Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie  Volume 35, 2025  http://journals.sfu.ca/dwr  51   Book Review  Caplan, N.A. &amp; Johns, A. (Eds). (2019). Changing Practices for the L2 Writing Classroom: Moving Beyond the FiveParagraph Essay. University of Michigan Press. Review by Leila Farzinpur  University of Toronto Mississauga  As  a  multilingual  learner  and  educator,  I  constantly  explore  the  challenges  faced  by  multilingual student writers who are learning to write in English as an additional language.  My goal is to find ways to support their writing practices and help them develop a strong  academic writer identity. The book's intriguing title, Changing Practices for the L2 Writing  Classroom: Moving Beyond the Five-Paragraph Essay, caught my attention, motivating me to  review it.  Although the book strongly criticizes the five-paragraph essay, I plan to use some of its  formulaic  elements  in  my  review,  as  it  can  still  serve  as  a  framework  and  be  adapted  to  various genres.    Summary The  book  presents  theoretical  and  practical  strategies  for  multilingual  students,  writing  instructors, educators, and researchers, organized into three main parts. Part 1 explains that  the  five-paragraph  essay  is  not  historically  longstanding,  not  a  distinct  genre,  and  not  universal. Chapter 1 reviews the history of the five-paragraph essay and critiques its format,  describing  it  as  a  barrier  to  meaningful  L2  writing.  The  author  suggests  a  genre-based  instruction  that  better  reflects  real-world  writing  by  emphasizing  audience,  context,  and  purpose. Chapter 2 provides a definition of genre and argues that the five-paragraph essay   Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie  Volume 35, 2025  http://journals.sfu.ca/dwr  52   is merely a predetermined form, far from the social nature of genre. The author encourages  adopting  genre-based  practice  as  a  flexible  approach  to  L2  writing  to  foster  authentic,  purposeful  writing  across  various  contexts.  Finally,  Chapter  3  argues  that  the  fiveparagraph essay is not a universal standard and supports culturally responsive teaching that  accounts for diverse educational settings and writing conventions.  Part  2  discusses  the  use  of  the  five-paragraph  essay  in  assessment,  its  inadequacies  across  all  educational  levels  from  elementary  to  graduate  studies  and  how  it  poses  a  barrier, especially for English learners   progress. Chapter 4 argues that the five-paragraph  essay does not meet the writing needs of young learners and outlines the Teaching/Learning  Cycle (TLC) as an instructional model. The authors suggest that such a genre-based approach  can prepare learners for future tasks, each with its own unique language and structure, to  accomplish its social purpose. Chapter 5 critiques the five-paragraph essay as too rigid for  L2  learners  in  secondary  schools  and  emphasizes  the  importance  of  scaffolding  and  adaptable,  genre-based  instruction  that  addresses  students    goals  and  proficiency  levels.  Chapter 6 notes that the five-paragraph essay fails to prepare students for future writing  tasks and offers an alternative, genre-based approach as a foundation, not a formula, that  can help L2 students transfer their writing skills to more advanced tasks. The writers stress  that genre awareness and context-based writing practices, such as open letters, are essential  for long-term adaptability.   In  Chapter  7,  the  author  argues  that  to  escape  the  five-paragraph  essay,  university  students, especially first-year students, need to be aware of the importance of task analysis  in their discipline. This chapter suggests that genre awareness and scaffolded activities such  as    Reading  Your  Classes    can  help  students  transfer  rhetorical  skills  and  make  informed  writing  decisions  across  contexts.  Chapter  8  emphasizes  that  the  genre  varieties  across  disciplines  have  little  resemblance  to  the  five-paragraph  essay  and  underscores  the  importance  of  understanding  assignment  expectations  for  L2  writers  by  examining  differences  among  three  common  language  patterns  across  disciplines  (i.e.,  description,  analysis, and argument). The authors suggest that, for university students to write effectively  in their discipline, they need to use scaffolded strategies, such as genre mapping and guided  revision.  Lastly,  Chapter  9  highlights  that  the  five-paragraph  essay  does  not  prepare   Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie  Volume 35, 2025  http://journals.sfu.ca/dwr  53   students for graduate school because it does not help them develop transferable skills. The  author  emphasizes  that  through  strategies  such  as  genre  analysis  and  peer  review,  L2  students can be equipped with the necessary tools rather than a formula for writing across  various academic genres, and encourages scholarly voice, genre awareness, and rhetorical  flexibility.   Part  3  discusses  the  five-paragraph  essay  s  role  in  standardized  testing  and  how  such  tests, which are limited to evaluating students   writing abilities, reinforce the five-paragraph  essay  by  rewarding  formulaic  writing.  Chapter  10  promotes  assessment  literacy  and  alternative models  like portfolios and integrated tasks  that support authentic, contextbased writing and greater rhetorical flexibility.  In the Conclusion, Caplan and Johns reemphasize that it is essential to move beyond the  five-paragraph essay and view writing as a rhetorical, social, and disciplinary practice. They  highlight that genre awareness, authenticity, and educators   collaboration can promote more  effective,  purpose-driven  writing  practices  across  various  contexts.  The  book  offers  a  foundation for ongoing reflection and growth in L2 writing pedagogy.   Strengths As I read the book, I found several strengths that resonated with my experiences as both a  multilingual  writer  and  instructor.  Together,  these  features  underscore  the  book  s  major  contributions and make it an especially valuable resource for teachers and researchers in  writing  pedagogy.  First,  it  adopts  a  genre-based,  socially  situated  approach  to  writing,  helping students understand not only how to write but also why specific rhetorical choices  matter in particular contexts. This approach is advantageous because it reflects how writing  functions  in  academic  and  professional  settings.  Another  notable  strength  is  the  book  s  capacity  to  connect  theory  and  practice.  The  book  effectively  connects  research-based  discussions with practical classroom strategies, enabling instructors to apply complex ideas  in  an  accessible  way.  The  book  s  contributors  are  from  various  institutions  and  teaching  backgrounds, enriching the discussions with multiple perspectives on writing instruction.  Finally, the book offers conceptual tools through the integration of genre theory, discourse   Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie  Volume 35, 2025  http://journals.sfu.ca/dwr  54   analysis,  and  sociocultural  frameworks,  along  with  reflective  questions  and  sample  assignments. These features further assist instructors in incorporating these ideas into their  everyday teaching practices.   Limitations Although  I  found  the  book  well-organized  and  highly  informative,  some  conceptual,  pedagogical, and structural limitations could be refined to enhance its impact further and  ensure  inclusivity  for  all  readers.  Regarding  conceptual  limitations,  while  the  authors  acknowledge global contexts, most chapters contain few examples from outside the Global  North, which limits the book  s relevance for multilingual writers and instructors working in  diverse  cultural,  linguistic,  and  institutional  environments.  The  book  can  effectively  demonstrate how genre pedagogy works in various multilingual contexts by providing more  examples of this kind. Another conceptual limitation is the frequent use of terms such as   L2  learners   and   L2 writing,   which imply a deficit view of speakers of English as an additional  language  and  fail  to  capture  the  complexity  of  writer  identity  in  the  academic  context.  Although identity, voice, and self-representation in academic writing are crucial components  of multilingual writing practices and help build confidence and agency as writers within the  English writing context, the book briefly mentions some accounts and provides no details on  this important aspect of academic writing in the genre-based writing approach.   The  book  often  assumes  readers  are  already  familiar  with  genre  theory,  discourse  analysis, or linguistic terminology which creates pedagogical and practical limitations. For  new instructors or those without a background in applied linguistics, this assumption may  create barriers and reduce the accessibility of the content. Moreover, the book paid limited  attention to digital and multimodal writing, such as videos, infographics, and digital texts,  which is increasingly important in writing classrooms. As a result, instructors receive little  guidance on integrating technology-mediated writing practices into genre-based pedagogy.  Ultimately, the book provides minimal discussion of assessment practices, giving instructors  few tools for evaluating student writing within a genre-based or socially situated framework.  As for structural limitations, the chapters vary in their overall consistency and contextual   Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie  Volume 35, 2025  http://journals.sfu.ca/dwr  55   specificity.  Some  chapters  offer  rich  examples,  detailed  classroom  activities,  and  clear  explanations  of  the  context  of  the  activities  (e.g.,  Chapter  4),  while  other  chapters  (e.g.,  Chapter  5)  remain  more  theoretical,  with  less  guidance  for  implementation.  This  uneven  depth may leave readers wanting more practical direction.   Furthermore,  although  the  book  critiques  the  limitations  of  the  five-paragraph  essay,  some of the reasons the authors present to challenge it are less compelling. For example, in  Chapter 5, the author states that the formulaic nature of the five-paragraph essay prevents  students  from  thinking  critically  (p.  95).  However,  when  students  use  the  five-paragraph  essay  formula,  they  still  need  to  provide  a  reasonable  discussion  and  support  their  arguments with reliable sources. They need to think critically to evaluate the resources and  present convincing reasons. In Chapter 6, although the authors criticize the effectiveness of  the five-paragraph essay, they acknowledge the usefulness of certain structures as principles  (p. 126). For example, they noted that including topic sentences or transitional words is not  necessary;  instead,  the  authors  can  use  subheadings.  Additionally,  the  authors  noted  that  writers   main ideas can be inferred rather than explicitly stated as a thesis. Nevertheless,  subtle intentions are not always obvious or correctly implied, and this type of writing can  lead to misunderstandings. Such misunderstandings by readers, especially in the context of  multilingual writing practices, can portray these writers as incompetent writers and shape  their writing identity in ways that are not desired by these students (Farzinpur, 2025). In  contrast,  explicit  presentation  of  the  writer  s  opinions  can  help  improve  communication  with readers, and help the writers establish an authoritative writer identity.  I believe that when we consider genre, audience, and context, the five-paragraph essay  formula can still provide a useful framework for multilingual writers, especially for those  like me who may not have received formal writing instruction in their dominant languages  and  previous  educational  settings.  The  usefulness  of  the  five-paragraph  essay  as  a  foundational framework for organization and coherence is undeniable. Even as writers move  towards  more  flexible  and  rhetorically  responsive  forms  of  writing,  elements  of  the  fiveparagraph  essay  such  as  main  points,  discussion,  and  conclusion  can  still  be  found  in  various genres, including reflection essays, lab reports, and emails.  Moreover,  writing  instructors  need  to  follow  Universal  Design  for  Learning  (UDL)   Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie  Volume 35, 2025  http://journals.sfu.ca/dwr  56   principles and recognize individual differences. They need to consider that many students   especially multilingual writers  consistently express a need for clear guidelines. Based on  my  teaching  experience,  these  students  often  feel  disoriented  and  uncertain  about  expectations when there is no explicit structure or direction. I believe that while students  can benefit from the five-paragraph essay framework, they can adapt it to genre, context, and  audience, incorporating cultural elements to create a strong academic writer identity in their  writing.  Finally, given the dynamic evolution of writing practices, I suggest that the authors update  future  editions  to  address  writing  with  AI  and  the  changing  nature  of  authorship  in  multilingual  settings.  Despite  these  gaps,  I  highly  recommend  this  book  to  writing  instructors and educators. The book offers rich theoretical insights and engaging classroom  activities that inspire more practical and flexible approaches to teaching writing.    References Farzinpur, L. (2025). Perceived writer: The construction of academic writer identity in the  interaction of multilingual student-writers and instructor-readers. The Canadian Journal  for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(1).   https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotlrcacea.2025.1.18031

## Références

L. (2025). Perceived writer: The construction of academic writer identity in the interaction of multilingual student-writers and instructor-readers. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotlrcacea.2025.1.18031