UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
Abstract : |
The objective of this study is to determine whether the process approach or the product/ traditional approach is better in teaching first-year undergraduates to write academic texts. Fifty-one students of the University of Selangor had participated in the study. They were divided into Group A and Group B. A pre-test was given prior to the treatment and a post-test after it. For seven weeks, the participants in Group A were taught to write academic texts using the product approach while those in Group B were taught to write academic texts using the process approach. The data collected from the tests was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 19.0. The data from the post-test was also triangulated with the data from the participants’ composing behaviors and the data from the participants’ folders. The results indicate that both the groups A and B show improvements in content, organization, vocabulary, language use, mechanics and overall results. However, the participants of group B show better improvement than those of Group A in terms of content, organization, mechanics and overall results. This shows that the process approach had not only significantly increased students’ level of proficiency in writing in general but also improved their ability to write academic text because it closely resembles the natural writing process. In conclusion, these findings imply that teachers of academic writing need to address procedural know-how explicitly and disclose what goes on in the process of writing academic texts to learners to help them write well. |
References |
1.Applebee, A. N. (1986). Problems in process approaches: Toward a reconceptualization of process instruction. In A. R. Petrosky & D. Bartholomae (Eds.). The teaching of writing (95 – 113). Chicago, IIl: National Society for the Study of Education. 2. Al Husseini, S. S. (2014). Academic writing skills demonstrated in university students’ final year project reports, and implications on the teaching of English for Academic Purposes, in the Arab world. European Scientific Journal, 1, 378 - 386. 3. Antoniou, M. & Moriarty, J. (2008). What can academic writers learn from creative writers? Developing guidance and support for lecturers in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(2), 157-167. 4. Ariza Martinez, A. V. (2005). The process-writing approach: An alternative to guide the students’ composition. PROFILE, 6, 37 – 46. 5. Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153 -160. 6. Baroudy, I. (2008). The implementation of process writing: Writing –teacher roles. Iranian Journal of Language Studies, 2(1), 1- 18. 7. Barnett, M. A. (1992). Writing as a process. The French review, 63(1), 31 – 44. 8. Baxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (1998). Writing on academic careers. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 281 -295. 9. Bayat, N. (2014). The effects of the process writing approach on writing success and anxiety. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(3), 1133 – 1141. 10. Bergman, C. A. & Senn, J. A. (1986). Heath grammar and composition (4th Course). Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath & Company. 11. Britton, J. L., Burgess, T., Martin, N., McLeod, A., & Rosen, H. (1975). The development of writing abilities. London: MacMillan Education. 12. Cameron, J., Nairn, K., & Higging, J. (2009). Demystifying academic writing: Reflections on emotions, know-how and academic identity. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33 (2), 269 – 284. 13. Chitravelu, N., Sithamparam, S., & Teh, S.C. (2005). ELT methodology, principles and practice (2nd ed.). Shah Alam: Oxford Fajar. 14. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, Vol 112(1), 155-159. 15. Cresswell, J.W. (2012). Educational research - Planning and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson. 16. De Lyser, D. (2003). Teaching graduate students to write: A seminar for thesis and dissertation writers. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 27(2), 169 -181. 17. Durst, R.K. (2006). Writing at the postsecondary level. In P. Smagorinsky (ed.), Research on Composition: Multiple Perspectives on Two Decades of Change (78 - 107). New York: Teachers College Press. 18. Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. 19. Flower, L. and Hayes, J. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 38(4), 365-87. 20. Flowerdew, L. (2005). Integrating traditional and critical approaches to syllabus design: The what, the how and the why? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(2), 135 -147. 21. Fowler, H. R. (1986). The little brown handbook (3rd ed.). Boston-Toronto: Little Brown Company. 22. Friedlander, A. (1990). Composing in English: Effects of a first language on writing in English as a second language. In B. Kroll (Ed.) Second language writing: Research insight for classroom. 109 – 125, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 23. Hanjani, M. A., & Li, L. (2014). EFL learners’ written reflections on their experience of attending process genrebased, student-centred essay writing course. The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 149 -166. 24. Harowitz, D. (1986). What professors actually require: academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 445 – 462. 25. Holmes, N. (2004). The use of a process-oriented approach to facilitate the planning and production stages of writing for adult students of English as a foreign or second language. Retrieved from http://www.developingteachers.com/articles/tchtraining/processw2_nicola.htm 26. Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. In C. N. Candlin & D. R. Hall (Eds.) Applied linguistics in action series. Essex: Pearson Education. 27. Hughey, J. B., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F. & Jacobs, H. L. (1983). Teaching ESL composition: Principles and techniques. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. 28. Johns, A. M. (2006). Text, role, and context: Developing academic literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 29. Keen, J. (2010). Strategic revisions in the writing of year 7 students in the UK. The Curriculum Journal, 21(3), 255 – 280. 30. Leki, I. & Carson, J. (1994). Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81 – 101. 31. Liuoliene, A. & Metiuniene, R. (2009). Students' learning through reflective journaling. Sankalka 17, 32 - 37. 32. Madigan, R., Linton, P., & Johnson, S. (1996). The paradox of writing apprehension. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.). The science of writing, theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (295 -307, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 33. Mangelsdorf, K., & Schlumberger, A. (1992). ESL student response stances in a peer-review task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), 235 -254. 34. Mather, N., & Jaffe, L. (2002). Woodcock-Johnson III = Reposts, recommendations, and strategies. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 35. McCrimmon, J. (1980). Writing with a purpose (7th edit). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. 36. McCuen, J. R. & Wrinkler, A. C. (1995). From idea to essay - A rhetoric, reader and handbook. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 37. Nicholls, G. (2001). Professional development in higher education. London: Kogan Page. 38. O’Malley, J. M. & Pierce, L. V. (1996). Authentic assessment for English Language learners. Practical approaches for teachers. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing. 39. Onozawa, C. (2010). A study of the process writing approach: A suggestion for an eclectic writing approach. Proceedings of Kyoai Gakuen College, Japan, 10, 158-162. 40. Perl, S. (1980). Understanding composing. College Composition and Communication, 31(4), 363-369. 41. Raimes, A. (1983). Anguish as a second language? Remedies for composition teachers. In A. Freedman, (ed.), Learning to Write: First Language/Second Language (pp. 258-272), London: Longman. 42. Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 229 -258. 43. Reid, J. (1991). The radical outliner and the radical brainstormer: A perspective on composing processes. TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 529 -534. 44. Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 407 - 430. 45. Richard, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 46. Santangelo, T., Harris, K.K. & Graham, S. (2007). Self-regulated strategy development: A validated model to support students who struggle with writing. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 5(1), 1– 20. 47. Shannon, C. & Weaver, W. (1963). Mathematical theory of communication. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. 48. Shih, M. (1986). Content-based approaches to teaching academic writing. TESOL Quaterly, 20(4), 617 – 648. 49. Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues, and directions. In Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 11-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 50. Spack, R. (1988). Initiating ESL students into the academic discourse community: How far should we go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29 – 51. 51. Spencer, E. (1983). Writing matters across the curriculum. Edinburgh: Scottish Council for Research in Education: SCRE Publication. 52. Susser, B. (1994). Process approaches in ESL/EFL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(1), 31- 47. 53. Watson, D. (2010). Teaching teachers to think: Reflective journaling as a strategy to enhance students’ understanding and practice of academic writings. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(12), 11 – 18. 54. White, R. & Arndt, V. (1991). Process writing. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman. 55. Weisendanger, K. D., Perry, J.R., & Braun, G. (2011). Suggest-choose-plan-compose. A strategy to help students learn to write. The Reading Teacher, 64(6), 451 – 455. 56. Zamel, V. (1976). Teaching composition in the ESL classroom: What we can learn from research in the teaching of English. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 67 -76. 57. Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 16(2), 195 – 209. 58. Zamel, V. (1983). The composing process of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 165- 187. 59. Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(1), 79-101. |
This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |