Impact of Process and Genre-Based Approaches to Writing on Iranian EFL Learners' Writing Performance across Creativity Levels
محورهای موضوعی : language teachingسولماز ایران نژاد 1 , ناصر غفوری 2 , اصغر محمودی 3
1 - گروه زبان انگلیسی ، واحد سراب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی ، سراب ، ایران
2 - گروه زبان انگلیسی، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران
3 - گروه زبان انگلیسی، واحد سراب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی ، سراب ، ایران
کلید واژه: EFL learners, writing performance, creativity level, genre-based, process-based, writing approach,
چکیده مقاله :
This study aimed at investigating the effect of process-based and genre- based approaches to writing instruction on Iranian EFL learners’ writing performance across high and low creativity levels. The study followed a quasi-experimental design and it was conducted with a homogenous sample of 72 learners who were selected from an initial group of 90 participants from a private language institute in Urmia, Iran. Based on the results of an English proficiency test known as Oxford Placement Test and a test of creativity known as Abedi-Schumacher Creativity Test, the participants were assigned into four groups of 18. The treatment period lasted for 10 sessions including pretest and posttest sessions. The results of ANCOVA statistics showed that the type of instruction had statistically significant effect on the learners’ writing performance, with the higher performance of genre-based over the process-based writing instruction, while the level of creativity had no significant effect on the participants’ writing scores. Furthermore, a significant interaction was observed between instruction type and the learners’ creativity level. The findings of this study have pedagogical implications for teachers, syllabus designers, and practitioners to use appropriate instructional methods in ELT with special attention on learners’ creativity levels.
هدف تحقیق حاضر بررسی تاثیر دو نوع آموزش با نامهای فرایند محور و ژانر محور بر روی مهارت نوشتاری زبان آموزان ایرانی در دو سطح خلاقیت کم و زیاد میباشد. این تحقیق با تعداد 72 زبان آموز همگون شده از تعداد 90 زبان آموز مشغول به تحصیل در یکی از آموزشگاه های خصوصی زبان انگلیسی در شهر ارومیه انجام شد. زبان آموزان بر اساس نتایج یک آزمون بسندگی زبان بنام آزمون تعیین سطح آکسفورد و یک آزمون تعیین خلاقیت بنان آزمون عبادی و شوماکر به چهار گروه 18 نفره تقسیم شدند. دوره آموزش با احتساب جلسات پیش و پس آزمون ده جلسه به طول انجامید. نتایج تحلیل آماری آنالیز کوواریانس نشان داد که نوع آموزش ژانر محور بطور معنی داری بیشتر از آموزش فرایند محور باعث پیشرفت توانایی نوشتاری زبان آموزان گردید ولی میزان خلاقیت زبان آموزان تاثیر چندانی در نوشتار آنان نداشت. همچنین مشخص شد که بین نوع آموزش و میزان خلاقیت زبان آموزان رابطه تعامل معنی داری وجود دارد. نتایج دارای پیامهای آموزشی مهم برای مدرسان زبان ، مولفان کتب درسی ، و کلیه افراد مربوط به آموزش زبان انگلیسی در توجه آنها بر سطح خلاقیت زبان آموزان می باشد
Arslan, R. Ş., & Şahin-Kızıl, A. (2010). How can the use of blog software facilitate the writing process of English language learners? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(3), 183–197.
Berger, C. (2001). Wireless: Changing teaching and learning 'everywhere, everytime'. Educause Review, 36(1), 58-59.
Brown, H. D. (2006). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. New York: Longman.
Cahyono, B.Y. (Ed). (2009). Techniques in teaching EFL writing. Malang: State University of Malang Press.
Cahyono, B. Y., & Mutiaraningrum, I. (2015). Indonesian EFL teachers’ familiarity with and opinion on the internet-based teaching of writing. English Language Teaching, 9(1), 199. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n1p199
Cahyono, B. Y., & Rahayu, T. (2015). Using video-based tasks for teaching writing process analysis essay. In B. Y. Cahyono (Ed.), Inspirations and innovations for English classroom (pp. 345-362). Malang: State University of Malang.
Cahyono, B. Y., & Widiati, U. (2006). The teaching of EFL writing in Indonesian context: the state of art. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 13(3), 139–150.
Che Mat, A., Awang, A., Nokman, A. Z., Musilehat, N., & Bakar, A. F. A. (2017). An authentic learning environment based on video project among Arabic learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 6(4), 143-148.
Clarke, I., & Flaherty, T. B. (2002). mLearning: Using wireless technology to enhance marketing education. Marketing Education Review, 12(3), 67-78.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, N.J: L. Erlbaum.
Dulay, H. C., Burt, M. K., & Krashen, S. D. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.
Faraj, A. K. A. (2015). Scaffolding EFL students’ writing through the writing process approach. Journal of Education and Practice, 6, 131–141.
Fareed, M., Ashraf, A., & Bilal, M. (2016). ESL Learners’ Writing Skills: Problems, Factors and Suggestions. Journal of Education & Social Sciences, 4(2), 83–94.
Fattah, S. F. E. S. A. (2015). The effectiveness of using WhatsApp messenger as one of mobile learning techniques to develop students' writing skills. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(32), 115-127.
Gao, J., (2007). Teaching Writing in Chinese Universities: Finding an Eclectic Approach. Asian EFL Journal, 20(2), 285-297.
Ghonsooly, B., & Showqi, S. (2012). The Effects of foreign language learning on creativity. English Language Teaching, 5(4), 161-167.
Grainger, T. (2005). Teachers as writers: learning together. English in Education, 39(1), 75–87. Greenstein, L. (2012). Assessing 21st century skills: A guide to evaluating mastery and authentic learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Grenville, K. (2001). Writing from start to finish: A six-step guide. Crows Nest, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.
Halliday, T. C. (1985). Knowledge mandates: collective influence by scientific, normative and syncretic professions. British Journal of Sociology, 36, 421-447.
Harmer, J. (2005). The practice of English language teaching (3. ed.). Harlow: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2011). How to teach writing. Harlow: Longman, Pearson Education.
Hidayati, R. P. P., & Nurjanah, S. (2017). Implementation of project-based learning model with windows movie maker media in improvement of short story writing. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning 2(1), 164-167.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaufman, J. C., Plucker, J. A., & Baer, J. (2008). Essentials of creativity assessment. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.
Keegan, D. (2005). The incorporation of mobile learning into mainstream education and training, World Conference on Mobile Learning, Cape Town. Retrieved September 27, 2017, from http://www.mlearn.org.za/CD/papers/keegan1.pdf
Kieran, D., & Xerri, D. (Ed.). (2017). The image in English language teaching. Malta: ELT Council.
Klimova, B. F. (2012). The importance of writing. Paripex - Indian Journal of Research, 2(1), 9–11. McGovern, J. (1983). Video applications in English language teaching (1st ed). New York: Pergamon Press in association with the British Council.
Miangah, T. M. (2012). Mobile-assisted language learning. International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems, 3(1), 309-319.
Miller, D.C., & Salkind, N.J. (2002). Handbook of research design and social measurement (6th ed.). California: Sage Publications.
Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (2nd ed). Boston: Thomson/Heinle.
Nalliveettil, G. M., & Alenazi, T. H. K. (2016). The impact of mobile phones on English language learning: Perceptions of EFL undergraduates. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(2), 264-272.
O’Malley, C., Vavoula, G., Glew, J., Taylor, J., Sharlpes, M., Lefrere, P., Lonsdale, P. Naismith, & Waycott, J. (2005). Guidelines for learning/teaching/tutoring in a mobile environment, (Online), Retrieved October 4, 2017, from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00696244/document
Papilaya, R. (2018). Effect of process approach combined with internet resources through mobile phone on EFL students’ ability in writing. (Unpublished master's thesis). Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang.
Petersen, S. A., Procter-Legg, E., & Cacchione, A. (2013). Creativity and mobile language learning using LingoBee: International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 5(3), 34–51.
Pishghadam, R., Khodaday, E., & Zabihi, R. (2011). Learner creativity on foreign language achievement. European Journal of Educational Study, (3)3, 465-472.
Quinn, C. (2000). mLearning: Mobile, wireless, in-your-pocket learning, Linezine. Fall 2000. Retrieved October 4, 2017, from http://www.linezine.com/2.1/features/cqmmwiyp.htm
Reid, J. M. (1993). Teaching ESL writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Regents/Prentice Hall.
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2013). Methodology in language teaching: an anthology of current practice (1st publ., 17. print). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Soraya, K. (2016). The effectiveness of collaborative writing strategy (CWS) in writing lesson regarded to the students’ creativity. Lingua Cultura, 10(2), 63-67.
Thieman, G. Y. (2008). Using technology as a tool for learning and developing 21st century citizenship skills: An examination of the NETS and technology use by preservice teachers with their K-12 students. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 342-366.
Timothy Kolade, A. (2012). The influence of process approach on English as second language students’ performances in essay writing. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 16-29.
Ting, N. C. (2013). Classroom video project: An investigation on students’ perception. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 441-448.
Traxler, J. (2009). Learning in a mobile age: International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 1(1), 1-12.
Wang, Z. (2014). An analysis on the use of video materials in college English teaching in China. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 2(1), 23-28.
Wati, N. S., Nurkamto, J., & Rochsantiningsih, D. (2012). The effectiveness of collaborative writing method to teach writing skill viewed from student creativity. Journal of English Teaching 1(1), 37-53.
Whalley, J., Welch, T., & Williamson, L. (2006). e-Learning in FE. Gosport: Continuum International Publishing Group.
