| Popis: |
This explanatory sequential mixed methods study compared the effects of three different approaches to writing (product, process, genre) in the quantitative phase. In the qualitative phase, it focused on the type and frequency of strategies employed by learners in each group by employing think-aloud protocols. Three intact groups (n1=25, n2=23, n3=24) who were selected based on convenience sampling took part in the study. The participants had taken an essay writing course in the fifth semester of their study in English Translation. First, the participants took a Nelson English language proficiency test and then sat for a writing pretest. Content Scoring Guide (Ashwell, 2000) was the rating scale for scoring the essays. The inter-rater reliability between the two raters (r=0.75) showed that they were consistent in their scoring. After verifying the homogeneity of the groups regarding language proficiency and writing ability, the researchers assigned them randomly to three types of writing instruction; namely product-based, process-based, and genre-based groups. The treatment took 12 sessions, and distinct techniques related to each writing approach were employed in the classes. After the treatment, the participants took a writing posttest. The two raters scored the essays (inter-rater reliability=0.79). The results of the one-way ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between the groups. Scheffe post hoc test showed that the genre-based group outperformed the other two groups. However, no significant differences were found between the product-based and process-based groups. In the second phase of the study, 12 participants (four individuals from each group) participated in the think-aloud sessions to clarify the type of strategy they used while writing. Mu’s (2005) taxonomy of ESL writing strategies was employed as the criterion for classifying the strategies. The study has implications for language teachers and educators who are seeking the best way to teach writing. Syllabus designers can also benefit from the findings when developing materials for writing classes. |
