{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023071852340145024, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003955174686882004, 'mean_word_length': 5.378151260504202, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Multimodal Composing and Traditional Essays: Linguistic Performance and Learner Perceptions

Over the past decade, digital multimodal composing (DMMC) in the language learning context has received growing attention. DMMC entails teaching writing as the social practice of meaning making using various semiotic tools (Siegal, 2012). Despite its potential benefits as a way to teach a meaning-making process in the current digitalized era, much concern regarding a lack of language focus has been expressed. The current small-scale exploratory study compared Korean EFL learners’ writing for DMMC and traditional essay writing in terms of syntactic complexity and accuracy as well as the learners’ perceptions of the two composing tasks. Using a within group comparisons design, 18 university students in Korea completed both DMMC and traditional writing on the same topic of their choice as a part of their required writing class. The findings revealed that traditional writing elicited syntactically more complex writing than DMMC using two measures (i.e. the number of words per T-unit, the number of clauses per T-unit). However, there was no significant difference in the accurate clause rate between the two conditions. Students had generally positive perceptions of DMMC, particularly regarding its effective role in meaning making. However, mixed perceptions were found in terms of helpfulness in improving writing skills. Pedagogical implications for English for academic purposes (EAP) contexts are discussed.