constructed in the English language are particularly insightfuldcompelling reading in my view for anyone interestedin history, and in particular for teachers of history to students in schools.

As the discussion builds and develops through the various chapters, Coffin goes ondby chapter 7dto introduce anaccount of Appraisal theory, which has to do with explaining the ways in which judgments are made about the events ofthe past. Building capacity to construct and sustain expression of well supported opinions and judgments about histor-ical events is a particular challenge for the student in the history classroom. Here Coffin is able to expose the linguistictools with which judgments and opinion are expressed for the purposes of writing history. By the final chapter, she is ableto demonstrate how an understanding of these things can be used for working with history students in schools.

This book overall makes a major contribution to the study of historical discourse and while it will be of interest toteachers of history, it will in addition be of considerable interest to those who work in discourse studiesgenerallydlinguists, applied linguists and educational linguists. Indeed, one of the recent emergent major themesin discourse studies overall involves a concern to explore in finer detail the manner in which the different disciplinesconstruct their meanings. In this context, this volume makes a new and original contribution.

Finally, I note that the volume is published only in hard back, making this quite an expensive book for the projectedaudience of students and young researchers in applied and educational linguistics. I would warmly encourageContinuum to produce a paperback copy as soon as possible.

Frances ChristieHonorary Professor of Education,

Faculty of Education and Social Work,University of Sydney, Sydney 2006, AustraliaE-mail address: f.christie@edfac.usyd.edu.au

doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2007.05.004

71Book reviews / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7 (2008) 68e73

Connecting Reading and Writing in Second Language Writing Instruction, Alan Hirvela. Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press, Michigan Series on Teaching Multilingual Writers, Diane Belcher and Jun Liu (Series Eds.) (2004).(210 pp., US$22.00), ISBN: 0472089188.

In his thoroughly researched yet pedagogically minded look at the readingewriting connection, Alan Hirvela haswritten a book that will certainly connect with a range of readersdacademics, teachers, and those of us somewhere inbetween. In bridging theory with pedagogy, this relatively short volume does several things at once: it offers a detailedlook at the theoretical background in presenting reading and writing as intertwined, mutually dependent literacy skills,it successfully brings together work done in both composition studies (L1) and second language (L2) writing, and itgrounds all this in practical pedagogy. Each chapter follows a similar structure that is theory-heavy up front followedby application of these theories and various readingewriting models. Each of the core chapters faithfully ends withactual teaching scenarios complete with teaching suggestions and end-of-the-chapter questions for reflection anddiscussion.

The book is divided into five chapters that move from a broader discussion of the readingewriting connectionto a more specific look at the pedagogical implications of how the acts of reading and writing reciprocally shapeand support one another. Chapter 1 constructs the foundation for Hirvela’s discussion by reviewing the past 30years of work done on the readingewriting connection. This overview is addressed through a chronological pre-sentation of the major themes that emerged in various literature reviews of readingewriting scholarship from theearly 1980s to the present. In doing this, the chapter traces two important lines of inquiry. First, the overviewilluminates the transition from seeing reading and writing as separate cognitive entities (1970s) to seeing readingand writing as mutually dependent socio-cultural acts of composing (1990s). The second brings together workdone in composition studies and second language writing regarding readingewriting connections, highlighting,among other issues, contrastive rhetoric and the important role the readingewriting connection plays in facilitat-ing second language acquisition.

Chapter 2 specifically addresses reader-response theory, which brings the reader to the forefront of the composingprocess. Moving away from more traditional ‘‘new critical’’ stances, where meaning is inherently fixed in the text,

72 Book reviews / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7 (2008) 68e73

reader-response theory fits far more with a social constructivist standpoint, where reader and writer co-constructa text’s meaning through a dialogical relationship. In essence, the reader is ‘‘composing’’ just as much as the writeris. Hirvela points out that this paradigm is important for understanding the readingewriting connection, particularly inESL contexts, because it parallels the recent social constructivist turn in L2 writing pedagogy (p. 53). The last part ofthe chapter discusses the advantages of using reader-response theory in the second language classroom and offers twoexamples, one at the high school level and one at the college level.

Chapters 3 and 4 move away from the broader aspects of the readingewriting connection addressed in the first partof the book by focusing on the actual reciprocal relationship involved in how writing supports reading (Chapter 3) andhow reading supports writing (Chapter 4). Hirvela frames this relationship by giving a concise and informativesummary of the directional, nondirectional, and bi-directional models of the readingewriting connection proposedby Eisterhold (1990). Because of the pedagogical significance in teachers’ being able to target students’ learning needsby purposefully moving in a certain direction, either from reading to writing or writing to reading, Hirvela adopts thedirectional model, the theory that ‘‘knowledge from one of these skills can be transferred to and thus inform the other’’(p. 72). Chapter 3 focuses first on how the writing-to-read direction developed out of criticism of pedagogies thattraditionally viewed literacy skills as separate, disconnected entities and then summarizes the research behind thislearning model. The chapter points out that research in how writing informs reading has predominantly taken placein L1 writing contexts and thus there is still a need for research in the L2 writing domain. Chapter 4 addresses thereading-to-write direction and uses as a theoretical foundation Krashen’s (1984) notion of how reading can provide‘‘comprehensible input’’ for writing. The chapter carefully distinguishes between models that would have studentsreading specifically for improving writing skills, and an indirect model, where students freely read and then graduallyrealize a greater control over their writing. Hirvela advocates the latter but highlights the important caveat fromKrashen’s (1993) reading input hypothesis that only reading that is voluntary and extensive provides input for writing‘‘because of the exposure to target language writing operations such reading provides’’ (pp. 129e130).

Chapter 5 completes the book by presenting an in-depth look at differing models of readingewriting pedagogy thatcan be used strategically in different classroom situations. Though pedagogy is addressed in each of the four precedingchapters, here it takes center stage and the bulk of the chapter is devoted to detailed descriptions of several differentmodels and how they work in the classroom. Highlights of the chapter include mention of how computer-integratedmodels facilitate literacy acquisition and production of nonlinear, electronic texts, and discussion of how sequentialand collaborative models present avenues for scaffolding assignments and negotiating roles as readers and writers.

In essence, this book does a service to composition scholars and teachers by effectively bridging work done in bothL1 and L2 writing. Hirvela seems determined to present the two as dually informing a readingewriting connection,whether it is a first-year writing class or an ESL writing class, though it is the latter that is ultimately the focus. In thefinal chapter, for example, when teaching models are brought into focus through the lens of the previous four chapters,L1 composition scholars are brought into conversation with L2 counterparts (David Bartholomae, Kenneth Bruffee,Ilona Leki, Ruth Spack, and others), seemingly in an attempt to blur what has traditionally been constructed as a well-demarcated boundary.

At the same time, this may be the only area where the book could have done more. In presenting his case, Hirvelaseems to gloss over very real controversies that have shaped and constrained composition studies. In his discussion ofcollaborative strategies, for instance, he pairs Kenneth Bruffee with John Trimbur to support a collaborative readingewriting model in an L2 context (p. 162). While Bruffee and Trimbur are certainly the most well-known L1 scholars oncollaboration, one of Trimbur’s (1989) central purposes is to strongly criticize Bruffee (1984) for presenting collab-oration as a place for students to conform to and appropriate academic discourse rather than to highlight difference.Making controversies like these explicit and discussing the effects these might have on pedagogy, especially inapplying them to L2 writing, might have yielded richer discussion on the readingewriting connection, though,admittedly, this also may have made the book less accessible when accessibility is one of its main strengths.

Overall, one comes away from this book feeling armed with a solid theoretical background to support actuallyusing one of several readingewriting models in teaching writing in a second language context. Because Hirvela bal-ances his careful, detailed reviews of the literature with equally thorough descriptions of how these teaching modelshave been used in the classroom, the real value of this volume is that it will appeal to researcher, graduate student, andin-service teacher alike. Ultimately, this is a user-friendly volume that can serve the dual purposes of being used asa springboard for further researching the readingewriting connection and as a valuable resource in teacher-trainingcontexts.

73Book reviews / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7 (2008) 68e73

References

Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative writing and the conversion of mankind. College English, 46, 635e652.

Eisterhold, J. (1990). Readingewriting connections: Toward a description for second language researchers. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language

writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 88e101). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Krashen, S. (1984). Writing: Research, theory, and applications. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

Krashen, S. (1993). The power of reading. Englewood, CA: Libraries Unlimited.

Trimbur, J. (1989). Consensus and difference in collaborative learning. College English, 51, 602e615.

Christian StuartDepartment of English, University of Washington,P.O. Box 354330, Seattle, WA 98195-4330, USA

E-mail address: cdds@u.washington.edu

doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2007.05.008