Comparing the Impact of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Pairing Types on Iranian High and Low Proficiency EFL Learners’ Writing Accuracy and Fluency

محورهای موضوعی : Journal of Studies in Learning and Teaching English

Negin Aalaei ¹ , Shima Ahamdi Azad ² , Karim Nazari Bagha ³

1 - Department of English Language Teaching, Sara. C., Islamic Azad University, Sarab, Iran
2 - Department of English Language Teaching, Sara. C., Islamic Azad University, Sarab, Iran
3 - Department of English Language Teaching, Sara. C., Islamic Azad University, Sarab, Iran

تاریخ دریافت : 1404/04/05 تاریخ پذیرش : 1404/05/08 تاریخ انتشار : 1404/06/22

کلید واژه: EFL writing, accuracy, fluency, pair-work, heterogeneous, homogeneous, high and low proficiency learner,

چکیده مقاله :

The current study examined the impact of homogeneous versus heterogeneous pairing types on Iranian high and low proficiency EFL learners’ writing accuracy and fluency. A total of 92 Iranian EFL learners, classified as high (H) or low (L) proficiency based on the Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT), were randomly assigned into three experimental groups: one heterogeneous group (H-L pairs, n=32) and two homogenous groups (H-H pairs, n=30 & L-L pairs, n=34). Following the pretest, collaborative writing tasks were conducted within homogeneous and heterogeneous pairs during the treatment phase, followed by a posttest. The accuracy and fluency of the compositions were assessed using the proportion of error-free T-units to the total T-units and the average number of words per T-unit in a text, respectively. The results of a two-way multivariate analysis of covariance, univariate tests, and post-hoc comparisons revealed that different pairing types did not yield any significant difference in the writing accuracy of high proficiency learners. However, a significant difference was observed in their writing fluency. Furthermore, significant differences in writing accuracy and fluency were found between the homogeneous L-L and heterogeneous H-L groups among low proficiency learners. The study’s findings hold strong theoretical and pedagogical implications, providing valuable insights for EFL educators and other stakeholders in the education sector.

چکیده انگلیسی:

The current study examined the impact of homogeneous versus heterogeneous pairing types on Iranian high and low proficiency EFL learners’ writing accuracy and fluency. A total of 92 Iranian EFL learners, classified as high (H) or low (L) proficiency based on the Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT), were randomly assigned into three experimental groups: one heterogeneous group (H-L pairs, n=32) and two homogenous groups (H-H pairs, n=30 & L-L pairs, n=34). Following the pretest, collaborative writing tasks were conducted within homogeneous and heterogeneous pairs during the treatment phase, followed by a posttest. The accuracy and fluency of the compositions were assessed using the proportion of error-free T-units to the total T-units and the average number of words per T-unit in a text, respectively. The results of a two-way multivariate analysis of covariance, univariate tests, and post-hoc comparisons revealed that different pairing types did not yield any significant difference in the writing accuracy of high proficiency learners. However, a significant difference was observed in their writing fluency. Furthermore, significant differences in writing accuracy and fluency were found between the homogeneous L-L and heterogeneous H-L groups among low proficiency learners. The study’s findings hold strong theoretical and pedagogical implications, providing valuable insights for EFL educators and other stakeholders in the education sector.

منابع و مأخذ:

Abbasi Dogolsara, S., Ahangari, S., & Seifoori, Z. (2022). Improving the fluency of the Iranian EFL learners’ oral performance through task variation. International Journal of Research in English Education, 7(3), 76-93. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.1.164-175
Adodo, S. O., & Agbayewa, J. O. (2011). Effect of homogenous and heterogeneous ability grouping class teaching on students’ interest, attitude, and achievement in integrated science. International Journal of Psychology and Counselling, 3(3), 48-54. https://doi.org/10.5897/ijpc.9000013 https://doi.org/10.5897/IJPC.9000013
Alfino, J., Latief, M. A., Widiati, U., & Saukah, A. (2022). The effect of different pair-work types on students’ writing quality. In The Second Economics, Law, Education and Humanities International Conference, KnE Social Sciences, pages 1–10. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v7i6.10603
Baer, J. (2003). Grouping and achievement in cooperative learning. College Teaching, 51, 169–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567550309596434
Biria, R., & Jafari, S. (2013). The impact of collaborative writing on the writing fluency of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(1), 164-175. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.1.164-175
Cen, H., & Wang, J. (2021). Effects of proficiency pairing on second language learning in collaborative writing. Technol. Enhanc. For. Lang, 04, 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0377-2
Derakhshan, A., & Shirmohammadli, M. (2015). The difficulties of teaching English language: The relationship between research and teaching. International Journal of Linguistics, 7(1), 102. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v7i1.6648
Dobao, A. F., & Blum, A. (2013). Collaborative writing in pairs and small groups: Learners’ attitudes and perceptions. System, 41, 365–378. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1004924
Edwards, L. (2007). Solutions placement test. Oxford University Press.
Fakher Ajabshir, Z., & Panahifar, F. (2020). The effect of teachers’ scaffolding and peers’ collaborative dialogue on speech act production in symmetrical and asymmetrical groups. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 45–61.
Fauziah, H., & Latief, M. A. (2015). The effect of working in heterogeneous and homogeneous pairs on the students’ writing skills. Arab World English Journal, 6(2), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol6no2.14
Hora, M. (2019). The impact of heterogeneous or homogeneous grouping on improving early elementary students’ fluency scores. [Master’s thesis], Northwestern College.
Indrilla, N., & Ciptaningrum, D. S. (2018). An approach in teaching writing skills: Does it offer a new insight in enhancing students writing ability? LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 21(2), 124-133. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v21i2.1036
Jafari, N. & Nejad Ansari, D. (2012). The effect of collaboration on Iranian EFL learners’ writing accuracy. International Education Studies, 5(2), 125-131. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v5n2p125
Jalili, M. H., & Shahrokhi, M. (2017). Impact of collaborative writing on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency of Iranian EFL learners’ L2 writing. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 4(4), 13-28.
Jee, S. & Aziz, A. (2021) The Application of the process-based writing approach in composing an argumentative essay: A Case Study of a Suburban Secondary School of Mukah District in Sarawak. Creative Education, 12(04), 880-896. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2021.124064
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. (2009). Joining together: Group theory and group skills. Boston Allyn & Bacon.
Johnston, C. G., James, R. H., Lye, J. N., & McDonald, I. M. (2000). An evaluation of collaborative Problem solving for learning economics. J Econ Edu, 31(1),13–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220480009596758
Kian-sam, H. (1999). Cooperative CBI: The effects of heterogeneous versus homogeneous grouping, student ability and learning accountability on achievement. Educational Research Journal, 14(2), 301-313.
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2008). The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 211-234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807086288
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and complications. Longman.
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2002). The effect of interaction in acquiring the grammar of a second language. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 343–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-0355(03)00009-0
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029
Jones, C., Pino-Pasternak, D., & Volet, S. (2022). Embodied interaffectivity in the emergence and maintenance of group cohesion. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 822072. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.822072
Li, N. & Liu, Y. (2022). Effects of dyadic patterns and proficiency pairing on Chinese EFL learners’ second language learning in collaborative writing. Front, Psychol. 13,1004924.
Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379, 259-278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb42014.x
Maftoon, P., & Ghafoori, G. (2009). A comparative study of the effect of homogeneous and heterogeneous collaborative interaction on the development of EFL learners’ writing skill. The Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(4), 127–158
Mahenthiran, S., & Rouse, P. (2000). The impact of group selection on student performance and satisfaction. The International Journal of Educational Management, 14(6), 255-265. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540010348043
Manegre, M., & Gutiérrez-Colón, M. (2020). Foreign language learning through collaborative writing in knowledge-building forums. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1836499
Meihami, H., Meihami, B., & Varmaghani, Z. (2013). The effect of collaborative writing on EFL students’ grammatical accuracy. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences. 11,47-56. https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilshs.11.47
Moqadasizadeh, Z., Tabatabaee Lotfi, A., Sarkeshikian, A. H., & Afshari, A. (2023). The effects of shared, interactive, and independent writing strategies on EFL learners’ writing accuracy and complexity. Interdisciplinary Studies in English Language Teaching, 2(1), 109-126. https://doi.org/10.22080/iselt.2023.25138.1050
Moustakas, L. (2023). Social cohesion: Definitions, causes and consequences. Encyclopedia, 3(3), 1028-1037. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3030075
Namaziandost, E., Shatalebi, V., & Nasri, M. (2019). The impact of cooperative learning on developing speaking ability and motivation toward learning English. Journal of Language and Education, 5(3), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2019.980919.9809
Neumann, H., & McDonough, K. (2015). Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 84–104. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.009
Niu, W., Yuan, Q., Qian, S., & Liu, Z. (2018). Authentic leadership and employee job behaviors: the mediating role of relational and organizational identification and the moderating role of LMX. Curr. Psychol, 374, 982–994. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12144-018-9937-0
Nosratinia, M., & Razavi, F. (2016). Writing complexity, accuracy, and fluency among EFL learners: Inspecting their interaction with learners’ degree of creativity. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(5), 1043–1052. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0605.19
Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2010). Effects of task complexity on fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students' argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 218-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.003
Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Language Learning, 47, 101-143. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.31997003
Poole, D. (2008). Interactional differentiation in the mixed-ability group: A situated view of two struggling readers Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 228–250. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.43.3.2
Rajablou, F., & Shirvan, M. E. (2017). Iranian English language learners’ attitude towards their accent in English language: An ecological approach. Englishes in Practice, 4(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1515/eip-2017-0001
Reigeluth, C. (1992). Elaborating the elaboration theory. Educational Technology Research & Development, 40(3), 80-86.
Sang, Z., & Zou, W. (2022). The effect of joint production on the accuracy and complexity of second language writing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09882-8
Sarkhosh, M., & Najafi, Sh. (2019). Collaborative and individual writing: Effects on accuracy and fluency development. Language Teaching Research, 136216881983140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819831406
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 12(2), 129- 158.
Shehadeh, A. (2011). Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(4), 286-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69.
Smieja, A. (2012). Mathematics classrooms at the middle school level: Does grouping make a difference in achievement. [Unpublished thesis]. Bemidji State University.
Soleimani, M., Modirkhamene, S. & Sadeghi, K. (2015). Peer-mediated vs. individual writing: Measuring fluency, complexity, and accuracy in writing. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2015.1043915
Storch, N. (2001). How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language Teaching Research, 5, 29-53. https://doi.org/10.1191/136216801666650977
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002
Storch, N. (2007). Investigating the merits of pair work on a text editing task in ESL classes. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807074600
Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2012). Pairing learners in pair work activity. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 31-48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812457530
Susanti, A., Widiati, U., & Yudi Cahyono, B. (2020). The effect of proficiency pairings on EFL students’ writing ability in genre-based approach context. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(1), 245-251. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i1.20439
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Tavakoli, M., & Rezazadeh, M. (2014). Individual and collaborative planning conditions: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 argumentative writing. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 32(4), 85–110. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2014.1857
Tutty, J. I., & Klein, J. D. (2008). Computer-mediated instruction: a comparison of online and face-to-face collaboration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 101-124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-008-9092-7
Veramuthu, P., & Shah, P. M. (2020). Effectiveness of collaborative writing among secondary school students in an ESL Creative Education classroom, 11(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2020.111004
Villarreal, I., & Gil-Sarratea, N. (2019). The effect of collaborative writing in an EFL secondary setting. Language Teaching Research, 24(6), 874-897. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819829017
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880607074599
Watson, S. B., & Marshall, J. E. (1995). Effects of cooperative incentives and heterogeneous arrangement on achievement and Interaction of cooperative learning groups in a college life science course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320308
Wigglesworth, G. & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445-466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104670
Willer, R. (2009). Groups reward individual sacrifice: The status solution to the collective action problem. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400102
Wu, M. Y. (2008). The impact of English proficiency on college learner- learners’ meaning negotiation in a Chinese EFL context. [MA dissertation, Lanzhou University].
Zabihi, R., & Rezazadeh, M. (2013). Creativity and narrative writing in L2 classrooms: Comparing individual and paired task performance. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 6(3), 29-46. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.481
Zamani, M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping of Iranian EFL learners in a writing context. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1149959, https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1149959