دوفصلنامه خواندن، یادگیری مستمر و رفتار علمی

Academic Writing Performance and Writing Strategy Use

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه آموزشی زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان سنندج، ایران

2 گروه آموزشی علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان سنندج، ایران

چکیده

Background: Academic reading and writing proficiency especially in globally accepted languages such as English is a key contributor to university students’ success in any disciplinary area. .Reading and writing strategies play a vital role in the development of reading and writing skills. Despite the rapidly expanding body of research on various aspects of reading and writing, only a few studies have focused on documenting the association between language proficiency and writing or reading strategies.
Purpose: This article describes a study into university students’ use of writing strategies. The study examined the relationship between writing strategy use and writing proficiency, looking at how three proficiency groups differ in writing strategies.
Methods: In this cross-sectional survey study, 194 undergraduate students enrolled in an English writing course at a public university took a two-part writing test, followed by a 26-item writing strategy scale. The study employed quantitative data analyses. Descriptive statistics were used for describing the overall use of different writing strategies, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the differences in writing strategies among three different writing proficiency groups.  
Results: The students reported a relatively high degree of writing strategy use. The study found that meta-cognitive strategy was the most frequently used strategy. The results also revealed that high writing proficiency group reported a significantly higher level of writing strategy use than middle writing proficiency group who in turn reported a significantly higher usage of these strategies than low writing proficiency one.
Conclusions: Students with high writing proficiency had higher writing strategy use than those with low writing proficiency. However, further research is needed to confirm these conclusions.
Implication: The findings have some implications writing instruction. Teachers can help students to improve their writing by teaching appropriate and effective strategies.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Academic Writing Performance and Writing Strategy Use

نویسندگان [English]

  • Saeid Raoofi 1
  • Saifullah Rahmani 2
  • Massoud Binandeh 2

1 Department of English Language Teaching, Farhangian University, Sanandaj, Iran

2 Department of Educational Science, Farhangian University Sanandaj, Iran

چکیده [English]

Background: Academic reading and writing proficiency especially in globally accepted languages such as English is a key contributor to university students’ success in any disciplinary area. .Reading and writing strategies play a vital role in the development of reading and writing skills. Despite the rapidly expanding body of research on various aspects of reading and writing, only a few studies have focused on documenting the association between language proficiency and writing or reading strategies.
Purpose: This article describes a study into university students’ use of writing strategies. The study examined the relationship between writing strategy use and writing proficiency, looking at how three proficiency groups differ in writing strategies.
Methods: In this cross-sectional survey study, 194 undergraduate students enrolled in an English writing course at a public university took a two-part writing test, followed by a 26-item writing strategy scale. The study employed quantitative data analyses. Descriptive statistics were used for describing the overall use of different writing strategies, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the differences in writing strategies among three different writing proficiency groups.  
Results: The students reported a relatively high degree of writing strategy use. The study found that meta-cognitive strategy was the most frequently used strategy. The results also revealed that high writing proficiency group reported a significantly higher level of writing strategy use than middle writing proficiency group who in turn reported a significantly higher usage of these strategies than low writing proficiency one.
Conclusions: Students with high writing proficiency had higher writing strategy use than those with low writing proficiency. However, further research is needed to confirm these conclusions.
Implication: The findings have some implications writing instruction. Teachers can help students to improve their writing by teaching appropriate and effective strategies.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • second language writing
  • language learning strategies
  • English as a second language
  • language proficiency
  • undergraduate students
Bai, R., Hu, G., and Gu, P. Y. (2013). The Relationship Between Use of Writing Strategies and English Proficiency in Singapore Primary Schools. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 1-11.
 Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Bruen, J. (2001). Strategies for success: Profiling the effective learner of German. Foreign Language Annals, 34(3), 216-225.
Carrell, P. L., and Connor, U. (1991). Reading and writing descriptive and persuasive texts. Modern Language Journal, 75, 314–324.
Chamot, A., and El-Dinary, P. B. (1999). Children's learning strategies in language immersion classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 319-338.
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language.: New York, NY: Longman.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual Differences in second language acquisition: Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Esmaeili, H. (2002). Integrated reading and writing tasks and ESL students’ reading and writing performance in an English language test. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 599–622. doi:10.3138/cmlr.58.4.599
Ferris, D.R. and Hedgcock, J. S. (2005). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fitzgerald, J. and Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35I (1), 39-50.
Flower, L., and Hayes, J. R. (1994). A cognitive process theory of writing. In R. B.Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, and H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 928-950). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Green, J. M., and Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL quarterly, 29(2), 261-297.
He, T-h. (2005). Effects of mastery and performance goals on the composition strategy use of adult EFL writers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 61(3), 407-431.
Hedgcock, J., and Atkinson, D. (1993). Differing reading and writing relationships in L1 and L2 literacy development. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 329–333. doi:10.2307/3587155
Janopoulos, M. (1986). The relationship of pleasure reading and second language writing proficiency. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 763–768. doi:10.2307/3586526
Komarraju, M., and Nadler, D. (2013). Self-efficacy and academic achievement: Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter? Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 67-72.
Lai, Y. C. (2009). Language learning strategy use and English proficiency of university freshmen in Taiwan. TESOL quarterly, 43(2), 255-280.
Liu, H.-J. (2008). A Study Of The Interrelationship Between Listening Strategy Use, Listening Proficiency Levels, And Learning Style. Annual Review of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, 5, 84-104.
Liyanage, I., and Bartlett, B. (2013). Personality types and languages learning strategies: Chameleons changing colours. System, 41(3), 598-608.
McGee, L. M., and Richgel, D. J. (1990). Learning from text using reading and writing. In T. Shanahan (Ed.), Reading and writing together: New perspectives for the Classroom (pp. 145-168). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
O'malley, J. M., and Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. : Newbury House, Harper and Row, New York.
PARIS, S. G., WASIK, B. A., and TURNER, J. C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P.Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, (Vol. 2, pp. 609-640).
Peacock, M., and Ho, B. (2003). Student language learning strategies across eight disciplines. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 179-200.
Petrić, B., and Czárl, B. (2003). Validating a writing strategy questionnaire. System, 31(2), 187-215.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., García, T., and McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and psychological measurement, 53(3), 801-813.
Pressley, M. (1991). Can learning disabled children become good information processors? How can we find out? In L. F. Feagans, E. J. Short, and L. J. Meltzer (Eds.), Subtypes of learning disabilities: Theoretical perspectives and research (pp. 137-161). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 229-258.
Raoofi, S., Chan, S. H., Mukundan, J., and Rashid, S. M. (2014). A qualitative study into L2 writing strategies of university students. English Language Teaching, 7(11), 39.
Raoofi, S., Binandeh, M., and Rahmani, S. (2017). An Investigation into Writing Strategies and Writing Proficiency of University Students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(1), 191-198.
Salahshour, F., Sharifi, M., and Salahshour, N. (2013). The relationship between language learning strategy use, language proficiency level and learner gender. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 634-643.
Sasaki, M. (2000). Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 259-291.
Sasaki, M. (2002). Building an empirically-based model of EFL learners’ writing processes S. Ransdell and M.-L. Barbier (Eds.),New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 49-80): Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic.
Shanahan, T. (1990). Reading and writing together: What does it really mean? Reading and writing together: New perspectives for the classroom (pp. 1-18). Norwood,
MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Shanahan, T. (2006). Relations among oral language, reading, and writing development. In C. A. Macarthur, S. Graham, and J. Fitzgerald, (Eds.) Handbook of Writing Research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Slotte, C., and Lanka, K. (1999). Review of process effects of spontaneous note-taking on text comprehension. Contemporary Educational Pscyhology, 24, 1-20.
Smith, F. (1994). Understanding Reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
TOMPKINS, G. E. (1997). Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
TIERNEY, R. J., and PEARSON, P. D. (1983).Toward a composing model of reading. Language Arts, 60, 568-580.
Tierney R.J., and Shanahan, T. (1991). In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research, Volume II. (pp. 246- 279). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.
Wenden, A., and Rubin, J. (1987). Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall International.
Wharton, G. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in Singapore. Language Learning, 50(2), 203-243.
Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 16(2), 195-209.
دوفصلنامه خواندن، یادگیری مستمر و رفتار علمی
دوره 1، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 2
اسفند 1396
صفحه 100-108