Writing skill in this digital age ,is a survival tool. Those who write well dominate their environments , from class rooms in school to the Corporate board rooms. All children in schools and students at the tertiary levels , deserve to be taught well and given an opportunity to write well and succeed in school and in the work place after school is over. The ultimate resource for teaching well in schools, is a well trained teacher , who gets constant in-service training to keep abreast of knowledge and skills in his/her profession . This article is for teachers of ESL Writing at all levels . A teacher trainer can also use it in, in initial teacher preparation programmes , or at in-service teacher training fora. Adewumi Oluwadiya PhD. , fwc Independent Consultant, ESL Writing Pedagogy & Research Bowie ,Maryland 20721, USA.

1. SOME DEFINITIONS OF WRITING AND THEIR PEDAGOGICAL
IMPLICATIONS FOR ESL CLASSROOMS IN NIGERIA
“ Author P “
ABSTRACT
There have been a lot of curricular innovations at all levels of the education system in
Nigeri,among which were the now discarded 6-3–3–4 System of Education and recently
the Universal Basic Education Programme. In the area of English Language Arts, new
curriculum standards have been developed for all levels by the National Educational
Research and Development Council ( NERDC) over the years, the latest being in 2014.
One of the areas of curricular innovation efforts in Nigeria that has been neglected,
is the development of current English language teaching methodology books, filled
with practical ideas and research -based strategies to mediate the curriculum to the
students at all levels. There is therefore a need to expose teachers and teacher trainers in
English Language Arts Education ,to research- based and current global best practices in
teaching the four Language skills , especially ESL Writing to improve students writing
and enhance their success in schools. This can be done at face to face pre-service and in-
service training workshops or journal articles like this one .This paper therefore, highlights
the various definitions of writing emanating from researches in English as a First Language
and English as a Second Language and discusses their pedagogical implications for ESL
Writing classrooms in Nigeria.
INTRODUCTION

2. In the last several decades, there have been a lot of curricular innovations and changes at
all levels of the education system in Nigeria Innovations and changes that were embodied
in the now discarded 6-3–3–4 System of Education , and recently the Universal Basic
Education Programme. In the area of English Language Arts, new curriculum standards
were developed and put in place for the Nursery, Primary and the Secondary school levels
by the National Educational Research and Development Council ( NERDC) over the years,
the latest being in 2014. Most tertiary institutions have also implemented curricular
innovations and changes. The former imbalance that existed between the two components
of Literature and Language in the English Departments that collaborated with Education
Departments in training ESL teacher inour Universities has been remedied. Both Language
and Literature now enjoy equal share of time, resources, and courses in these Departments.
This is a welcome development, as in the past, Literature tended to take a lion share of the
time, resources, courses and even staff employment and development resources. Graduate
teachers of English Language are now more likely to be grounded in Literature as well as
in Language, thus making them more functional and equipped to teach English Language
Arts in the secondary schools.
One of the areas of curricular innovation efforts in Nigeria that has been
neglected is the development of new and relevant English language teaching
methodology resource materials for the various levels of the education system. By
this I mean companion books filled with current and cutting edge practical ideas and
research -based strategies on how to mediate the curriculum to the students at all
levels. This is most needed in the area of Writing pedagogy at the Secondaryschool
level where some studies over the years, discovered among other things, that most
teachers in the schools were out of date scientists in the area of Writing pedagogy. They
still taught Writing the product – oriented way as opposed to the research- based and more
efficient and eclectic approach that borrows freely from the Product and Process
approaches. These teachers were ignorant of the current paradigm shift from Product to
both Product and Process inwriting pedagogy. In addition, a content analysis of a majority

3. of the Basal Readers used by Secondary school teachers and students in Nigeria, revealed
that the Product Approach to writing pedagogy was dominant. This was in gross violation
of the recommendations of the Curriculum Standards on Writing instruction produced by
the official body (NERDC 2014) charged with the development of new curricular for
Schools in Nigeria. Moreover the focus given to Writing in the teaching/learning
encounters in these Basal Readers was very little. The net result of all these inadequacies
in the teaching of English is that , students failure rate in the Secondary school
graduating Examination, conducted by the West African Examination Council, has
recorded on the average 70%failure in English Language in the last ten years . There
is therefore a need to expose teachers and teacher trainers in English Language Arts
Education to research- based and current global best practices in teaching the four
Language skills , especially ESL Writing to improve students writing and success in the
English Language examinations and succeed in schools .
This can be done in face to face in-service trainings , workshops or journal articles like
this one .The major thrust of this paper therefore is , to highlight the various definitions of
writing and insights about writing emanating from research in First Language and Second
Language and discuss their pedagogical implications for ESL Writing classrooms in
Nigeria.
What Writing Is
‘Writing’ is one of those words in the English language that has multiple meanings.
Writing has been variously defined as a cognitive process, a physical process, a
social process , a productand as a second language. Writing as a cognitive process
has to do with the act of creating written language, the act of writing – that is the
composingprocess orthe writing process –the “mental gymnastics” the writer goes
through in creating text. Writing as a social process involves the notions of an
addressor (the writer), a message (the content of the writing), an audience (the

4. reader, who can be the writer himself or someone else) and a purpose(that is, what
the writer intends the piece of writing to do forhim). Writing is thus a socialprocess
as it entails a social context and interaction between a writer and a reader in a
communication act. Writing, defined as a product, are the texts or pieces of written
discourse that emanate from the act of writing (from the cognitive, physical and
social processes earlier on mentioned). These written texts have certain formal
features that differentiate them from spoken language. Hence Writing has also been
defined as a second language because writing is not speech written down. In
subsequent sections of this paper we examine each of these definitions of writing
and highlight their pedagogical implications for ESL Writing classrooms in Nigeria.
Writing As a Cognitive Process
Writing as a Cognitive Process gained prominence in writing research literature in
the early 1970s through the research activities of Emig (1971) and Stratta, Dixon
and Wilkinson (1973). These were the two initial studies in what is now known as
the Process studies in Writing research. Other researchers including Flower and
Hayes (1980), Graves (1982) and Zamel (1982, 1983) have conducted similar
studies into how competent writers write in both First language (L1) and Second
language (L2).
Emig (1971) conducted a study into the composing processes of Twelfth
Graders in the United States. She selected eight competent studentwriters and asked
them to compose aloud, “to express orally the thoughts and feelings that came to
them while they were engaged in writing three short themes during individual
sessions with the investigator” which she tape-recorded. From this data, she
describes the dimensions of the composing process the students go through as:
prewriting, planning, starting, composing aloud, reformulation, stopping and
contemplation of product.

5. Stratta, Dixon and Wilkinson (1973:31) conducted Workshops in Winnipeg
(Canada) and Ilorin (Nigeria) in which teachers were asked to write in response to
certain experiences. The teachers were then asked to describe what they went
through in their writing. The authors, according to Wilkinson (1986:31), described
writing as:
A process of discovering one’s self, a working through of responses in early drafts and by
this means discovering what they wanted to say, and how they wanted to say it, through
the process of doing so.
Flower and Hayes (1980) studied a competent writer who was asked to “think
aloud” as he wrote on a theme and this was recorded on tape. The researchers also
took down notes of their observation of the writer’s behaviour and utterances as he
wrote. Using the writer’s Meta comments, the verbal transcript, the notes made by
the researchers and a page of the completed essay, the researchers, through protocol
analysis, identified the stages the writer went through as: planning, translating and
reviewing. They, however, noted that these stages are nonlinear but are rather
recursive and generative.
Graves (1982, 1983) has conducted studies into the writing process of young
children, particularly the first four grades (Primary One to Four). Graves’ studies
focused on the acts of composing of the pupils by observing and recording (by audio
and video) the processes as they happen, and the revisions that were subsequently
made. Graves’ findings show, among other things, an increase in the children’s
control of writing and the strategies of revision they employ and find useful. A
process format based on Graves’ studies was designed by Walshe (1982), and it
involves:
1) Prewriting - the experience of problem incubating;
2) Writing - drafting, revising editing;

6. 3) Postwriting - publication, reader response, writer’s own evaluation.
Zamel (1982) studied the composing processes of English as a Second
Language (ESL) college students in the United States. The study was based on the
self-reports and written work of the students. It was revealed that proficient ESL
writers, like their native language counterparts, experience writing as a process of
creating meaning. According to Zamel (1982:202), these students:
Explore their ideas and thoughtson paper, discovering in the act of doing so not only what these ideas and
thoughts are, but also the form with which best to express these.
The student-writers, Zamel continues;
Recognise the importance of being flexible, starting anew when necessary, and continuing to
rework their papers overtime as they take into account another reader’sframe of reference.
In orderto further investigate how ESL Students write, Zamel (1983) adopted
“a more rigorous approach” using a case study comprising interviews and
observation of eight College students while composing. Their writing behaviours
and what they wrote were recorded. The students in this sample were of Chinese,
Spanish, Fortuguese, Hebrew and Persian extract. The questions Zamel raised in her
study were:
1) How do ESL student writers write?
2) How do their ideas seem to get generated?
3) What happens to these ideas after they are recorded?
4) To what extent do these writers attend to the development and clarification of
these ideas?
5) To what extend and at what point during the process dothesewriters deal with
more mechanical matters?
Zamel (1983:184) sums up her findings thus:

7. … Composing asithasbeen experiencedanddescribedby the skilledESLwriters,seems
to be a processof discovering and exploring ideas, and constructing a framework with which to
best present these ideas. This processis creative and generative and may not always be based
on a clear sense of direction or explicit plan,but rathera plan that allows for furtherdiscovery
and exploration. It involves integrating new ideas, revising those that have already been
recorded, and may entail reconstructing one’s framework to accommodate these changes.
The findings of the above process studies ofwriting clearly show that writing
involves the general activities of prewriting, writing/composing, revising and
editing. There is a consensus among these researchers that prewriting is a form of
incubation period involving such activities as making notes, outlining, scripting
sentences and themes, etc. Composingofthe writing stage involves translating these
developed and organized ideas into sequential text. The revising process, sometimes
occurs simultaneously with the other activities and involves making changes in
ideas, organization, and expression. Editing, on the other hand, is a process of
polishing or refining wording, spelling, usage, and punctuation as well as
grammatical correctness, among others.
These researchers, particularly Flower and Hayes (1980), emphasize that the
writing processes are nonlinear and not always ordered or even separable. Writers
at times revise sentences in their minds before ever putting them on paper. Some
writers make plans only after their first drafts. The possibilities to which writers can
juggle the stages of writing are many. But what is of utmost importance is that
competent writers go through several stages in creating texts. The various stages of
the writing process cannot be done efficiently all at once and it is because these
writers composeand revise in separate steps that make them effective and competent
writers.
It is not only researchers into writing who have defined writing as a
cognitive process. Otherlanguage scholars and teachers ofwriting have also defined

8. writing as a cognitive process: Murray (1978), Smith (1982), Moffet (1982), Honig
(1985) and Gray (1986) are examples of such scholars.
Honig (1985:vii) sums up all these scholars’ definition of writing succinctly
when he says:
… Writing is a process that include prewriting, drafting, revising and editing. These
writing stages include higher level thinking skills/processes, such as convergent and
divergent thinking, analysis and synthesis and inferential and evaluative skills.
All the above definitions of writing have been given by researchers into the
writing process, language scholars and teachers of writing. But how do the
established writers – the literary giants of the day – define writing? The fact that
some established and accomplished writers take writing to be a cognitive process,is
attested to by Tolstoi, quoted in Olson (1986:139), when he says:
I scarcely ever read my published writings, but if by chance I come across a page, it
always strikes me; all this must be rewritten; this is how I should have written it.
Another accomplished writer, Wright (1982:264) has this to say about writing:
Popular misconception has it that writers’ inspiration falls from the sky and hits them on
the head. Actually the moments of clarity are born out of hard work, false starts, and
discarded efforts. It is only through the struggle that what was brewing in the unconscious
is able to shoulder its way through to consciousness.
In conclusion, the cognitive processes involved in writing as identified and
defined by researchers, language scholars and teachers of writing as well as
competent writers themselves can be represented as shown in Figure 1.
Prewriting

9. Editing Drafting/Writing
Revising
Figure 1
The Writing process
It is clear from Figure 1 that no matter who the writer is, no matter what
the goals or purposes ofwriting may be, no matter what kind of writing the writer is
engaged in, and no matter who the audience is, the four distinct or broad steps
/stages of prewriting, drafting/writing , revising and editing are essential if one is to
write effectively and powerfully. The writing process is however recursive and
generative , for instance while revising , you can return to the prewriting step to
develop and expand your ideas . The implications of the definition of writing as a
cognitive process to the teaching and learning of the skill are:
1. The teaching of writing ought to be informed by and based on what writing
entails.
2. Since the composing or writing process is a non-linear, exploratory and
generative process whereby writers discover and formulate their ideas as they try to
approximate their intended meaning, any approaches to theteaching ofwriting ought
to simulate the composing process as muchas possible. Teachers therefore ought to
give students direct experiences with the composing/writing process. This calls for
a dynamic and interactive teaching/learning relationship between student-writers
and the teachers in the context of making and communicating meaning in written
language. It is this belief that informed the Carnegie Report (2006) to insist that

10. students should be taught and encouraged to use the writing process and allthe stages
in it rather than lecture them on it alone.
Writing As a Physical Process
Writing as a physical process doesnotrequire further elaboration here as we assume
that everyone knows what it is as we write all the time either as students or as
teachers. But it is vital to say that students need to be encouraged to improve on
their handwriting as illegible writing discourages your audience from reading and
extracting meaning from your text/script. Some students fail becauseexaminers are
unable to read their handwriting and thus cannot extract any meaning from the
students’ scripts. However, writing as a physical process makes demands on the
writer’s fingers whether using pen and paper or the word processor . We are all
conversant with the drudgery of writing by hand and writers’ cramp and this has
pedagogical implications for the tools we encourage and require our students to
master and usein ESL Writing classrooms. Inthis digital age , man has learnt to take
drudgery out of his daily chores, computers being the latest labour saving gadgets
around . The computer , especially the micro-computer like the word processorhas
been found to be a versatile teaching aid in the Language Arts classrooms,
particularly in the teaching of writing. Dauite (1986) asserts that the computer can
help to ease the cognitive, social, as well as the physical constraints that students
face when learning to write and writing to learn. Dauite advocates that students be
encouraged and taught how to do word processing and use the computer for all the
stages in the writing of their essays ( prewriting, writing , sharing and responding ,
revising and editing stages) There is however a dearth of digital tools like the
computerin mostschools in Nigeria and this may hinder easy access to the computer
for most students . However, the Technology rooms usually have some computers
and the Language Arts teachers and the Technology teachers and other content area

11. teachers can collaborate to teach topics and achieve the much needed practice of
teaching writing- across the- curriculum. There are other benefits of using
computers in the writing classrooms which every ESL writing teacher need to read
about and adapt in his classroom, however , there are some teaching/ learning down
sides of using computers to write which students and teachers need to guide against
.
Writing As a Social Process
Any piece of writing has a writer, content, a purpose and an audience to
whom the writing is addressed. Although writing is like a person talking
to himself on paper, the writer has to learn to imagine his audience or
readers, and construct his text to meet such readers’ needs and
expectations. The writer has to understand the readers’ problems,
interests and construct his texts to cater for these. Writing is therefore a
social process since the writer tries to communicate with others in the
social context. It is only when writing serves as a means to an end – (e.g.
note making) as a means of communicating something, even if to oneself,
that it can be like natural language use, as opposed to an abstract exercise
in language use. This definition of writing as a social process has some
implications for the teaching and learning of the skill, two of which are:
1. Writing ought to be taught in the context of communication (Dauite,
1985:4) Thus writing to real audiences within and outsidethe classroom
to transact real business or share information is advocated. That way

12. students begin to see the values of writing and endeavor to write well
and begin to see themselves as writers.
2. Teachers ought to create a community of writers in their classrooms, where
learners can interact in the process of creating texts. Teachers ought to take
students through this social process by requiring first drafts of their essays
and then teach them how to use various sharing and responding strategies to
refine their texts .
Students in such classrooms write and/or read their texts to each other,
critique such texts, revise and edit them. This is what professional writers do in an
attempt to discover what they want to say and the best way to say it. Thus
professionalwriters ponderaboutand discuss their writing with others orthemselves
in order to ensure that what they have written down on paper is what they intended
writing; and that their texts comply with the conventions and rules of written
language.
Writing As a Second Language
Writing has also been defined as a second language as distinct from spoken
language. (Silber 1979, Stubbs 1984 and Horning 1987). Stubbs (1984:117) lists
some of the formal features which distinguish spoken language from written
language thus:
SPEECH (Conversation): information, pitch, stress, rhythm, speed of utterance,
pausing, silences, variation in loudness; other paralinguistic features, including
aspiration, laughter, voice quality; timing, including simultaneous speech; co-
occurrence with proxemic and kinesic signals; availability of physical context.
WRITING (printed material): spacing between words, punctuation, including
parenthesis; typography, including style oftypeface, italicization, underlining, upper

13. and lower case; capitalization, inverted commas, for example to indicate that a term
is being used critically (“Chimpanzees’ language”), graphics, including lines,
shapes, borders, diagrams, tables; abbreviations; logograms, for example, layout,
including paragraphing, spacing, margins, pagination, footnotes, headlines and sub-
headings; permanence and therefore availability of co-text.
The list above clearly shows that writing is not speech written down. It has
its own characteristic features which are not found in speech and therefore need to
be explicitly taught and learnt.
Silber (1979:297) identifies three major areas where speech and writing
diverge sharply. According to her, these are:
i) Writing needs accurate diction and sufficient detail whereas in an oral context,
a gesture or facial expression can convey the material of an entire paragraph.
Students who are already used to imprecise diction in speechtend to carry over this
inadequacy when they write. And because there are no paralinguistic cues to make
explicit their implicit meaning, student-writers fail in communicating when they
write. So writing needs a wider knowledge of vocabulary than speech. Spelling is
another area where students carry over features of their spoken dialect thus creating
omission of tense and number inflections and suffixes marking part of speech, just
to mention a few.
ii) Writing requires clear syntactic boundaries and junctions, whereas the surface
structure of spoken utterances often fail to producethe deep structure accurately or
completely. Thus students who are used to speaking without conscious attention to
syntactic rules often carry this habit into their writing and tend to omit subjects, verbs
and other elements in their texts. This results in sentence fragments.

14. iii) Writing cannot easily convey information if it is not ordered in terms of
chronology, cause and effect, comparison and contrast or similar patterns whereas
speech can move backward and forward in its treatment of a topic without risking
significant loss of meaning. Students’ writing is impoverished when they write as
they speak because their writing imitates the ‘rambling’ style of speechwith which
they are already familiar.
The three areas of divergence between speechand writing may accountformost
of the problems students have in writing, such problems like poor control of
inflections and functional suffixes, almost total ignorance of the conventions of
spelling and punctuation and lack of development oftheir texts in a sequential order.
Silber (1979:299) therefore asserts that:
Studentswho have trouble with writing suffer from the interference of their spoken
dialects… In a very real sense, these students are coming to written English as a
second language and should be so treated.
Another proponent of Writing as a second language is Horning (1987) who
highlights the following four hypotheses which conclude that writing is indeed a
second language:
Hypothesis I: Written form of language constitutes a second language;
Hypothesis II: Much like skill in a second language, writing skill develops
through acquisition and learning;
Hypothesis III: Acquisition of writing skill comes about in an ordered form;
Hypothesis IV: What students learn in the basic writing classroom functions
only as a monitor onthe output of the writing skills they have acquired. Errors occur
as a result of either monitor over use or non-use or non-optimum use.
Silber (1979), Stubbs (1984) and Horning (1987) all seem to agree that writing
is basically different from speech and that this difference partly accounts for

15. students’ poorwriting since they tend to carry over speechpatterns into their written
language. One way out of the dilemma, according to theses scholars, is to teach
writing as a second language. If we want to teach writing as second language we
ought to know the theories and research findings related to second language learning
and apply them to the acquisition and development of writing skill in learners. Such
current theoretical perspectives and research findings on second language learning
and acquisition that are applicable to the acquisition and development ofwriting are:
1) The learner engages in processes of creative construction (Dulay and Burt
1974) and hypothesis testing (Corder1967) in developing a second language. Errors
are therefore an inevitable outcome of the language learning process.
2) Target (Second – or foreign -) language input must be made comprehensible
to the learner; this input must be a bit beyond the acquirer’s present level, must vary
in character, must be presented in enormous quantities, must reduce the acquirer’s
affective filter and must occurin the context of natural language use in order for the
development process to occur (Krashen 1981, 1982).
3) Feedback in the target language plays an important role in language learning
(Krashen and Seliger 1975).
The teaching and learning of writing ought to be informed by the above
findings from ESL research since writing has been defined as a second language.
Writing As A Product
Writing, that is the product or text that writers typically create, has been
variously classified. There are the four traditional categories identified as
Narration, Description, Exposition and Argumentation. Scholars such as Emig
(1971), Briton, Burgess, Martin, McLeod and Rosen (1975), Britton (1978) and
Eckhardtand Stewart(1979) havequestioned these four categories. These
scholars and researchers claimthat Exposition, Description, Narration simply
involve technique (that is a way of arranging language) while Argumentation

16. alone implies purposein addition to technique. For these reasons, Eckhardtand
Stewart(1979:202) concludethat “it is ultimately dangerous … to teach expertise
in technique apart fromthe question of whatthe technique is being used to
accomplish.”
Similarly, Emig (1971),Brittonet. al. (1975)andBritton (1978)rejectthe four
traditional domains of writing and in their place categorized discourse into
functional modes. So we can conclude that “dividing the universe of discourse”
(Moffet, 1968) into domains has undergone modifications. A teacher of writing
needs to knowthe categorizations of writing and ensurethat he/sheassignsessays
in each category to help students write in diverse forms so that students can learn
to write in all these categories and be able to write all types of writing they may
facein their schoolworkacrossthesubjectareas,andin theworkplaceafter school
is over in the wider world .Moreover, a Curriculum developer needs to include
these writing types in any Curriculum Standards designed for teaching Writing in
schoolsto ensurerelevantliteracy education is given to all schoolchildren. Training
students to write in all genres to various audiences for varied purposes prepares
them for meeting all their writing needs in schools and beyond.
SUMMARY
Writing has been defined as a cognitive process, a physical process , a
social process, a second language and a product . These definitions cover the
mental gymnastics we go through in creating texts, that is the composing/writing
process; the physical drudgery of manipulating the pen through paper or typing on
the computer keyboard to transcribe our thoughts down, the social interactional
aspectof written language or the communicative dimension; as well as the products
or texts that emanate from written language use, texts which Silber (1979), Stubbs

17. (1984) and Horning (1987) define as a second language in contrast to spoken
language from which it differs markedly. In the light of these diverse definitions of
writing, it is obvious that any approaches to the teaching and learning of the skill
ought to be eclectic rather than based on one of the two major theoretical
perspectives to language acquisition and learning – Behaviourism and Mentalism.
(See Oluwadiya 1990 for a brief review of language acquisition theories). Such an
eclectic approachought to take care ofthe social, cognitive and linguistic constraints
that are commonly involved in learning to write. Such approach ought to:
i) Provide opportunities for learners to be aware of their purpose, their audience
and the need to communicate meaning. These are three ofthe variables that must be
present if learners are to use language creatively without fear of errors.
ii) Accept that errors are inevitable in learning to write since such systematic
errors represent the learner’s inter-language and are evidence that learning is taking
place.
iii) Provide opportunities for learners to re-examine their written work (that is
revise and edit their work) in order to test hypothesis about the rules and patterns of
written language.
iv) Provide feedback on the form and content of students’ writing and thus enable
them to make a transition from their inter-language (Corderand Selinker) orinternal
monologue (Vygostsky and Piaget) or “writer based prose” (Flower) to “reader
based prose”(Flower) – that is writing that has purpose, a clearly defined audience
and communicates meaning clearly and competently.
v) Provide language input that is comprehensible to the learner in terms of topics
and tasks for writing and give room for student’s interests and choice of topics to
write on
vi) Provide input that vary in character – teachers ought to teach and assign various
types of writing in order to create variety and sustain students’ interest. Input in

18. terms of written language produced by competent or skilled writers is also vital if
students are to learn to write well. It thus means that students ought to be provided
good reading materials and encouraged to read extensively. Such extensive reading
enhances the process of unconscious acquisition of the salient features of written
language. Reading culture is poor in Nigeria today as Television programmes,
Internet and electronic games have taken over our youths’ attention from reading.
This has severe implications for student writers, as reading is known to reinforce
writing ability as extensive reading is a sure improver of writing.
vii) Provide input in enormous quantities – teachers ought to require their students
to write often, two essays a month minimal.
viii) Provide contexts for natural language use – that is, tasks assigned must
simulate what real writers do in actual life situations and not“artificial dummy runs”.
Such tasks ought to be on things that are of interest to the learners, things they have
adequate knowledge of and are interested in and are willing and capable of writing
on.
ix) Provide ample opportunities for learners to experience the writing process in
actual classroominstructional practices and encourage learners to use the process in
constructing/ writing their essays, thus the workshop approachis advocated for ESL
writing classrooms.
xi) Encourage computer literacy and teach students how to use the word processor
to ease writers’ cramp and facilitate ease of going through the stages of the writing
process as they write individually or collaboratively in and out of the classroom.
SELECTEDREFERENCES

19. Dauite, C. (1985). Writing and Computers. Addison – Wesley Publishing Company, Reading.
Dulay, H. and Burt, M. (1982): Language Two. Oxford University Press, New York.
Emig, J. (1971). The Composing Processes of Twelfth Grades. National Council for Teachers of
English. (Research Report 13, Champaign, Illinois.
Flower, L.S. and Hayes, J. (1980). Identifying the Organization of Writing Process. In: Cognitive
Processes in Writing (Gregg, L.W. and Steinberg, E.R. (Eds.) Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 78 – 88.
Graves, D.M (1983). Writing: Teachers and Children at Work. New York, Heinemann.
Graves, D.H. (1978): Balance the Basics: Let them Write. Ford Foundations, New York.
Graves, D.H .(1982) Patterns of Child Control of the Writing Process. In: English in the Eighties.
Eagleson, R.D. (Ed.) Australian Association for the Teachers of English, Canberra
Gray, J. (1986). The California Writing Project. In: Practical Ideas for Teaching Writing as a
Process. (Olson, C.B. (Ed.). California State Department of Education, Sacramento, pp. 3, 8.
Horning, A.S. (1987) Teaching Writing as a Second Language. S. Illinois University Press,
Carbondale
Krashen, S.D. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Pergamon,
Oxford
Moffet, J. (1982). Writing, Inner Speech and Meditation. College English, 44, 3, 231 – 246.
Murray, D.M. (1978). Internal Revision: A Process of Discovery. In: Research on Composing
(Cooper, C. and Odell, L. (Ed.). National Council for Teachers of English, Urbana Illinois, pp. 85
– 91.
Ndahi, K.S. (1982). Second Language Acquisition in Childhood: A Case Study. Unpublished
Ph.D. Dissertation, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Oluwadiya, A.O. (1988). Background for Developing an Evaluation plan for the 6–3-3–4
Educational System. In: Towards Implementing the 6–3–3–4 System of Education in Nigeria.
(Akpa, G.O. and Udoh, S.U. (Eds) National Association of Educational Administration and
Planning (Jos Chapter), Techsource Electronic Press, Jos, pp. 14 – 23.
Oluwadiya, A.O. (1990). The Teaching of Writing in Borno State Secondary Schools: A Survey
Study of Instructional Practices. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria.
Oluwadiya A.O.(1990) The Place of Computers in the Teaching of Writing . In :Proceeding of the
International Conference on Third World Strategies for Technological Development. Eze, T. I.,
Madusolomon, M. A. (eds.) Summer Educational Publishers Ltd, Fegge, Onitsha. pp. 260-266

20. Oluwadiya, A. O.(1992 ). Some Prewriting Techniques for Student Writers. FORUM 30, 4, 12
-15 & 32
Oluwadiya, A.O. (1994). Some Strategies For Teaching Student- Writers Composing , Revision
And Editing Skills in ESL Writing Classrooms. Paper presented at the In-service Training
Workshop for Teachers of English, March 12th 1994, Command Day Secondary School, Luigi
Barracks, Abuja Nigeria
Oluwadiya, A.O. (2006) Research Based Practical Ideas For Teaching Writing As A Process in
Nigerian Secondary Schools. Paper presented at a one day workshop for Secondary School
Teachers in Abuja Federal Capital Territory organized by the Nigerian National Volunteer Service,
the Presidency, Abuja, Nigeria on United Nations Volunteer Day December 5th 2006
Oluwadiya, A.O. (2011). Some Prewriting Techniques for Student Writers. In: Creative Classroom
Activities, T. Kral (ed). English Language Program .U.S. Department of State Washington, DC.
USA.
Oluwadiya , A.O. (2015). Some Strategies For Teaching Writing As A Process to ESL Students.
Paper Presented At a Two –Day Workshop On Practical Ideas For Process Pedagogy in ESL
Writing Classrooms in Nigeria, January 8th -9th 2015, Anglican Girls Grammar School, Apo,
Abuja , Nigeria.
Olson, C.B. (1986) (Ed). Practical Ideas for Teaching Writing as a Process. California State
Department of Education, Sacramento, pp. 17 – 45
Smith, F. (1982). Writing and the Writer. Heinemann Educational Books Ltd, London, pp. 19 –
24
Smith, T.R. (1983) (Ed). Improving Writing in California Schools: Problems and Solutions.
California State Department of Education, Sacramento, pp. 50, 66.
Silber, P. (1979). Teaching Writing as a Second Language. CCC, 30, pp. 297 – 301
Stratta, L.; Dixon, J. and Wilkkinson, A. (1973). The Patterns of Language. Heinemann, London.
Strong, W. (1983). Sentence – Combining: A Composing Book. Random House Inc., New York.
Stubbs, M. (1984). Language and Literacy. Routledge Kegan Paul, London.
Walshe, W. (1982). Every Child can Write. Primary School English Teachers’ Association,
Canberra, Australia

21. Wilkinson, A; Stratta, J.; and Dixon, S. (1973). “Writing”. In: Recent Advances in Classroom
Research. British Journal of Psychology, Monograph Series No. 2 (Bennet, N. and Deforges C.
(Eds). Edinburgh, Scotland
Wilkinson, A.M. (1986). The Writing of Writing. Open university Press, Stony Stratford
Zamel V. (1983). The Composing Processes of Advance ESL Students: Six Case Studies. TESOL
Quarterly, 17,2, 165 – 187.
Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The Process of Discovery, TESOL Quarterly, 16, 2, 195 – 209.
Zamel .V. (1987). Recent Research on Writing Pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly 21, 4, 196 – 223.