scholarly journals Collaborative Writing in EFL Classroom: Comparison on Group, Pair, and Individual Writing Activities in Argumentative Tasks

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-188
Author(s):  
Jitlada Moonma ◽  
Chittima Kaweera
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Group Work ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Collaborative Writing ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Argumentative Writing ◽  
Advanced Level ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Novice Learners ◽  
Group Pair

This study focused on comparing the effects on 32 students’ argumentative writing qualities when they worked alone or collaborated in pairs and groups and explored the students’ opinions towards critical thinking across different writing activities. The 32 students were divided into groups of four (n=8), pairs (n=16) and individuals (n=32). Their papers were rated in terms of content, language use, and organization by three raters. The research employed argumentative writing rubrics, semi-structured interview, and observation. From the total of 15 points, the novice learners gained the highest scores when writing in groups (X ̅ = 11.22), followed by pairs (X ̅ = 10.19) and individuals (X ̅ = 8.98). The intermediate learners also gained the highest scores in group work (X ̅ = 11.50), followed by pairs (X ̅ = 10.32), and individual work (X ̅ = 9.04), respectively. Similar to the advanced level, they had the highest scores when working in groups (X ̅ = 11.95), followed by pairs (X ̅ = 10.45), and individuals (X ̅ = 9.45). The findings indicated that group work led to the highest scores in all proficiency levels and in groups, the students’ critical thinking improved regarding analyzing, evaluating and creating information when they brainstormed, shared and discussed all information. In pairs, the students also demonstrated that their critical thinking developed but only in analyzing from sharing information with a partner. In individuals, all proficiency levels reported that critical thinking was not developed as no interaction with peers.

scholarly journals Using Cooperative Learning In Teaching Critical Thinking In Reading

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Anit Pranita Devi ◽  
Bachrudin Musthafa ◽  
Gin Gin Gustine Gustine
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Cooperative Learning ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Interpersonal Relationship ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Classroom Observations ◽  
Thinking Dispositions ◽  
Critical Thinking Dispositions ◽  
Development Of Students

This study investigates how cooperative learning facilitates students in learning critical thinking in reading and to find out the benefits and challenges during the implementation of cooperative learning in one vocational school in Cimahi. A case study is utilized by using instruments of classroom observations, questionnaires, semi structured interview and students’ written tests. The findings show that the implementation of cooperative learning facilitates students develop their critical thinking and enhance critical thinking dispositions in reading. Three features which contribute to the development of students’ critical thinking in reading are: the encouragement of student-student interaction; the provision of group purposes; and the provision of stimulus to the students’ development of thought and ideas. The aforementioned features promote benefits which involved higher motivation and involvement, increased opportunity for language use, and developed interpersonal relationship. Nevertheless, these benefits are constrained by the availability of time, students’ English proficiency, and students’ contribution to the groupwork. It is recommended that further researchers conduct the similar study in a longer period to make sure that the key elements of cooperative learning are well-structured.Keywords: cooperative learning, critical thinking

Improving EFL learners' pragmatic awareness

2003 ◽  
Vol 141-142 ◽  
pp. 199-223
Author(s):  
Seran Doğançay-Aktuna
Keyword(s):  
Language Use ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Effective Communication ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Main Claim ◽  
Advanced Level ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Linguistic Resources ◽  
Pragmatic Awareness ◽  
Language Classrooms

This paper overviews the ways in which EFL learners' pragmatic awareness can be developed in language classrooms through focused instruction and practice. It argues that effective communication requires awareness of the conventions governing language use and attention to the characteristics of the context and the interlocutors, besides linguistic resources. The main claim is that even though some pragmatics data that is based on native speaker norms might not provide relevant models for learners of English as a foreign or international language, these learners still need to become aware of crosscultural variation in norms of language use and learn how to consider social and contextual factors surrounding effective communication. After defining pragmatic competence and transfer, the paper discusses possible ways for integrating pragmatic consciousness-raising into language teaching and the problems involved in this endeavour. It then describes a course designed to raise pragmatic awareness in advanced level EFL learners as part of their TEFL training program. The underlying principles, materials and sample activities of the course are presented and learners' reaction to the course is discussed.

scholarly journals The effects of grouping types on promoting critical thinking in EFL collaborative writing

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-120
Author(s):  
Nguyen Thi Minh Tram ◽  
Bui Thi Thuc Quyen
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Collaborative Learning ◽  
Tertiary Education ◽  
Collaborative Writing ◽  
Homogeneous Groups ◽  
Learning And Teaching ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Heterogeneous Groups ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Impact

Nurturing critical thinking (CT) has been acknowledged as a core objective of tertiary education, and drawn attention from academia of teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL), particularly in EFL argumentative writing. It has been claimed that collaborative learning which stimulates the active exchange of ideas within small groups not only increases interest among the participants but also promotes critical thinking. One of the important aspects of learning and teaching through collaboration is the group composition or grouping “who with whom”. The present study was an attempt to investigate the impact of homogeneous and heterogeneous groupings on critical thinking in collaborative writing. Having been required to write an argumentative essay as a pre-test, 75 participants, who were categorized by their prior critical thinking levels, were assigned into three group types: heterogeneous, homogeneous high and homogeneous low groups. As a consequence, four types of students were considered their improvement before and after the experiment: high-level students in heterogeneous groups, lowlevel students in heterogeneous groups, high-level students in homogeneous groups, low-level students in homogeneous groups. The results demonstrated that learners improved their critical thinking level through collaborative writing, whether working with stronger or weaker peers. However, heterogeneous grouping showed superiority over homogeneous grouping at the low level. The results revealed that cooperative learning could be especially beneficial for low students. It is hoped that the findings of the present study will give teachers deep insights into group compositions in collaborative learning courses, and will help them make better group experiences for students.

scholarly journals Effects of Explicit Instruction on Text Structure in Process Writing

2020 ◽  
Vol 2019 (1) ◽  
pp. 433
Author(s):  
Sachi Oshima
Keyword(s):  
Explicit Instruction ◽  
Writing Skills ◽  
Text Structure ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Process Writing ◽  
Advanced Level ◽  
English Writing ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Efl College Students

This study investigates the effectiveness of explicit instruction on text structure in the development of Japanese EFL college students’ English writing skills by examining two research questions: (1) How does students’ writing change after being given lessons on explicit instruction and process writing?; and (2) How do students’ perceptions of English writing change due to process writing and explicit instruction on text structure? Two groups of students were given four lessons on process writing and explicit instruction. While one group of advanced-level students wrote an argumentative essay, the other group with beginner-level students wrote a descriptive essay. The results suggest that explicit instruction on text structure can be a useful means of developing English writing skills regardless of students’ English proficiency levels. Students self-report indicated that their ability to organize ideas was highly improved, and they exhibited positive changes in writing in terms of organization and awareness of readers. 本研究では、EFL環境下にある日本人大学生を対象に、文章構成（text structure）の明示的指導がライティングにどのような効果を有するかを、次の2点について考察し、検証した。（1）プロセスライティングと文章構成の明示的指導により、学習者の英語ライティングはどのように変化するか。（2）プロセスライティングと文章構成の明示的指導により、学習者の英語ライティングに対する認識はどのように変化するか。2グループの学生に対しプロセスライティングと文章構成に関する明示的な指導を4レッスンずつ行った。英語上級者のグループにはargumentative essay（議論型エッセイ）を、初級者のグループにはdescriptive essay（記述型エッセイ）を書かせた。結果、文章構成の明示的指導は、学習者の英語運用能力に関わらず、英語ライティングの向上に効果的であることが分かった。学習者は文章構成力が最も上がったと回答しており、ドラフトにも文章構成力の向上や読み手を意識した文章への変容といった効果が表れた。

scholarly journals A Case Study on the Conceptualization and Teaching Practice of L2 Argumentative Writing Instruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 30
Author(s):  
Zhiying Chen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Writing ◽  
Teaching Practice ◽  
Tertiary Education ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Teaching Beliefs ◽  
Argumentative Writing ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
English Major ◽  
Language Capacity ◽  
Task Oriented

Argumentative writing is one of the main writing types in Second Language Writing (SLW) instruction, as it links with the assessment of language capacity in tests. It is a common course for students of tertiary education, but few instructors have a clear comprehension of it. With the goal of giving circumspect teaching implications, this study serves as an illustration for argumentative writing lecturers in higher education. In this study, semi-structured interview, classroom observation and collected written drafts are used as research tools to discover the conceptualization and teaching practice of two lecturers who are instructing English-major sophomores. The findings show that different teaching beliefs (human-oriented and task-oriented) lead to different teaching process in argumentative writing class. Besides, the assessment criteria and students’ response are revealed to understand the effects of those instructions accordingly.

Engaging in dialogue during collaborative writing: The role of affective, cognitive, and social engagement

2021 ◽  
pp. 136216882110540
Author(s):  
Boya Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Social Engagement ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Collaborative Writing ◽  
Task Engagement ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Dynamic Nature ◽  
Instructional Activities ◽  
Single Text ◽  
Method Approach

Collaborative writing (CW) involves two or more students writing a single text together. Previous studies mainly focused on students’ cognitive engagement in CW and investigated their attention to various language-related problems during task interaction. However, little CW research to date has considered that engagement in language-related discussions can manifest from three dimensions: cognitive, social, and affective. Focusing on the multidimensional characteristics of engagement, this study investigated how Russian learners’ social and affective reactions influence their focus on language use while they completed a CW task. Drawing on Svalberg’s framework of engagement with language to identify the three dimensions of engagement, I conducted a mixed-method approach towards analysing the audio-recorded collaborative dialogues by three student pairs ( n = 6), along with a qualitative analysis of their responses to a five-point Likert scale questionnaire. The analyses showed that when learners were interactive and viewed the activity as useful, they noticed many linguistic problems and elaborated on them. In contrast, when learners demonstrated social disengagement and perceived disadvantages from CW, they were likely to withdraw their attention from resolving the language issues they encountered. These findings indicate the complex and dynamic nature of task engagement. They can provide second language (L2) teachers with an in-depth understanding of how to fully engage students in instructional activities to better foster their L2 learning.

Summary and conclusion

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Gafaranga
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Research Direction ◽  
Code Switching ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Advanced Level ◽  
Concurrent Use ◽  
Interactional Functions ◽  
New Research

Research in code-switching, undertaken against the backdrop of very negative attitudes towards the concurrent use of two or more languages within the same conversation, has traditionally been geared towards rehabilitating this form of language use. From being seen as a random phenomenon reflecting the user’s lack of competence, code-switching is currently seen as sign of an advanced level of competence in the languages involved and as serving different interactional functions. However, as a result of its success, the research tradition now faces an entirely new challenge: Where to from here? How can research in code-switching continue to be relevant and interesting now it has largely achieved its original purpose? This book has argued that, in order to overcome this challenge, the notion of bilingualism itself must be redefined. Bilingualism must be seen as consisting of diverse interactional practices and be investigated as such. This book has made the case for this new approach, outlined a methodology for investigating bilingualism as interactional practices and illustrated it by means of three case studies. This concluding chapter wraps up the argument and invites other researchers to contribute to this new research direction.

The interplay of oral corrective feedback and L2 willingness to communicate across proficiency levels

2020 ◽  
pp. 136216882092896
Author(s):  
Mostafa Zare ◽  
Zohreh Gooniband Shooshtari ◽  
Alireza Jalilifar
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Willingness To Communicate ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Feedback Type ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
High Preference ◽  
Oral Corrective Feedback ◽  
The Impact

This study aims to explore the impact of oral corrective feedback types on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ willingness to communicate across proficiency levels. It also investigates how EFL learners view different types of feedback in relation to their willingness to communicate. Sixty Iranian EFL learners were tracked in four proficiency levels. Initially, the participants filled in a questionnaire to measure their attitudes to oral CF and their willingness to communicate. Subsequent to the teachers’ employment of explicit correction, recasts, and prompts, the learners’ willingness to communicate was measured anew. A semi-structured interview was also conducted. The results revealed learners’ high preference for prompts. A two-way mixed between-within ANOVA demonstrated a significant effect for both oral corrective feedback and proficiency level on willingness to communicate. Furthermore, elicitative types of feedback were ranked as the most contributory feedback type to L2 willingness to communicate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document