The Effect of Reflection Supported Learning versus Electronic Supported Learning on Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners' Argumentative Writing
محورهای موضوعی : 0
Farnaz Sahebkheir
1
,
Fatemeh Ranjdoost
2
1 - Islamic Azad University of Tabriz
2 - M.A. student
کلید واژه: Argumentative Writing, E-Writing, Electronic Supported Learning, Reflection Supported Learning, Writing.,
چکیده مقاله :
This study aimed to find the effects of reflection-supported learning versus electronic-supported learning on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ argumentative writing. Second, it attempted to determine whether reflection-supported or electronic-supported learning has more beneficial effects on improving Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ argumentative writing. 46 female EFL learners from Pardisan Institute in Marand - East Azerbaijan participated in this study. PET test was used to homogenize the participants. They were non-randomly assigned into two experimental groups. The first experimental group received reflection-supported learning treatment and the second experimental group received electronic-supported learning treatment. Furthermore, MANCOVA was used to check the scores of the pre-test and post-test. The results revealed that the electronic-supported group yielded superior outcomes to the reflective-supported group.
This study aimed to find the effects of reflection-supported learning versus electronic-supported learning on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ argumentative writing. Second, it attempted to determine whether reflection-supported or electronic-supported learning has more beneficial effects on improving Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ argumentative writing. 46 female EFL learners from Pardisan Institute in Marand - East Azerbaijan participated in this study. PET test was used to homogenize the participants. They were non-randomly assigned into two experimental groups. The first experimental group received reflection-supported learning treatment and the second experimental group received electronic-supported learning treatment. Furthermore, MANCOVA was used to check the scores of the pre-test and post-test. The results revealed that the electronic-supported group yielded superior outcomes to the reflective-supported group.
Abbas, S. H. (2016).The effect of reflection-supported process-based writing teaching on Iraqi
EFL students' writing performance and attitude. Arab World English Journal, 10(1), 24-32.
Alfalagg, A. C. (2020). Impact of teacher-student writing conferences on frequency and
accuracy of using cohesive devices in EFL students’ writing. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education 5(1), 34-51. DOI:10.1186/s40862-020-00104-z
Álvarez, G. (2012, July). New technologies in the university context: The use of blogs for We
are developing students' reading and writing skills. RUSC, 9(2), 185-198.
Deti, T. , Ferede, T. & Dinsa, D. T.(2023). The effect of reflection on developing writing.
Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8(1), 23-33. DOI:10.1186/s40862-023-00202-8
Fajrina, A., Asra, R., Eriadi, A., & Andani, R. (2021). Best practices in teaching argumentative
writing. Best Practices in Writing Instruction, 2, 113–140.
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford
University Unit.
Godwin-Jones, R. (2009). Emerging technologies personal learning environments.
Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 3-9.
Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2010). They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic
Writing. W. W. Norton & Company
Hinkel, E. (2011). Teaching academic ESL writing: Practical techniques in vocabulary and
grammar. Routledge.
Johnson, K. E. (2017). Reflective Writing and Cognitive Task Complexity: Understanding
Student engagement in the development of higher-order thinking skills. Studies in Higher Education, 42(3), 439-455. https://doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1038100
Juvova, A., Chudy, S., Neumeister, P., Plischke, J., & Kvintova, J. (2015). Reflection of
constructivist theories in current educational Practice. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(5), 345–349.
Knapp, P., & Watkins, M.(2005). Genre, Text, Grammar: Technologies for Teaching and
Assessing Writing. University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
Kouicem, K., & Kelkoul, N. (2016). Constructivist theories of Piaget and Vygotsky:
General teaching implications. Retrieved from: http:// dspace. Univ- eloued. dz/ bitst ream/ 123456789/2775/1/ Constructivist% 20Theories% 20of% 20Pia get% 20and% 20Vygotsky. Pdf
Mugambi, M. (2018). Linking constructivism theory to classroom practice. International Journal
of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 5(9), 96–104.
Mulugeta, F. (2021). Addis ababa university students’ strategy use in a reading-to-writing Task.
The Ethiopian Journal of Education, 41(1), 75–111.
Sudirman, A., Gemilang, A. V., & Kristanto, T. M. A. (2021). The power of reflective Journal
writing for university students from the EFL perspective. Studies in English Language and Education, 8(3), 1061-1079.
Surur, A. N., & Dengela,S. T. (2019). The relationship between writing anxiety and students’
writing performance at Wolkite University first-year English primary students. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 4(6), 10-19.
Xhaferi, B., & Xhaferi, G. (2017).Enhancing Learning through Reflection: A case study of
SEEU. See Review, 12(1), 53–68.
Zulfikar, T. & Mujiburrahman, M. (2018). Understanding own teaching: becoming reflective
teachers through reflective journals. Reflective practice, 19(1), 1-13. DOI:10.1080/14623943.2017.1295933
