In response to the complexity and configurations of theories and research on writing and writing education, Ivanič developed a framework of discourses of writing and learning to write to systematically interlink views of language, beliefs about writing, beliefs about learning to write, approaches to the teaching of writing, and assessment criteria across seven identified writing discourses (e.g., skills discourse , process discourse , social practices discourse ). Given that the original framework lacks sufficient delineation of writer-oriented and technology-enhanced trends in L2 writing education, this article aims to propose two innovative types of writing discourses, affects discourse and technology discourse , in an updated pedagogical framework with text, writer, and context as three subdimensions. In light of the framework, the article advocates for a multidimensional approach that considers the pivotal role of L2 writers’ emotions and motivations and the application value of technological tools in enhancing the writing process and outcomes. Meanwhile, the updated framework functions as a robust pedagogical and research instrument to systematically uncover the complexities of writing education at the levels of belief, practice, and policy. This article concludes with a discussion on the potential implications of the framework for L2 writing instruction and assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: