DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2012.18.08.3773 An Investigation Into Writing Strategies of Iranian EFL Undergraduate Learners (original) (raw)
Related papers
An Investigation Into Writing Strategies of Iranian EFL Undergraduate Learners
2012
This study adopted the cognitive process of writing to investigate the composing strategies of Iranian EFL undergraduate learners. Specifically, the study aimed to address the following research questions: (1) What writing strategies do Iranian EFL writers with different writing ability employ while composing? (2) Are there any differences between the writing strategies used by good EFL learners to those used by the poor ones? Think aloud protocols, post writing interviews, written products and stimulated recalls were collected from three skilled and three less skilled EFL writers while completing an argumentative task. Analysis of the data revealed that, despite employing the strategies in combination and in a recursive fashion by both groups, two groups of writers were found to be different in their planning, drafting and reviewing. Specifically, good and poor writers were found to be different in employing certain strategies like rereading, repetition, L1 use and rehearsing.
Iranian Efl Learners' Writing Ability and Writing Strategies in Two Discourse Types
2013
Adapting a purely cognitive view of composing, Flower and Hayes (1981, p. 366) note that processes of writing are certain distinctive "thinking processes" that writers organize once engaged in writing. Hence, there are two key terms in the cognitive view of writing: thinking and process (Riazi, 1995). The first one identifies thinking critically in order to solve a problem which, on its own, calls for planning of the written task. This is where cognitive psychology and composition field are clearly reconciled. The problem solving nature of writing (Flower & Hayes, 1980) is accommodated in higher-order cognition in cognitive psychology. Higher-order cognition, according to Solso (cited in Bergovitz, 2008), are the mental activities or performances based on which knowledge is acquired or understood; it refers to aspects of cognition based on the perception and memory stages and which normally occur at the end of the information-processing sequence. To be more precise, this cognition "refers to such aspects of cognition as problem-solving and language" (Bergovitz, 2008, p. 12). Identifying the problem and planning the task, writers then initiate the process of composing by translating their abstract ideas and conceptions into words in addition to reviewing their written products through revising or editing (Riazi, 1995) to solve this problem. This is where the strategies are called into action. Strategy researchers generally believe that students employ strategies to solve the language problem (e.g., Oxford, 1990). On the other hand, cognitive psychologists also maintain that strategies are part of the solutions learners employ to solve a language problem (Bergovitz, 2008). Therefore, using the recursive and nonlinear processes of writing, this study adopts a holistic view to investigate the whole composing process than a single sub process like planning. This holistic investigation of writing from the time the writers see the topic up until they finish it, is also more comprehensive, as Roca de Larios et al. (2007) have asserted. 1. Writing/composing is a cognitive process of knowledge production (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987). 2. Writing/composing strategies are operationally defined as methods the writers consciously and intentionally employ to generate ideas, plan, draft, organize, and revise in the whole process of writing (Arndt, 1990; Beare, 2000). 3. Writing/composing process is the rationale, goal-oriented activity of hierarchical processes in which the writer actively attempts to solve the given problem including three major stages planning, transcribing, and reviewing (Flower & Hayes, 1980; Tapinta, 2006).
2013
Adapting a purely cognitive view of composing, Flower and Hayes (1981, p. 366) note that processes of writing are certain distinctive "thinking processes" that writers organize once engaged in writing. Hence, there are two key terms in the cognitive view of writing: thinking and process (Riazi, 1995). The first one identifies thinking critically in order to solve a problem which, on its own, calls for planning of the written task. This is where cognitive psychology and composition field are clearly reconciled. The problem solving nature of writing (Flower & Hayes, 1980) is accommodated in higher-order cognition in cognitive psychology. Higher-order cognition, according to Solso (cited in Bergovitz, 2008), are the mental activities or performances based on which knowledge is acquired or understood; it refers to aspects of cognition based on the perception and memory stages and which normally occur at the end of the information-processing sequence. To be more precise, this cognition "refers to such aspects of cognition as problem-solving and language" (Bergovitz, 2008, p. 12). Identifying the problem and planning the task, writers then initiate the process of composing by translating their abstract ideas and conceptions into words in addition to reviewing their written products through revising or editing (Riazi, 1995) to solve this problem. This is where the strategies are called into action. Strategy researchers generally believe that students employ strategies to solve the language problem (e.g., Oxford, 1990). On the other hand, cognitive psychologists also maintain that strategies are part of the solutions learners employ to solve a language problem (Bergovitz, 2008). Therefore, using the recursive and nonlinear processes of writing, this study adopts a holistic view to investigate the whole composing process than a single sub process like planning. This holistic investigation of writing from the time the writers see the topic up until they finish it, is also more comprehensive, as Roca de Larios et al. (2007) have asserted. 1. Writing/composing is a cognitive process of knowledge production (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987). 2. Writing/composing strategies are operationally defined as methods the writers consciously and intentionally employ to generate ideas, plan, draft, organize, and revise in the whole process of writing (Arndt, 1990; Beare, 2000). 3. Writing/composing process is the rationale, goal-oriented activity of hierarchical processes in which the writer actively attempts to solve the given problem including three major stages planning, transcribing, and reviewing (Flower & Hayes, 1980; Tapinta, 2006).
Toward an Empirical Model of EFL Writing Processes: An Exploratory Study
The present study investigated EFL learners' writing processes using multiple data sources including their written texts, videotaped pausing behaviors while writing, stimulated recall protocols, and analytic scores given to the written texts. Methodologically, the study adopted a research scheme that has been successfully used for building models of Japanese L1 writing. Three paired groups of Japanese EFL writers (experts vs. novices, more-vs. less-skilled student writers, novices before and after 6 months of instruction) were compared in terms of writing fluency, quality/complexity of their written texts, their pausing behaviors while writing, and their strategy use. The results revealed that (a) before starting to write, the experts spent a longer time planning a detailed overall organization, whereas the novices spent a shorter time, making a less global plan; (b) once the experts had made their global plan, they did not stop and think as frequently as the novices; (c) L2 proficiency appeared to explain part of the difference in strategy use between the experts and novices; and (d) after 6 months of instruction, novices had begun to use some of the expert writers' strategies. It was also speculated that the experts' global planning was a manifestation of writing expertise that cannot be acquired over a short period of time.
An Investigation of EFL Learners' Mental Processes in L2 Writing: The Case of Iranian EFL Learners
—Normal human communication manifests itself mostly either in written or spoken form. Examination of speech and writing processes enables psycholinguists to peek into the way people plan their language production. This article aimed to examine how EFL learners plan their writing activities. To this end, two groups of High proficiency (HPG) and Low proficiency (LPG) of 16 EFL students were asked to write an argumentative essay on the given topic. Based on the data obtained from their think-aloud protocols, retrospective interviews, and the comparisons of the two groups' performance, it was found that both groups approached the writing task in a linear progression of three stages of Formulation, Execution, and Monitoring. However, there were differences in the ways the two groups planned their writing productions.
Islamic Azad University-Isfahan Branch, 2020
In the present study, the effects of four planning time conditions (pre-task, extended task, free writing, and control) were investigated over the quality of expository and argumentative writings of 108 undergraduate EFL writers. The maximum time limit was 30 minutes for all the four groups of the study. The results revealed significantly higher writing quality in the free writing condition in both argumentative and expository writings. The results also showed that compared with the effects of the writing mode those of the planning time conditions were more decisive on the writing quality. Moreover, argumentative writings were of higher quality than expository writings. Being placed in different writing modes was not decisive in the choice of planning time conditions. The results may have pedagogical implications for EFL writing instructors and theoretical implications for EFL writing researchers.
The Effect of Instruction on Writing Performance of Intermediate EFL Persian Students
International Journal of Linguistics, 2012
This study was an attempt to investigate the effect of instruction on writing performance of EFL Iranian learners. For this purpose, a group of 33 Iranian learners studying at an English language school located in Isfahan, Iran, took part in this research. They attended an L2 writing course for 16 sessions and were instructed on how to develop their skill of writing in English. Prior to the instruction, they were asked to write a pretest on the topic of "Immunity against Infectious Diseases ". The same topic was given to them at the end of the course as a posttest. The participants' writings were exactly typed as they were in Microsoft office 2003 and the number of words and spelling errors were counted. Using ESL composition profile, their performance on both pretest and posttest were scored. The participants' scores on each 326 subcategory of the ESL profile together with their quantitative scores were entered into the statistical program of SPSS 16. Using a matched t-test, the researchers investigated the mean differences between the pairs. The results indicated that the difference between the means is significant and the writing instruction has made a difference. The calculated effect size also showed a very large effect. mechanics, and vocabulary use. In contrast, the proponents of process approach to writing state as their primary considerations the need to see learners as creators of language, to allow their intrinsic motives play a role, to put emphasis on the content and the message learners want to convey, to give student writers time to draft, write and rewrite, and to give them feedback, from both instructor and peers, throughout the composing process . Thus, writing is seen to be an interactive process between the perceived reader audience and the writer, an act of communication which occurs by way of the text (Olshtain; 2001). In short, the writing-as-process position underscores the necessity of redirecting the orientation toward composition, from product to process . In this way, teachers can elevate the quality of learners' written communication skills by emphasizing that they should write thinking of the message they want to convey rather than grammar, that writing involves a continuous attempt to explore thoughts in the process of putting them on paper, and that it is unrealistic to try to produce a perfect paper right the first time .
In recent years, a number of large-scale writing assessments (e.g., TOEFL iBT) have employed integrated writing tests to measure test takers' academic writing ability. Using a quantitative method, the current study examined how written textual features and use of source material(s) varied across two types of text-based integrated writing tasks (i.e., listening-towrite vs. reading-to-write) and two levels of language proficiency (i.e., high vs. low). Sixty Iranian English major students were selected through purposive sampling and divided into low and high proficiency groups based on an IELTS practice test. Then, they were required to write on a listening-to-write and a reading-to-write task. Results of twoway and one-way ANOVAs revealed that firstly, variations in integrated writing tasks together with level of proficiency had a significant effect on all the generated discourse features, secondly, the two types of integrated tasks produced features sharing the same features, and thirdly, some features could distinguish a certain level of proficiency. In addition, the results indicated that plagiarism (i.e., direct source use without quotation) is higher in response to the reading-to-write task than the listening-to-write task especially among the low proficiency writers. Implications of the study are presented.
L2 Writing Strategies Used by EFL Graduate Students
Journal of ELT Research
This study investigates the writing strategies and the predominantly strategies used by four Indonesian graduate students when writing in L2 (English). They were divided into 2 groups, skilled and less skilled writers, to examine what strategies they applied when writing. The main instrument of this study is Think Aloud Protocols (TAPs). The analysis of data collected discovered some findings: (1) both skilled and less skilled writers used varied strategies. However, the frequency of using each strategy was different. Skilled writers used each strategy in high frequency. On the other hand, less skilled writers only used each strategy in low frequency, while skilled writers understand the recursive nature of writing. (2) Skilled writers used reading and rereading strategies in high frequency for several purposes: revising and editing the text, developing ideas, and getting new ideas, while less skilled writers rarely used those strategies. They wrote whatever ideas came into their mind, and reread the text once in a while. These findings suggest that effective writing strategies should be introduced explicitly when student writers have already mastered the foundation of writing. Unfortunately, they are seldom guided on the use of writing strategies in the process of their writing. In fact, effective writing strategies and the frequency of using each strategy could help them become good writers and influence the quality of their writing. Based on these findings some suggestions are discussed.
The main purpose of the present quasi-experimental study was twofold; its first purpose was to investigate the effects of using of two approaches namely; genre and process on EFL learners' accuracy, fluency, and complexity in written task production. Secondly, it attempted to investigate the effects of mentioned approaches on EFL learners' attitude toward writing skill. to this end, 60 learners of English at intermediate level were selected randomly as the participants of the study and assigned into three groups of product, process, and genre groups. a written task was employed to collect data from the participants. the collected written data was quantified in terms of accuracy, fluency, and complexity measures. The results of the study based on one-way ANOVA revealed that there were significant differences on EFL learners' writing performance. The current study might carry some pedagogical implications for EFL learners' writing skill, learner attitude toward writing, teacher education and task designers.