The Effects of Jigsaw Puzzle and Literature Circle Techniques on Argumentative Writing of Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه تخصصی زبان، فرهنگ، و ترجمه (دوفصلنامه)
1 - کارشناس ارشد آموزش زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه فنی و حرفه ای بروجن، بروجن، چهار محال وبختیاری،ایران
کلید واژه: collaborative learning, Argumentative Writing, Jigsaw Puzzle, Literature Circle,
چکیده مقاله :
The main objective of the current study was to check two collaborative techniques, i.e., Jigsaw Puzzle and Literature Circle, to see their impact on argumentative writing improvement among Iranian EFL language learners. To this end, a quantitative design and a pretest-treatment-posttest method were used. The sample of this study was sixty Iranian learners who were assigned randomly to two homogeneous experimental groups, group A: Jigsaw Puzzle, and group B: Literature Circle; each one consisted of 30 participants, based on their performance on the OQPT. They sat for an argumentative writing pretest, then the treatments were implemented for every group, and finally, they sat for an argumentative writing posttest. The results implied that implementing the Literature Circle technique leads to a statistically significant improvement in argumentative writing by Iranian EFL learners. Moreover, the findings revealed that using the Jigsaw Puzzle technique results in a statistically significant improvement in argumentative writing essay performance by Iranian EFL learners. Furthermore, the comparison of the effects of the treatments of the study showed that the Literature Circle group outperformed the Jigsaw Puzzle group. The study provides implications for EFL teachers, learners, and curriculum developers.
The main objective of the current study was to check two collaborative techniques, i.e., Jigsaw Puzzle and Literature Circle, to see their impact on argumentative writing improvement among Iranian EFL language learners. To this end, a quantitative design and a pretest-treatment-posttest method were used. The sample of this study was sixty Iranian learners who were assigned randomly to two homogeneous experimental groups, group A: Jigsaw Puzzle, and group B: Literature Circle; each one consisted of 30 participants, based on their performance on the OQPT. They sat for an argumentative writing pretest, then the treatments were implemented for every group, and finally, they sat for an argumentative writing posttest. The results implied that implementing the Literature Circle technique leads to a statistically significant improvement in argumentative writing by Iranian EFL learners. Moreover, the findings revealed that using the Jigsaw Puzzle technique results in a statistically significant improvement in argumentative writing essay performance by Iranian EFL learners. Furthermore, the comparison of the effects of the treatments of the study showed that the Literature Circle group outperformed the Jigsaw Puzzle group. The study provides implications for EFL teachers, learners, and curriculum developers.
References
Aronson, E., Bridgeman, D. L., & Geffner, R. (1978). Interdependent
interactions and prosocial behavior. Journal of Research &
Development in Education.
Aronson, E., & Bridgeman, D. (1979). Jigsaw groups and the
desegregated classroom: In pursuit of common goals. Personality
and social psychology bulletin, 5(4), 438-446.
Al-Salkhi, M. J. (2015). The effectiveness of the jigsaw strategy on the
achievement and learning motivation of the 7th primary grade
students in Islamic education. International Journal of humanities
and social science, 5(4), 111-118.
Abdollahzadeh, E., Amini Farsani, M., & Beikmohammadi, M. (2017).
Argumentative writing behavior of graduate EFL
learners. Argumentation, 31(4), 641-661.
Azmin, N. H. (2016). Effect of the Jigsaw-Based Cooperative Learning
Method on Student Performance in the General Certificate of
Education Advanced-Level Psychology: An Exploratory Brunei
Case Study. International Education Studies, 9(1), 91-106.
Anker, P. (2004). A vindication of the rights of brutes. Philosophy &
Geography, 7(2), 259-264.
Boonsiri, N. (2007). An Analysis of Rhetorical Patterns: A Study of Thai
University Students’ Argumentative Compositions. A Master’s
Project, Graduate School, Srinakharinwirot University. Bangkok,
Thailand.
Chaya, W. (2005). The effects of explicit metacognitive strategy training
on EFL students' revision of their argumentative essay (Doctoral
dissertation, School of English, Institute of Social Technology,
Suranaree University of Technology).
Clayton, T., & Klainin, S. (1994). How organization affects grammatical
accuracy. Research in reading and writing. Anthology Series, 32.
Crowhurst, M. (1991). Interrelationships between reading and writing
persuasive discourse. Research in the Teaching of English, 314-338.
Dar, R. & Khan, J (2015). How ESL teachers and peers evaluate and
respond to students writing. RELC Journal, 20(1), 77–90.
Gholamyian, F. / Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation 5(1) (2022), 1-16
15
Flower, L. (1979). Writer-based prose: A cognitive basis for problems in
writing. College English, 41(1), 19-37.
Galbraith, D., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1999). Effective strategies for the
teaching and learning of writing. Learning and instruction, 9(2), 93-
108.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: the theory in practice. New York:
Basic.Hyland, F. (2003). ESL writers and feedback: giving more
autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research 4(1), 33–54.
Ibáñez, M. B., Rueda, J. J. G., Maroto, D., & Kloos, C. D. (2013).
Collaborative learning in multi-user virtual environments. Journal
of Network and Computer Applications, 36(6), 1566-1576.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2008). Social interdependence theory
and cooperative learning: The teacher's role. In The teacher’s role
in implementing cooperative learning in the classroom (pp. 9-37).
Springer, Boston, MA.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Stanne, M. B, (2000). Cooperative
learning methods: A meta-analysis. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, University of Minnesota, USA.
Kongpetch, S. (2006). Using a genre-based approach to teach writing to
Thai students: a case study. Prospect, 21(2), 3-33.
Kellog, R. (2001). A model of working memory in performance: Effects
of rough draft and outline strategies. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 14(1), 355-365.
Maslow, A. H. (1968), Toward a Psychology of Being, 2nd ed., New
York, Van Nostrand.
Mateos, M., Martín, E., Cuevas, I., Villalón, R., Martínez, I., & GonzálezLamas, J. (2018). Improving written argumentative synthesis by
teaching the integration of conflicting information from multiple
sources. Cognition and Instruction, 36(2), 119-138.
Prommas, P., & Sinwongsuwat, K. (2013). A comparative study of
discourse connectors used in argumentative compositions of Thai
EFL learners and English-native speakers. The TFLTA Journal, 4,
88-102.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and
learning. Annual review of psychology, 49(1), 345-375.
Perkins, M. & Smith, J. (2014). The influence of peer feedback on selfand peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing, 19(2), 109–
131.
Gholamyian, F. / Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation 5(1) (2022), 1-16
16
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1987). Knowledge telling and
knowledge transforming in written composition. Advances in
applied psycholinguistics, 2, 142-175.
Slavin, R. E. (1991). Synthesis of research of cooperative
learning. Educational leadership, 48(5), 71-82.
Siriphan, S. (1988). An investigation of syntax, semantics, and rhetoric in
the English writing of fifteen Thai graduate students (Doctoral
dissertation, Texas Woman's University).
Sherman, R. J. (1998). Collaborative planning, forecasting &
replenishment (CPFR): Realizing the promise of efficient consumer
response through collaborative technology. Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, 6(4), 6-9.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher
psychological processes. MA: Harvard University Press.
Weigle, A. (2002). Metacognitive strategies in L2 writing: A case for task
knowledge. In A. James (Ed.), Georgetown university round table
on languages and linguistics (p. 302-322). Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press.
Wongsothorn, A. (1994). An investigation of students' writing
improvement through various types of teachers'
intervention. Research in reading and writing: A Southeast Asian
collection, 118-125.
Yamamoto, M., Umemura, N., & Kawano, H. (2017, July). Automated
essay scoring system based on rubric. In International Conference
on Applied Computing and Information Technology (pp. 177-190).
Springer, Cham.
Zarei, A. (2012). Argumentative competence and written production in
foreign and native languages. Langue-Francaise, 112, 88-105.
