This study sought to explore the teaching strategies to improve writing skills as an essential requirement for effective learning in schools for grade 8 and 9 learners in English first an additional language.
1. TEACHING STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE THE WRITING SKILLS FOR GRADE 8 AND 9 LEARNERS IN ENGLISH FIRST ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE: A CASE STUDY OF FOUR HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE CRADOCK EDUCATION DISTRICT. BY ZIMKHITHA KALIPA Submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FORT HARE SUPERVISOR: DR N. PYLMAN January 2014
2. DECLARATION Student number: 201013162 I declare that: TEACHING STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE THE WRITING SKILLS FOR GRADE 8 AND 9 LEARNERS IN ENGLISH FIRST ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE: A CASE STUDY OF FOUR HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE CRADOCK EDUCATION DISTRICT. Is my own work and that all the sources that I have used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references. Z.KALIPA DATE ________________ ________________ (i)
3. DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my family especially my loving mother Linda, my sister Apelele, my son Hlumisa, siblings, friends and my colleagues for their unwavering support and encouragement. (ii)
4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am thankful to God for giving me tremendous strength to carry out this study. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr. N. Pylman, for providing me with the assistance and guidance in this study. Thank you for your kindness, your patience and for being there every step of the way. Without your encouragement and constant assistance, this dissertation would not have been I owe my deepest gratitude and love to my mom for her belief in me, caring for my son during this period and for her support in this study. Thank you for your love and support. I acknowledge with thanks the assistance of the following people: The Principals and the teachers involved in this study for their cooperation. My friends for their support, Sibongiseni Dwenga and Isabella Mafuna. My colleague, Fiola Mnqathu for her words of encouragement and inspiration. My sister, Apelele Kalipa for her support. My aunt, Evelyn Tobbie Kalipa for being there for me throughout this journey. Mpumelelo Speelman for his motivation and support. (iii)
5. ABSTRACT Writing skills is are an essential requirement to lifelong learner success yet the way teachers teach and provide feedback to their learners on writing is quite challenging. This study sought to explore the teaching strategies to improve writing skills as an essential requirement for effective learning in schools for grade 8 and 9 learners in English First Additional Language. For people living in the townships and rural areas in South Africa, exposure to English is limited, because the majority of people communicate with each other in local languages. With teachers and learners residing in the townships where communication occurs mostly in isiXhosa, problems in language proficiency, in particular writing in English First Additional Language, are often encountered not only by the learners, but by educators as well. This was a case study of four high schools in the Cradock Education District. In-depth interviews were conducted with eight participants in the four schools. There were eight main findings, which are as follows: Lack of support for teachers, lack of a culture of learning amongst learners, and lack of competence in English for both learners and parents, which need to be addressed; and strategies proposed to improve writing skills are: the importance of creative writing; regular feedback and the importance of drafts. (iv)
6. KEYWORDS: Teaching strategies, writing skills, English First Additional Language, process approach model, product approach model and genre approach model. (v)
7. ACRONYMS CAPS Curriculum and assessment Policy Statement EFL English First Language FAL First Additional Language FL Foreign Language GET General Education and Training HoD Head of Department LOLT Language of learning and teaching L1 First Language L2 Second Language SL Second Language T1 Teacher One T2 Teacher Two T3 Teacher Three T4 Teacher Four T5 Teacher Five T6 Teacher Six T7 Teacher Seven T8 Teacher Eight (vi)
8. LIST OF TABLES PAGES Table 4.1 Respondents in relation to gender 81 Table 4.2 Presentation in relation to teaching experience 82 Table 4.3 Respondents in relation to qualifications 83 Table 4.4 Profile of respondents in relation to age 84 (vii)
9. FIGURES PAGES Figure 2.1 A model of writing (diagram of process writing) 18 Figure 2.2 Wheel model of genre literacy 22 (Viii)
10. APPENDICES A. Letter from the Department of Education granting permission to carry out the research in the sampled schools B. Interview schedule C. Informed consent for the participants D. Transcribed interviews of the participants (ix)
11. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES DECLARATION (i) DEDICATION (ii) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (iii) ABSTRACT (iv) ACRONYMS (vi) LIST OF TABLES (vii) LIST OF FIGURES (viii) APPENDICES (ix) CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND ORIENTATION OF THE STUDY 1.1 BACKGROUND 1 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 4 1.3.1 Research question 5 1.3.2 Sub-questions 5 1.4 Objectives of the study 5 1.5 Purpose of the study 6 1.6 Rationale of the study 6 1.7 Significance of the study 7 1.8 Delimitation of the study 7 1.9 Definition of terms 7 1.10 Literature review 8 1.10.1 Process approach 8 1.10.2 Product approach 9 1.10.3 Genre approach 9 1.11 RESEARCH PARADIGM, DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
12. RESEARCH 10 1.11.1 Research paradigm 10 1.11.2 Design 10 1.11.3 Methodology 11 1.11.3.1 Sample selection 11 1.11.3.2 Data collection instruments 12 1.12 Reliability 12 1.13 Validity 12 1.14 Data analysis 13 1.15 Ethical consideration 13 1.16 Summary 14 1.17 Chapter outline 15 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.0 INTRODUCTION 16 2.1 Theoretical framework 16 2.1.1 Process approach 16 2.1.2 Product approach 20 2.1.3 Genre approach 21 2.2 Problems encountered by teachers when teaching writing skills in English First Additional Language. 23 2.3 Factors impacting writing skills of English First Additional Language students. 29 2.3.1 Student under-preparedness 29 2.3.2 Student writing at school level 31 2.3.3 Writing as a product of reading 32
13. 2.4 Strategies currently used by teachers when teaching writing skills in English First Additional Language. 33 2.5 Guidelines for improvement in teaching writing skills. 39 2.6 Summary 54 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3.0 INTRODUCTION 55 3.1 RESEARCH ORIENTATION 55 3.1.1 Research paradigm 57 3.1.2 Case study 59 3.2 Re-statement of research purpose 61 3.3 Re-statement of research questions 61 3.4 Methodology 62 3.4.1 Approval process 63 3.4.2 Research population and sample 63 3.4.3 Selection of respondents 65 3.4.4 Data collection techniques 65 3.4.4.1 Interviews 66 3.4.4.2 Interview setting 68 3.4.4.3 Discussion of interview schedule 69 3.4.4.4 Transcribing the interviews 69 3.5 Data analysis 70 3.5.1 Qualitative data analysis 71 3.5.1.1 Structural coding 72 3.6 Reliability and Validity 73 3.7 Ethical considerations 75
14. 3.7.1 Autonomy and respect for the dignity for persons 75 3.7.2 Non-maleficence 75 3.7.3 Beneficence 76 3.7.4 Justice 77 3.8 Summary 77 CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF DATA 4.0 INTRODUCTION 78 4.1 DATA ANALYSIS 78 4.1.1 Data reduction 78 4.1.2 Data display 79 4.1.2.1 Context of the schools 79 4.1.2.2 Tables 81 4.1 Respondents in relation to gender 81 4.2 Presentation in relation to teaching of English First additional Language 82 4.3 Respondents in relation to qualifications 83 4.4 Profile of respondents in relation to age 84 4.1.3 Thematic analysis 84 4.1.4 Discussion of findings 110 4.2 Summary 122 CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.0 INTRODUCTION 123 5.1 Synopsis of chapters 123 5.2 Summary of main findings 124 5.3 Conclusion 125 5.4 Recommendations 125
15. .5 Reference list 127
16. CHAPTER .1 BACKGROUND AND ORIENTATION OF THE STUDY 1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY This study sought to explore teaching strategies to improve the writing skills for Grade 8 and 9 learners in English First Additional Language: A case study of four High Schools in the Cradock District. Writing skills is an essential necessity to lifelong learner success, yet the way teachers teach and provide feedback to their learners on writing is somewhat challenging. In the South African context, English is mostly used in urban areas, especially in the city, for economic purposes (Nomlolo: 2007). For people living in the townships and rural areas, exposure to English is limited, because the majority of people communicate with each other in local languages. While many schools located in isiXhosa-speaking communities, where teachers and learners are only exposed to English in the classroom environment (Nomlolo: 2007). However, English which is First Additional Language (FAL) to both teachers and learners is also the language of learning and teaching (LOLT) in many schools. According to Al.gomoul (2011) writing is one of the four main language skills that teachers often neglect. Meanwhile, almost all English language teachers in the study by Al.gomoul (2011) expressed their concern with the low level of achievement in writing skills of their students. They confirmed that only 5% - 10% of learners can write legibly. With regard to the instructional aspects of foreign language/second language (FL/SL) writing, the early 1960s was marked by the prevalence of a product approach. Kroll (1998) in a review of literature about that period argued that the model for teaching writing was composed of four steps. First, rules of writing were presented to students. The students were next provided with a text for classroom discussion and analysis. Third, having supplied the students with an outline based upon the text, the teacher required a writing assignment. Finally, students received comments as to the quality of their completed writing product. This completed product, however produced, i.e., 1
17. irrespective of the strategies and processes the students used, was considered the principal criterion for assigning scores. Likewise, EFL instruction in the 1970s was marked by the predominance of a controlled composition model. According to Hyland (2002), “learning to write in a second language was mainly seen to involve developing linguistic and lexical knowledge as well as familiarity with the syntactic patterns and cohesive devices that form building blocks of texts” (p. 13). In other words, learning to write involved imitation and manipulation of models supplied by the teacher (Mirzaii, 2012). Richards (2002) enumerates the activities in this approach as including familiarization, controlled writing, guided writing, and free writing. Richards also points out that “activities based on controlled composition predominated during the period that sought to prevent errors and develop correct writing habits” (p. 21). Subsequently, according to Richards (2002), the focus in teaching writing shifted to a paragraph-pattern approach with an emphasis on the use of topic sentences, supporting sentences, and transitions. In other words, there was a shift in focus from mere attention to the structural aspects of writing―grammar rules and vocabulary items―mainly addressing intra-sentential relationships, to one attending to both structure and content, addressing inter-sentential as well as intra-sentential, relationships (Mirzaii, 2012). The consequence of this shift, according to Mirzaii, was “an emerging attention, requiring sentences to be cohesive, and the whole text coherent” (p. 32). In the 1990s, the process approach to writing appeared in the context of writing pedagogy, contrasting a newly emerged classroom ideology with that previously espoused by the product approach. Silva and Matsuda (2002, cited in Richards, 2002) depict the process approach as “a complex, recursive and creative process that is very 2
18. similar in its general outlines for first and second language writers: learning to write requires the development of an efficient and effective composing process” (p. 261). This composing process would require learners to engage in the operations of rehearsing (also known as prewriting), writing (also referred to as drafting or composing), and revising (also labeled editing) (Richards and Schmidt, 2010). More recently, foreign language/second language (FL/SL) writing pedagogy has witnessed the emergence of a genre approach to writing instruction. This approach, as depicted by Mirzaii (2012), “looks at the ways in which language is used for particular purposes in particular contexts, i.e., the use of different genres of writing” (p. 34). Bhatia (1993) defines genre as “a recognizable communicative event characterized by a set of communicative purpose(s) identified and mutually understood by the members of the professional or academic community in which it regularly occurs” (p. 43). Similarly, Hyland (2002) points out that “contemporary views of L2 writing see writing as involving composing skills and strategies for drafting and revising but also a clear understanding of genre to be able to structure their writing experience according to the demands of particular contexts” (p. 15). Furthermore, Al.gomoul (2011) believes that writing is an essential skill in foreign language learning in order to give the learners the opportunity to develop the proficiency they need to write personal letters, essays, research papers and journals. Referring to my own experience as a language teacher 15 years ago, I have noticed that English First Additional Language learners display a distinct difference in their ability to speak English (which they do well) and write in English (which they do poorly). In exploring this issue, the statement of the problem will now be offered. 3
19. 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM According to the Department of Education (2002) learning outcome 4 requires the learner to write different kinds of factual and imaginative texts for a wide range of purposes. However, Kannan (2009:2) in his statement argues that “even though students are studying English, they are not able to produce even a single sentence without any grammatical error in English”. With teachers and learners residing in the townships where communication occurs mostly in isiXhosa, problems in language proficiency, in particular writing in English First Additional Language, are often encountered. The schools are also located in isiXhosa-speaking communities, and teachers and learners are only exposed to English in the classroom environment. Meanwhile, according to the Department of Education (2002), learners are required to use first additional language effectively and with confidence for a variety of purposes including learning. According to Badger and White (2000) the only reason to practice writing to many students is to pass tests or examinations. They further explained that this focus on writing to pass examinations reduces writing to produce product and receiving a grade from the teacher and this is not likely to make students interested in writing. Besides, Ruiz-Funes (1999) postulates that students lack the necessary tools to approach writing in an argumentative essay and engage in a complex process that includes exploration of a problem, evaluation of facts and evidences. He therefore, suggested that students need to be aware that good writing is not just grammatically accurate and that other factors such as organization, coherence and the use of cohesive devices are essential elements of good writing. In addition, teachers need to address the question of why English First Additional Language is being taught and learned, take the students where they are in their writing 4
20. expertise and move them forward and help them to create texts that match their expanding intellectual abilities (Leki :2001). From these problems it is evident that there is a need for educators to improve their strategies, attitudes and try out new strategies. 1.3.1 Research questions IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE PROBLEM STATEMENT, THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS FOR THIS STUDY ARE FORMULATED AS FOLLOWS: What strategies are appropriate for the improvement of Grade 8 and 9 learners writing skills in English First Additional Language? 1.3.2 Sub-questions What problems do teachers experience when teaching writing skills in English First Additional Language? What teaching strategies do teachers currently use in teaching writing skills in English First Additional Language? In order to address the above research questions the aim of this research need to be 1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY a) To identify appropriate strategies that teachers could use to improve writing skills in English First Additional Language. b) To identify the problems experienced by teachers when teaching writing skills in English First Additional Language. 5
21. c) To examine the strategies currently used by teachers for the teaching of writing skills to English first additional language speakers. 1.5 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY This study aims to examine the strategies suitable for the improvement of Grade 8 and 9 learners writing skills in English First Additional Language. At the same time, it also aims at identifying the challenges that teachers encounter when dealing with writing skills and examining the strategies currently used by teachers for the teaching of writing skills to English First Additional Language speakers. Increasing our understanding of the writing process of English First Additional Language is through the technique of 1.6 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY From my own observation as a teacher of English language, I have noticed that Grade 8 and 9 learners in particular find it difficult to write in English. They say they do not find reasonable ideas in English, and even if they find ideas they fail to elaborate them into correct English. So the impact is that they hate to write in English, they start to form a negative attitude towards writing in English. This has been proved by Al-Mashour (2003) in his statement that foreign language learners find writing a difficult and exhausting process. He further explained that such learners may have a limited scope of vocabulary, may suffer from the inability to write coherent and cohesive texts, and may be unable to spell words and use grammatical structure correctly. In view of the above problem this study will be conducted. 6
22. 1.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY This study attempts to shed light on the teaching strategies that English First Additional Language teachers utilize when producing an extended piece of writing. Its implications may help teachers and their students benefit from the findings of the study. It could also lead to a better understanding of the challenges that English First Additional Language teachers are faced with when teaching writing skills. By knowing and understanding these challenges, English First Additional Language teachers will be better equipped to deal with them and more importantly, be significant contributors to transforming learners in becoming better writers. The researcher also hopes to open an avenue in this research area due to its importance to Curriculum Specialists in the Cradock District. 1.8 DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY A case study will be conducted at four purposively selected High Schools in the Cradock District. This research study will be limited to Grade 8 and 9 English First Additional Language teachers in the four High Schools in the Cradock Education District. Two schools are located within the town of Cradock, while the other two schools are in the town of Tarkastad. Thus, interviews conducted in this study will be directed to English First Additional Language teachers. 1.9 DEFINITION OF TERMS In answering the research questions of the study, it is firstly necessary to explain the meanings of the terms: Additional language, strategies, writing and language of learning and teaching (LOLT). 7
23. 1.9.1 Additional Language – According to the Department of Education (2002) additional language is a language learned in addition to one‟s home language. In this study English is used by isiXhosa speaking community as first additional language and language of learning and teaching. 1.9.2 Strategy- Pietersen (2010) defines a strategy as the sum of an organization‟s choices about where it will compete, how it will create superior value for its customers, and how it will generate superior returns to its investors. In this study the strategies are the methods used by teachers to teach writing skills. 1.9.3 Writing- Writing is defined as the creation of original text using the individuals‟ intellectual and linguistic resources (Hudelson: 1988). Writing in this study refers to the way the learners communicate their ideas. 1.9.4 Language of Learning and Teaching (LOLT)- According to the Department of Education (2002) this is referred to as the language that is mostly used in a particular learning and teaching environment. In this case English is used as a language of learning and teaching. 1.10 LITERATURE REVIEW The theoretical framework of this study will be located within the Process approach model by Kroll (2001), Steele (2004), White and Arndt‟s (1991) and Trupe (2001), Product approach model by Gabrielatos (2002) and (Steele: 2004), and Genre approach model by Badger and White (2000) and Cope and Kalantzis (1993). As part of my literature I will discuss the following three models: 1.10.1 Writing process approach model Kroll (2001) defines process approach as an umbrella term for many types of writing courses. What this term captures is the fact that student writers engage in their writing 8
24. tasks through a cyclical approach rather than a single-shot approach. They are not expected to produce and submit complete and polished responses to their writing assignments without going through stages of drafting and receiving feedback on their drafts, be it from peers and/or from the teacher, followed by revision of their evolving 1.10.2 Product approach model According to Gabrielatos (2002) a product approach is “a traditional approach in which students are encouraged to mimic a model text, usually is presented and analyzed at an early stage”. For example, in a typical product approach-oriented classroom, students are supplied with a standard sample of text and they are expected to follow the standard to construct a new piece of writing. Product Approach Model comprises of four stages (Steele: 2004) these are: 1.10.3 Genre approach model Badger and White (2000) sees the genre approach as an extension of product approach. Like product approaches, genre approach regard writing as predominantly linguistic but, unlike product approaches, they emphasize that writing varies with social context in which it is produced. So, there is a range of varieties of writing such as sales letters, research articles, and reports linked with different situations. 9
25. 1.11 RESEARCH PARADIGM, DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY. 1.11.1 Research paradigm According to Joubish et al. (2011) a paradigm is a worldview, a whole framework of beliefs, values and methods within which research takes place. It is these worldviews within which researchers work. The interpretive paradigm will be used in this research. The interpretive paradigm aims to find new interpretations or underlying meanings and adheres to the ontological assumption of multiple realities, which are time and context dependent. A related term is “naturalistic”, which has connotations of research done in a natural setting, rather than in a laboratory (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2000). The assumption underlying this paradigm is that people make decisions and act in accordance with the subjective understanding of the situations in which they find On the basis of the description of the interpretive paradigm, the researcher will attempt to gain entry into the conceptual world of the research respondents, which are English First Additional Language teachers, in order to understand and interpret experiences pertaining to their practice. This can be done successfully as I will be adopting a qualitative approach to research. 1.11.2 Design A research design is a plan, structure and strategy of investigation so conceived to obtain answers to research questions or problems (Kerlinger: 1986). The design describes the procedures for conducting the study, including when, from whom and 10
26. under what conditions data were obtained. Its purpose is to provide the most valid, accurate answers as possible to research questions (McMillan & Schumacher: 1993). The research design of this study seeks to investigate the strategies to improve Grade 8 and 9 learners writing skills in English First Additional Language. In order to examine these strategies, data will be collected from teachers by means of interviews. Furthermore, all the sub-questions will be researched by means of a literature review and also drawing on the views of practicing teachers. 1.11.3 Methodology 1.11.3.1 Sample selection Out of twenty one high schools in the Cradock District, four high schools will be purposively selected, two schools located in Cradock and two in Tarkastad. This will then be convenient to the researcher as the distance will be much closer. Therefore, the sample of this study will consist of Grade 8 and 9 First Additional Language Teachers in four High Schools, two teachers from each school chosen randomly to fit the purpose of the study. Johnson and Christenson (2004:197) define sampling as the process of drawing a sample from the population where the characteristics of a subset are selected from a larger group. Purposive sampling was used in this study because it is a non- random sampling technique in which a researcher solicits persons with specific characteristics to participate in a research study (Bogdan and Biklen 2007). As an experienced teacher who have taught English First Additional Language to the Grade 8 and 9 learners for 15 years, I will therefore only focus on these grades in determining their feelings about English First Additional Language and the problems they encounter when teaching and learning writing skills. 11
27. 1.11.3.2 Data collection instruments Permission to do the research will be required and it will be granted by the Department of Education, the Principal or Head of the English Department and by English First Additional Language Teachers. In order to collect data concerning strategies and techniques followed by teachers and the difficulties experienced by teachers when teaching writing skills, interview guides will be developed and sampling will be done. Semi- structured interviews will be used. All the interviews will be recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. Since an interview is an eye to eye interaction, I hope to get wholesome information because the interviewee will be speaking from the heart. Purposive sampling will also be used as discussed above. 1.12 RELIABILITY Koch (1993) suggested that one of the ways in which a research study may be shown to be dependable, is for its process to be audited. Guba & Lincoln‟s (1985) recommendation is that auditability be the criterion for rigour when dealing with the consistency of data. Therefore, a reliable measure has to yield the same outcome if tested more than once. In qualitative studies the researcher is concerned with the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the data (Rodolo: 2008) and this is what this study aims to achieve. 1.13 VALIDITY “The validity of a measurement instrument is the extent to which the instrument measures what it is supposed to measure” (Leedy and Ormrod 2005:28). According to 12
28. Rodolo (2008) the researcher should be aware of prejudice. Furthermore, Lincolm and Guba (1989) argued that ensuring credibility is one of the most important factors in establishing trustworthiness in the qualitative research. Therefore, validity of the interview instrument will be tested by giving it to educators prior to conducting the interviews. After the interviews, the participants will be given feedback to make sure that the researcher captured their experiences appropriately. Self –awareness of the researcher is also essential (Koch: 1993) and the information given will be based on proven facts. 1.14 DATA ANALYSIS A qualitative analysis of the data guided by the steps described by Bogdan and Bilken (1998) will be used to analyse the transcripts of the interviews with the teachers. Everything that will originate out of the interviews will be written down, including the main questions and probes used in order to be able to study the content of the interviews. The main question of the interviews will direct the analysis and will be used to create the first main coding categories. These categories, and the data they contain, will help inspire further questions and sub-coding categories which will be used to analyse the data in greater detail. The data will have to be re-read repeatedly; themes and patterns will be identified and arranged analytically in text summaries. Results of the analysis of the students and teacher‟s comments will be compared to each other. 1.15 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS Ethics are considered to deal with beliefs about what is right or wrong, proper or improper, good or bad (McMillan & Schumacher, 1993).The following aspects will form the code of ethics that will be employed for the purpose of this study: 13
29. 1.15.1 Informed consent as dialogue Participants will be contacted by means of a telephone call followed by a visit. During my visit to each participant, they will be informed of the purpose of the study and will be assured of confidentiality and anonymity (McMillan & Schumacher: 1993). Participants will not be required to give an immediate response, instead, they will be provided with a letter of information and an appropriate consent form to be signed and posted at a later date. 1.15.2 Confidentiality and anonymity Codes of ethics insist on safeguards to protect people‟s identity and those of research locations (Thordson: 2000). During this study all reasonable steps to maintain confidentiality of participants will be taken. For example, the findings of the research will be recorded in such a way that participants could not be identified and appropriate codes will be used when individual statements are quoted. 1.16 SUMMARY In this chapter the background and orientation to the study was covered. The problem statement and the objectives of the study are clearly stipulated. The research questions, the rationale the significance of the study and the literature review are explained. Lastly, the research design and methodology, ethical issues, data analysis, the limitations of the study and the chapter outline are also explained. The literature review and theoretical framework will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. 14
30. 1.17 Chapter outline Chapter 1: Chapter one deals with the background to the research problem. The statement of the research problem is tackled as well as research questions, the purpose of this study, rationale and aims, research paradigm, design and methodology. The terminology is defined and the chapter concludes with the chapter outline. Chapter 2: Chapter two presents the theoretical framework and the literature review that was conducted on teaching approaches based on the following headings: process, product and genre approach. Chapter 3: Chapter three explains the research design and methodology employed to investigate the research questions were discussed according to the following headings: research orientation, research purpose, research methodology and data analysis. Chapter 4: Chapter four comprises of a detailed analysis and interpretation of the data collected through semi-structured interviews. The discussion of data collected is preceded by biographical information of the respondents in relation to gender, teaching experience in English, qualifications and age. This is followed by a thematic discussion and interpretation of the interviews conducted. The data to answer the research questions set in Chapter One is discussed. Chapter 5: Chapter five summarizes and concludes the study. Recommendations and suggestions for further studies on the gaps that were identified by the researcher are tabulated in this chapter 15
31. CHAPTER. 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.0 INTRODUCTION The previous chapter is a preparatory chapter to the research. Chapter 2 is a literature review and is twofold; it firstly locate the research within its theoretical framework and context and secondly, to understand writing skills within the school context and the problems faced by teachers when teaching writing skills. 2.1 THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK The theoretical framework of this research is located within the Process approach model, White and Arndt‟s (1991),Kroll (2001) and Steele (2004), and Trupe (2001): Product approach model, Gabrielatos (2002) and (Steele: 2004), and Genre approach model, Cope and Kalantzis (1993) and Badger and White (2000). 2.1.1 Process approach model Kroll (2001) defines process approach as an umbrella term for many types of writing courses. What the term captures is the fact that student writers engage in their writing tasks through a cyclical approach rather than a single-shot approach. They are not expected to produce and submit complete and polished responses to their writing assignments without going through certain stages. This includes stages of drafting and receiving feedback on their drafts, be it from peers and/or from the teacher, followed by revision of their evolving texts. Hence a process approach tends to focus more on 16
32. varied classroom activities which promote the development of language use: brainstorming, group discussion and rewriting. The Process Approach Model comprises of eight stages (Steele: 2004): Stage one (Brainstorming): This is generating ideas by brainstorming and discussion. This will help to stimulate students to write through inspiring ideas, unlocking creating and providing vocabulary. Stage two (Planning/Structuring): Students exchange ideas into note form and judge quality and usefulness of their ideas. Stage three (Mind mapping): Students organize ideas into a mind map, spider gram, or linear form. This stage helps to make the hierarchical relationship of ideas which helps students with the structure of their texts. Stage four (Writing the first draft): Students write the first draft. This is done in the class frequently in pairs or groups. This stage incorporates strategies developed in brainstorming. Students should concentrate on getting ideas down on paper without worrying about spelling or grammar. Stage five (Peer feedback): Drafts are exchanged, so that students become the readers of each other‟s work. By responding as readers students develop awareness of the fact that a writer is producing something to be read by someone else and thus they can improve their own drafts. Feedback improves the writers‟ drafts and developing the readers understandings of good writing (Richards: 2003). Stage six (Editing): Drafts are returned and improvements are made based upon peer feedback. Responses to writing come from a variety of sources: self, teacher, friends and peer response groups. 17
33. Stage seven (Final draft): A final draft is written. According to Richard (2003) the final draft should be ready for publication and the student should be satisfied with the way the piece reads. This will help in motivating them to write. Stage eight (Evaluation and teachers‟ feedback): Students‟ writings are evaluated and teachers provide a feedback on it. According to Richard (2003) teacher written response play a central role in most English First Additional Language writing classes. The following diagram shows the cyclical nature and the interrelationship of the stages: Thinking Final Planning Version Editing Drafting Revising Figure 2.1: A model of writing (diagram of process writing) Source: (White and Arndt‟s (1991) White and Arndt‟s diagram (1991) offers teachers a framework which tries to capture the recursive, not linear, nature of writing. 18
34. Trupe (2001) mentions that to incorporate process instruction in our classes, we may remember the following points: Ask students to do a lot of writing, but don‟t make every assignment count for a grade. Read some student texts as a “real” reader, responding to content without seeking to correct it. Give students some class time to start brainstorming on a writing topic after you‟ve given an assignment. As little as 5 minutes will be effective. Encourage a variety of prewriting and planning strategies. Assign students to peer groups to give each other focused feedback on drafts. Prepare some guidelines for peer responders, so that they can look for specific textual features, and ask them to provide written feedback to the student authors. Peer group sessions can be held in class, face-to-face out of class, or in a computer environment (email, bulletin board, etc.). Encourage students to ask you questions about their writing, as they are working on Practice formative assessment. If at all possible, schedule brief face-to-face conferences for discussion of student writing. Consider framing your comments in terms of questions, like, “What do you mean here?” or, “Can you tell me more about this?” rather than in evaluative 19
35. 2.1.2 Product approach model According to Gabrielatos (2002) a product approach is “a traditional approach in which students are encouraged to mimic a model text, usually is presented and analyzed at an early stage. For example, in a typical product approach-oriented classroom, students are supplied with a standard sample of text and they are expected to follow the standard to construct a new piece of writing. Product Approach Model comprises of four stages (Steele: 2004) Stage one: Students study model texts and then the features of the genre are highlighted. For example, if studying a formal letter, students‟ attention may be drawn to the importance of paragraphing and the language used to make formal requests. If a student reads a story, the focus may be on the techniques used to make the story interesting, and students focus on where and how the writer employs these techniques. Stage two: This stage consists of controlled practice of the highlighted features, usually in isolation. So if students are studying a formal letter, they may be asked to practice the language used to make formal requests, for example, practicing the „I would be grateful if you would...‟ structure. Stage three: This is the most important stage where the ideas are organized. Those who favor this approach believe that the organization of ideas is more important than the ideas themselves and as important as the control of language. Stage four: This is the end product of the learning process. Students choose from the choice of comparable writing tasks. To show what they can be as fluent and competent users of the language, students individually use the skills, structures and vocabulary they have been taught to produce the product. 20
36. 2.1.3 Genre approach model Badger and White (2000) sees the genre approach as an extension of product approach. Like product approaches, genre approach regard writing as predominantly linguistic but, unlike product approaches, they emphasize that writing varies with social context in which it is produced. So, there is a range of kinds of writing such as sales letters, research articles, and reports linked with different situations. As not all learners need to operate in all social contexts, this view of texts has implications for the writing syllabus. According to Badger and White (2000) genres are also influenced by other features of the situation, such as the subject matter, the relationship between the writer and the audience, and the pattern of organization. In short, to them genre-based approach see writing as essentially concerned with knowledge of language, and as being tied closely to a social purpose, while the development of writing is largely viewed as the analysis and imitation of input in the form of texts provided by the Furthermore, Badger and White (2000) stated that, for genre analysts, the central aspect of the situation is purpose. Different kinds of writing, or genres, such as letters of apology, recipes, or law reports, are used to carry out different purposes. To them, in terms of writing development, genre approaches have many similarities with product approaches. Cope and Kalantzis (1993) talk of a wheel model of genre literacy. This wheel has three phases: 21
37. Purpose (Genre) Channel Subject matter Interlocutor Relationship (Model) (Field) (Tenor) Text Figure 2.2: Wheel model of genre literacy Source: Cope and Kalantzis (1993) Modelling the target genre, where learners are exposed to examples of the genre they have to produce; the construction of a text by learners and teacher; and, finally the independent construction of text by learners. In theory, the cycle can be repeated as and when necessary, but it would seem that often each phase appears only once. According to Badger and White (2000) the three approaches are largely complementary; this becomes more apparent if we examine their weaknesses and strength. The disadvantages of process approaches are that they often regard all writing as being produced by the same set of processes, that they give insufficient importance to the kind of texts writers produce and why such texts are produced, and that they offer learners insufficient input, particularly in terms of linguistic knowledge, to write The main advantages are that they understand the importance of the skills involved in writing, and recognize that what learners bring to the writing classroom contributes to the development of writing ability (Badger and White: 2000). The weaknesses of 22
38. product approaches are that process skills, such as planning a text, are given a relatively small role, and that the knowledge and skills that learners bring to the classroom are undervalued. Their strengths are that they recognize the need for learners to be given linguistic knowledge about texts, and they understand that limitation is one way in which people learn (Badger and White: 2000).The negative side of genre approaches is that they undervalue the skills needed to produce a text and see learners as largely passive. More positively, they acknowledge that writing takes place in a social situation, and is a reflection of a particular purpose, and understand that learning can happen consciously through imitation and analysis (Badger and White: 2000). However, Badger and White (2000) are of the view that an effective methodology for writing needs to incorporate the insights of product, process, and genre approaches. To them one way of doing this is to start with one approach and adapt it. Meanwhile, adapting an approach has led to important developments in the writing classroom. They felt that it is also possible to identify an approach which is a synthesis of the three approaches, which they term the process genre approach. The essential idea is that the writing class recognizes that writing involves knowledge about language ( as in product and genre approaches), knowledge of the context in which writing happens and especially the purpose for the writing ( as in genre approaches), and skills in using language ( as in process approaches), writing development happens by drawing out learners‟ potential (as in process approaches) and by providing input to which the learners respond (as in product and genre approaches) Badger and White (2000). 2.2 PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY TEACHERS WHEN TEACHING WRITING SKILLS IN ENGLISH FIRST ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE. Yan (2005) indicated that English First Additional Language teachers and students face certain problems in teaching and learning writing. As many teachers of English in China 23
39. have noted, acquiring the writing skill seems to be more laborious and demanding than acquiring the other three skills (Zheng: 1999). In fact, Nunan (1999:271) considers it an enormous challenge to produce “a coherent, fluent, extended piece of writing” in one‟s Additional language. This is magnified by the fact that the rhetorical conventions of English texts, structure, style and organization often differ from the conventions in other languages. It requires effort to recognise and manage the differences (Leki: 1999). In addition, Yan (2005) mentioned that in many countries, education systems emphasize writing for taking tests. This is not likely to make students interested in writing, which becomes decontextualized and artificial, giving students no real sense of purpose or perspective of a target audience. Furthermore, while nearly all language teachers would be expected to have had experience speaking, listening, and reading, it is quite possible that few language teachers are writers themselves, either in L1 or L2 and, as a result, have few experiential resources to draw on besides what they might have experienced in elementary school with first language writing instruction, e.g. an focus on neatness, spelling, and grammatical correctness (Leki: 2001). To him, a reasonable position from which to begin both for teachers and teacher trainers would seem to be engaged in some public writing themselves, to reflect carefully on that experience, and to base classroom decisions as far as possible on principle rather than only on habit , only reproducing what they themselves once experienced. Not only teachers‟ training but also the educational backgrounds of the students need to be considered and accommodated or built on. On the one hand, Leki (2001) argued that individuals who learn to write in school settings are nearly invariably tested on their writing and are allowed to advance, or not, depending on the results. This means that some are left behind. Those with access to better writing instruction, those who can afford private tutoring, for example, will advance further and more easily. There is a cost to teachers as well; writing teachers must make enormous time investments to respond adequately to student writing. This is 24
40. in line with what is indicated by the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) that the challenge in the senior phase is to provide support for these learners because they still cannot communicate well in their Additional language at this level (Department of Basic Education:2011). This means that writing instruction is expensive on a broader plane (Leki: 2001). However, according to Leki (2001) introducing new English First Additional Language writing programs where previously writing had only been used to reinforce the development of oral language can create severe logistic tensions. In settings where grammar or translation styles of language instruction predominate, it is possible to have classes of 30 or 50, possible more. Classes of such size create problems for writing teachers. Even without large numbers, it is possible that educational ministries and program administrators who want to include English First Additional Language writing in schools may not be aware of the amount of time demanded of English First Additional language writing teachers and/or may be unwilling to spend the amount of money it takes to have a writing program. For many students an invaluable feature of some writing programs is individual writing conferences with teachers. But teachers may feel that because of the time conferences require, it is simply not possible to include conferencing as part of their teaching strategies. Moreover, Leki (2001) postulated that beyond issues of time and numbers of students, logistic tensions within the English First Additional Language writing classroom itself include developing an understanding of and a strategy for accommodating local needs. For example, creating or experiencing real purpose for writing may be a reasonable goal in setting where English is the medium of daily communication. There students can be asked to write letters to the local newspapers and in this way perhaps work towards developing a sense of their broader English speaking audience. But these goals may be more difficult to achieve with less access to the target language in the surrounding environment, where there may be no English language newspaper to send letters to. 25
41. Furthermore, no matter how persuasive recommendations for writing instruction methods and materials (often coming from the center) may be, they must be adapted to local possibilities. For example, peer responding may include making copies of student texts for peer to read. However, making copies may simply not always feasible in all According to Shin (2006) teachers reported feeling overwhelmed by the number of non- native errors in their students‟ writing and by not knowing where to begin in providing their feedback. However, some students want praise, others see it as condescending, some want a response to the ideas, others demand to have all their errors marked, some use teacher commentary effectively, others ignore it altogether. This makes it difficult for teachers to cater for all these different perceptions and expectations (Hyland: 2003). Similarly, Shin (2002b) postulated that teachers with little or no training regarding how to provide feedback on Additional Language writing often find it difficult to decide whether to start correcting all errors (which often result in crossing out and rewriting entire blocks of sentences) or to leave errors untouched because there are too many of them. He further explained that neither alternative, however, is likely to have a long lasting and genuine impact on students as they learn to improve their writing in English. Meanwhile, according to Reid (1993) a successful teacher response must help students to improve their writing by communicating feedback detailed enough to allow students to act, to commit to change in their writing. He supported his statement by saying that successful teacher feedback results in substantive and authentic improvements in students‟ perceptions and practice of writing. On the other hand, teachers are often the only evaluators of the students‟ writing and so they want to feel confident that they are responding consistently across student scripts and that other teachers would evaluate the work in a similar way. Unfortunately, they 26
42. may be influenced as much by their own cultural context and experiences as by variations in writing quality. Even where texts are double marked, research has found that teachers can differ in what they look for in writing and the standards they apply to the same text. Novice teachers, for instance, tend to be highly visible (Hyland: 2003). The other challenge confronting teachers of English First Additional Language writing is that of meeting students where they are in terms of language and writing skill and taking them forward (Leki:2001). In addition, if the students do not see a reason to learn to write, and if, nevertheless, it is decided by teachers or ministries of education that English First Additional Language writing will be taught, the challenge then becomes engaging students in dialogue to explain this decision. Furthermore, particularly for writing teachers who are not natives of the students‟ culture, it would seem imperative to learn about the context in which the teaching will take place. That context include students‟ previous experiences with both L1 and L2 writing instruction and their thoughts on such questions about writing as what makes writing good, how people become good writers and how good they themselves want to become at writing in English (Leki : 2001). Moreover, De Segovia and Hardison‟s (2008) study argues that the policy statements tend to be idealist so the shift from a teacher-centred to a learner-centred approach did not evolve smoothly. It required an understanding of the language learning process in order to establish attainable goals and compatible methodology. Programme implementation involved additional obstacles, including a lack of sufficient teacher training, resources, mentoring support, and the cost of further education for in-service teachers. Although the teachers played a major role in the reform, they were an untapped resource in the decision –making process. Other problems such as teacher confidence and a radical timetable for change contributed to failure. 27
43. McAllister (2009) also reflects on the challenges of language teachers. He stresses that the techniques, aims and materials that relate to language teaching need to be reformed. According to him, the teaching of language needs to be in a truer and more complete form. There is the need for trustworthy and thoughtful people to clarify the relevant instructional aims. The final challenge is how to translate aims into real and concrete forms. According to this scholar, this necessitates sweeping changes in the attitudes of people interested in language teaching. It also necessitates having a revolution of classroom presentation and retraining of hundreds of teachers. There is also a need for a comprehensive vision to help in the adjustment to the demands of the new world. Some students may have had experience, pleasant or unpleasant with peer response (Howard and Jamieson: 1995).Therefore teachers may encounter some students who question the validity of peer response, especially because many students are accustomed to writing solely for the teacher who will assign the grade. They may question their classmates‟ authority for grading their writing. Teachers can perhaps explain the value of peer response from their own experience with peer review of scholarly work, explaining that responses and suggestions from their colleagues and their responses to their colleagues‟ work substantially enrich the revising process. Myles (2002) indicated that student‟s writing in a Second Language is faced with social and cognitive challenges related to Second Language acquisition. Learners may continue to exhibit errors in their writing for the following social reasons: negative attitude towards the target language, continued lack of progress in the Second Language. Other social reasons include a wide social and psychological distance between them and the target culture, and a lack of integrative and instrumental motivation for learning. However, according to him most research in Second Language writing focuses on the teaching of writing rather than on the Second Language learners‟ experiences in the process of writing. At the same time, the use of various strategies in 28
44. writing is affected by many variables such as gender, attitudes, motivation, cognitive style, self-confidence and the teacher‟s behaviour. Nordquist (2009) argues that whatever your attitude may be, one thing is certain: how you feel about writing both affects and reflects how well you can write. Certainly you can change your attitude as you gain more experience as a writer. 2.3 FACTORS IMPACTING ON WRITING SKILLS OF ENGLISH FIRST ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE STUDENTS. There are a number of factors that contribute to poor performance of students in their writing. According to Chokwe (2013) these factors include under-preparedness caused by ineffective teaching of writing at school level; socio-economic issues; and inadequate reading. Some of the factors are discussed in this section. 2.3.1 Student under-preparedness Under-preparedness is caused by a number of factors. As Engstrom (2008) contends, students may be unprepared because of inadequate schooling experiences, competing family and work demands, lack of English language competency. Furthermore, Sanchez and Paulson (2008) argue that minority students‟ underprepared status often serves to compound their marginalisation and oppression. In addition, Chokwe (2013) postulates that this is a worldwide occurrence, particularly in English First Additional Language contexts where English is the medium of instruction. Similarly, other authors indicate that their students typically come from educationally underprepared backgrounds, with some having had no access to libraries (Granville and Dison: 2009). Moreover, Moutlana (2007) when examining the literacy levels in South Africa argues that the low literacy standards among students should be an issue of concern in education circles 29
45. and ascribes the low literacy standards among South African students to student under- preparedness at various levels. According to Chokwe (2011) it is clear that both factors, that is, students‟ low literacy levels and under-preparedness, can impact negatively on students‟ writing competencies, and in turn their ability to succeed in their studies. On the other hand, Chokwe (2013) asserts that student under- preparedness tends to be perceived as a student problem. Several researchers argue that the problem of student writing is also exacerbated by teaching staff members who are at times under- qualified, under-prepared and inefficient (Engstrom: 2008). In addition, Engstrom (2008) contends that institutions that are serious about supporting learners‟ success and persistence of underprepared students must prepare the teachers not just the students, about what these students need to learn and succeed. For example, Chokwe (2011) mentioned that from the schooling system, there are still instances where members of the teaching staff are not trained to teach subjects they are teaching. Meanwhile, in most cases in the Education field, most of the blame is put on students (Luna: 2002) and none on the teachers. According to Luna (2002) teachers should also reflect on their practices and approaches that they employ in their classrooms. A new breed of such practitioners is needed in the educational circles for the better development of our students‟ writing. With the kind of background that the English First Additional students come from, we seem to be expecting miracles from them in producing quality writing without proper training and according to Chokwe (2011) such expectations cannot be justified. However, he suggested that teachers should also reflect on their practice and be introspective about what might be right or wrong about the pedagogic practices and approaches that they employ in their classrooms. 30
46. 2.3.2 Student Writing at school level Chokwe (2013) mentions that schools play a critical role in developing students‟ reading and writing skills. He further explains that if student writing is not addressed adequately at school level, the higher education sector will always be inundated with students who are academically under-prepared. Hart (1995) reports that such English Second Language learners seldom use English in their daily lives, and that crowded classrooms and poor facilities dominate their learning and teaching environment. He also projects that this situation will remain in the schooling context for the vast majority of South Africans for the foreseeable future. Cliff and Hanslo (2009) also observe that students from under-resourced school backgrounds are often characterised by weak academic performance and that they are likely to continue in higher education. Some researchers attribute students‟ poor writing skills to the teachers‟ reluctance to teach writing. For instance, Harris (1977) reports that some teachers do not teach composition at school level. Furthermore, research also indicates that there are fewer writing activities done in schools and student writing is underestimated (Wingate: 2006). For example, he found that many students are no longer required to write essays at secondary schools. This is a challenge that the teachers have to address. Similarly, Munro (2003) state that dealing with students‟ literacy difficulties is a challenge that faces many teachers and schools. Chokwe‟s (2013) article concurs that indeed our students‟ writing skills demonstrate a dysfunctional education system that younger generations have to live with and that can be attributed to lack of quality leadership in education that should start addressing these issues. To him, some writing deficiencies are attributed to lack of creativity in the classroom practices. Cohen and Riel (1989) report that the task of writing in schools was not effective and could have 31
47. been effective when writing to an imaginary audience, and if the purpose was made explicit. Similarly, Engstrom (2008) reports that students consistently said that high school was a waste of time, they learned little from the lecture mode of class delivery and spent few hours (if at all) studying. 2.3.3 Writing as a product of reading According to Chokwe (2013), writing cannot be discussed in isolation from reading. Research has shown that the two complement each other (Rose: 2004). For example, Rose (2004) argues that the parent-child reading before school is the first stage in a curriculum of reading skills that underlies the content and processes of teaching and learning in each stage of schooling. He found that parent-child reading is not practised in rural areas where indigenous people of Australia live. The situation is comparable to a majority of South Africans who live in rural areas. In addition, Rose (2004) argues that writing activities in schools tend to be regarded as secondary and dependent on reading proficiency. Furthermore, he suggests that for learners to become better writers, they have to master reading from an early age. However, Jurecic (2006) argues that teaching writing in High School is challenging in this era where the reading culture has been eroded by television, movies, videos and games, amongst other factors. He maintains that students need to read more to be prepared for reading and writing in different disciplines. He also suggest that students also need more practice in using writing to explore ideas, develop positions, deliberate about problems and paradoxes, make arguments and think new thoughts about the Zamel (1992) states that writing allows students to write their way into reading, that reading shares much in common with writing, and that reading is also an act of 32
48. composing. She critiques the way reading is being taught in schools. She observed that students view the purpose of reading as to answer questions that follow after reading. In agreement with Freire (1970), she also noticed that students read textbooks so that they can regurgitate what they read back to the teacher, and that if students fail to regurgitate information, they feel they are not good readers. She also noted that students are apprehensive about their own writing. Notably, Zamel (1992) challenges the structure of reading textbooks which relegates writing to the last activity. Therefore, reading and writing are reciprocal as students read what has been written and incorporate that as part of their writing. She also argues that writing enables us to re- look at texts in a way which lets us grapple with uncertainties, reflect on complexities, deal with puzzlements, and offer approximate readings. She also argues that writing dispels the notion that reading is a matter of getting something and getting it at the outset (Zamel: 1992). The following approaches to teaching writing have been advocated and used in the past few decades of English language teaching and are still used even today. 2.4 STRATEGIES CURRENTLY USED BY TEACHERS WHEN TEACHING WRITING KILLS IN ENGLISH FIRST ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE. According to Yan (2005) one of the processes that are used by teachers is the product approach. Raimes (1983) explained that this approach uses the normal procedure of assigning a piece of writing, collect it, and then return it for further revision with the errors either corrected or marked for the students to do the corrections. Meanwhile, according to Yan (2005) the product approach has received much criticism that it ignores the actual processes used by students, or any writers, to produce a piece of writing. He further mentioned that instead, it focuses on imitation and churning out a perfect product. Even though very few people can create a perfect product on the first draft. Another criticism that he mentioned is that this approach requires constant error 33
49. correction that affects students‟ motivation and self-esteem and that it does not effectively prepare students for the real world or teach them to be best writers. Nevertheless, Yan (2005) recommends the product approach as having some credibility because at some point there will be a final draft that requires attention to grammar, spelling, and punctuation. However, in mid-1970s the process approach replaced the product approach Yan (2005). According to Tribble (1996) the process approach identifies four stages in writing: (1) Prewriting, (2) composing/drafting, (3) revising, and (4) editing. The process approach emphasizes revision, and also feedback from others, so students may produce many drafts with much crossing out of sentences and moving around of paragraphs Yan (2005). He sees the process approach as bringing meaningfulness to learners who make a personal connection to the topic and come to understand the process they follow when writing about it. Meanwhile, according to Badger and White (2000), this approach has been criticized because it views the process as the same for all writers, regardless of what is being written and who is doing the writing. Nevertheless, they still maintain that the process approach is widely accepted and utilized because according to them it allows the students to understand the steps involved in writing, and it recognizes that what the learners bring to the writing classroom contributes to the development of the writing In addition, Hedge (1988) argued that writing is more of recursive activity in which the writer moves backwards and forwards between drafting and revising, with stages of preplanning in between. Rewriting gives students the chance to think further about the content. They are able to focus on the introductory paragraph and develop ideas from the previous draft in a subsequent paragraph in the new version. They refer to all the 34
50. components of the process of writing as composing: students start off with an overall plan in their heads, they think about what they want to write and who they are writing for, then they draft out sections of the writing and work on them and they constantly review, revise and edit their wok. In the 1980s it was the genre approach that became popular with the notion that student writers could benefit from studying different types of written texts Yan (2005). Cope and Kalantzis (1993) explains the genre approach in three phases: (1) the target genre is modelled for the students, (2) a text is jointly constructed by the teacher and students, and (3) a text is independently constructed by each student. Badger and White (2000) stipulated that the approach acknowledges that the writing takes place in a social situation and reflects a particular purpose, and that the learning can happen consciously through imitation and analysis, which facilitates explicit instruction. Though, they also criticized it as showing no value to the processes needed to produce a text and sees a learner as largely passive but on the other hand, Yan (2005) regard the genre approach as being successful at showing students how different discourses require different In fact, many writing teachers recognised the need to adopt a variety of approaches in the writing classroom. They combine them in developing a new way of thinking about writing Yan (2005). One example mentioned by Badger and White (2000) is a synthesis of the process and the genre approaches which they have aptly termed the process genre approach. Yan (2005) describe it as the approach that allows students to study the relationship between the purpose and form for a particular genre as they use the recursive processes of pre-writing, drafting, revision, and editing. According to Badger and White (2000) the teaching procedure for the process genre approach is divided into six steps: (1) preparation, (2) modelling and reinforcing, (3) planning, (4) joint constructing, (5) independent constructing, and (6) revising. Of which, according to the Department of Basic Education (2011) not every step of the process will be used on every occasion. For example, if learners are writing a familiar text type, they will not 35
51. need to analyze its structure and language features in so much detail. These steps are described as follows: 2.4.1. Preparation The teacher begins preparing the students to write by defining a situation that will require a written text and placing it within a specific genre, such as a persuasive essay arguing for or against an issue of current interest. According to them this activates the schemata and allows students to anticipate the structural features of this genre. 2.4.2 Modelling and reinforcing In this step the teacher introduces a model of the genre and let students consider the social purpose of the text, including who the audience will be. For example, they mentioned that the purpose of an argumentative essay is to persuade the reader to act on something. Next, the teacher discusses how the text is structured and how its organization develops to accomplish its purpose. The students may do some comparisons with other texts to reinforce what they have learned about the particular 2.4.3. Planning In this step many meaningful activities activate the students „schemata about the topic, including brainstorming, discussing and reading associated material. The aim is to help the students develop an interest in the topic by relating it to their experience. 2.4.4. Joint constructing During this step, both teacher and student work together to start writing a text. While doing so the teacher uses the writing processes of brainstorming, drafting, and revising. The students contribute information and ideas, and the teacher writes the generated text on the blackboard or computer. The final draft provides a model for students to refer to when they work on their individual compositions. 36
52. 2.4.5. Independent constructing At this point students have examined model texts and have jointly constructed a text in the genre. They now undertake the task of composing their own texts on a related topic. 2.4.6. Revising Students eventually will have a draft that will undergo final revision and editing. Students may check, discuss, and evaluate their work with fellow students, as the teacher again guides and facilitates. The teacher may make an effort to publish the students‟ work, which will impact a sense of achievement and motivate the students to become best writers. Apprenticeship models of instruction, which developed out of Vygotsky‟s sociocultural theories of language and literacy, are also becoming more common. Students start with what they already know and can do, but their learning is extended into what Vygotsky termed the “zone of proximal development” through strategic instruction, collaborative construction of opportunities and active participation (Lantolf: 2002). Apprenticeship models enable learners to utilize the new language as a tool in the process of becoming Similar to Cumming (1995)‟s suggestions for fostering writing expertise, that students are supported by scaffold of prompts and explanations, by extensive modelling, by in- process support, and by reflection that connects strategic effort to outcomes (Flower: 1994). This is supported by Department of Basic Education (2011) that writing which is appropriately scaffold using writing frames (as and when necessary), produces competent, versatile writers who will be able to use their skills to develop and present appropriate written, visual and multi-media texts for a variety of purposes. Drawing on and revising student knowledge of genres, reflecting on strategies for approaching a variety of literary tasks, and cultivating a meta-language for discussing texts are important components of socio-literate methods (Johns:1999). 37
53. Reid (1993) also mentioned another strategy used by teachers in dealing with unfamiliar content in English for specific purposes and in content-based instruction, that they let the learner explain the content as a way of using English appropriately and dealing with the teacher‟s possible lack of content knowledge. In addition, Shin (2006) indicated that teachers when faced with unfamiliar content of the student writing concentrate on grammar, spelling and punctuation as mentioned on the background, rather than connecting with the learner to have a better understanding of the content of the student‟s writing. This is in contrast to the view of the Department of Basic Education (2011:10) that “acquiring the grammatical rules of the language does not necessarily enable the learner to use the language in a coherent and meaningful way.” It is therefore required that the teaching of language structure should focus on how language is used and what can be done with language, i.e. how to make meaning, how to attend to problems and interests, influence friends and colleagues, and how to create a rich social life. In addition, the teaching of language structures should be a means to improving one‟s speaking, reading and writing. On the one hand, Donald and Williams-James (1997) stated that teachers identify surface errors in writing conventions rather than engaging with issues of argumentation, organization or analysis. Obviously, this is problematic in that the rubric that is used when marking essays in particular emphasizes argument and organization and does not allow teachers to mark down students papers excessively for grammatical error. This further disadvantages those students who may still be learning the convention of written English Rubbin and William-James (1997). Furthermore, writing instructions must be individualized through teacher feedback on student writing because mere exposure to standard writing conventions does not improve student use of them (de la Luz Reyers as cited in Shin: 2006). Therefore, responding to individual student writing, then, is a critical part of one‟s job as a writing teacher. This further requires a fair amount of practice and reflection as opposed to what teachers do (Shin: 2006). 38
54. Even though there are still problems that persist, there are ways to improve the teaching of writing skills to benefit all writing tasks and some of them are discussed below. 2.5 GUIDELINES FOR IMPROVEMENT IN TEACHING WRITING SKILLS Hedge (1999) assumed that writing is essentially a creative process which involves students in a learning process, motivates, builds their confidence, gives them an opportunity to explore the language, to communicate and to look for the best ways of self-expression. The teacher‟s role in this process is undoubtedly very important: The teacher‟s role is to provide an environment in which students will learn about writing, see models of good writing, get plenty of practice in writing, and receive help during the writing process. This contradicts what is mentioned by Rubbin and Williams-James on the strategies adopted by teachers, that they just identify surface errors rather than helping the students. In addition, Department of Basic Education (2011) postulated that “Frequent writing practice across a variety of contexts, tasks and subjects enables learners to communicate functionally and creatively.”The teacher, being a facilitator, helper, motivator, consultant, prompter, advisor and only then assessor should help the learners by organising writing as a series of stages. First of all, students need to feel the necessity of writing: Why should I write? What‟s the point of writing? These are common complaints of students. And it is up to the teacher to bring the real-world atmosphere in the classroom. As Hairston (1984:82) puts it: “We cannot teach students to write by looking only at what they have written. We must also understand how that product came into being, and why it assumed the form that it did. We have to understand what goes on during the act of writing …if we want to affect its outcome. We have to do 39
55. the hard thing, examine the intangible process, rather than the easy thing, and evaluate the tangible product.” Ur (2002) assure that the writing process is the starting point for developing students‟ writing abilities, teachers must recognise that students need a range of writing experiences to develop as writers. In addition, in order to become good at writing, learners need concentration, instruction, practice, and patience. The teacher‟s task is to assist her learners to gain control over the written word. Brown as cited in Al.gomoul (2011) provides guidelines for developing learners‟ writing techniques. The teacher, when giving the learners a writing task, should always consider various techniques for maintaining efficient writing practice. These include: Balance process and product, take account of the learner‟s cultural/literacy background, connect reading and writing, provide as much authentic writing as possible, frame lesson plans in terms of including prewriting, drafting and revising stages, offer techniques that are as interactive as possible and sensitively apply methods of responding to, and correcting the students‟ writing. Besides, the teacher should encourage the students to focus on a goal or main idea when writing. They should also encourage them to utilise feedback on their writing, revise their work willingly, efficiently and patiently make as many revisions as needed. According to Shin (2006) one of the focuses should be on teachers to explore ways to progressively move students towards less dependence on the help of them by teaching them to learn to recognize and correct their own errors. One way in which the teachers can help their students find errors on their own writing is by using self-editing checklist, bearing in mind that not students can correct their own grammatical errors. He indicated that sometimes learners may have internalized an incorrect version of a grammar rule or they simply have not learned the rule in question. In this case a teacher‟s intervention will be required. 40
56. Browne (1999) suggests that extending children‟s knowledge about how to write may also be helpful. Contrary to Donald and Williams-James (1997) problems with structure, organisation and sequence in children‟s writing can be helpful. This can only be done when they are taught about the characteristics and forms of different types of writing and when they are given clear structural guidelines to follow. Planning using sequence of pictures, individual words or captions helps to order children‟s writing. Brainstorming for ideas and recording these provides a support for children when they are thinking about what to include in their writing. He further mentioned that giving children opportunities to rehearse orally what they are going to write helps them to organise and order their thoughts. This can be done with a peer partner or with an adult who can make suggestions about alterations that will result in better writing. However, decisions about the strategies that are used will depend on the child‟s needs, and the support that is given will be differentiated to suit the child‟s interests. Again, Browne (1999) mentioned that punctuation should be taught within the context of children‟s own writing and other encounters with print. To him children should be allowed to experiment with punctuation so that teachers can discuss this with them and help them to refine their understanding. Children can be helped to see this convention in action as the teacher writes beneath the children‟s own writing and discusses how he writes it. Further experiences can be provided through discussions of texts in published books. As the teacher introduces children to the terminology of language, pointing out letters, words and sentences he will be helping children to recognise that words are formed through combining letters and that each word is separated from the next by a space. Discussions about punctuation marks after sharing a story or big book with the class enable the teacher to explain the use of punctuation in a meaningful and visible According to Peters (1985) spelling in English is complicated as a result most writers do not simply „catch‟ spelling accuracy, they need to be taught carefully, systematically and 41
57. sensitively. He emphasised that good teaching does not merely consist of correcting children‟s mistakes but helps them to avoid repeating those mistakes. This involves giving children strategies for producing conventional representations of words and remembering the spelling of frequently used words. Learners are best able to make use of teaching when they appreciate its relevance to their own needs, so children are likely to learn most productively if they are taught to spell the words that they use in their own writing. Teachers need to respond positively to the ideas that are expressed and the spellings that have been attempted before discussing how spelling could be improved. This is in contrast to Shin (2006)‟s argument that teachers concentrate on spelling when faced with unfamiliar content. This suggests that teachers should refrain from concentrating on spelling errors but rather concentrate on the content. Furthermore, when giving help it is important that teachers limit the number of errors they correct and consider when and which words to teach to individuals, groups and classes. As it is emphasized by Robb, Ross & Shortreed (1986) that it may not be worth the instructor‟s time and effort to provide detailed feedback on sentence level grammar and syntax, since improvement can be gained by writing practice alone. However, practice alone may improve fluency, but if errors are not pointed out and corrected, they can become ingrained in student writing. Besides, survey reports in English First Additional Language have indicated that students attend to and appreciate their teachers‟ pointing out of grammar problems says Brice (1995). In support of this claim, Fathman and Whalley (1990), from their research on feedback and revision in an English First Additional Language context, concluded that grammar and content feedback, whether given separately or together, positively affect rewriting. Lastly, grammatical feedback had more effect on error correction than content feedback had on the improvement of Myles (2002) also argued that students come to class both to improve their language proficiency and become more confident in their writing abilities. Writing practice can also 42
58. present diagnostic feedback that helps learners improve their linguistic accuracy at every level of proficiency. Instruction should provide students with ample amounts of language input and instruction, as well as writing experience preferably through the interweaving of writing and reading, referred to as “intertextuality” (Blanton:1999), and feedback to fulfil their goals. As suggested by the Department of Basic Education (2011:6) that “writing is closely linked to reading…” Even though, the Department of Basic Education maintains that “although reading is an important source of input, it is through writing, that writing skills are developed” (pg. 36). According to Myles overt classroom instruction through modelling, is only one part of the teaching process, providing students with feedback on their writing is the other. Essentially, teachers need to consider factors related to language proficiency, second language acquisition, and writing skill development when giving feedback. Specifically, the effectiveness of feedback may depend on the level of students‟ motivation, their current language level, their cognitive style, the clarity of the feedback given, the way the feedback is used, and the attitudes of students towards their teacher and the class (Ferris:1997). Classroom setting, course goals, and grading procedures and standards are also important (Leki: Meanwhile, teachers must be aware of the complexities involved in the revision process and respond to writing so that students can make modifications with confidence and competence. Ideally, learners should be encouraged to analyse and evaluate feedback themselves in order for it to be truly effective. Teacher commentary, student reaction to commentary, and student revisions interact with each other in a formidable way. How teachers intervene in writing instruction, and how English First Additional language writers react to the feedback influences the composing process. Again process models of writing instruction allow students time to reflect and seek input as they reshape their plans, ideas, and language. In classroom practice, the focus is on idea development, clarity, and coherence before identification and grammar correction. Ideally, instruction and response serve to motivate revisions, encourage learning, induce problem-solving and critical thinking, in addition to further writing practice (Cummings:1989). 43
59. According to Wallace, Stariha and Walberg (2004) it appear that computers can be both harmful and helpful in writing and learning to write. They stated that the neat appearance of words in the computer screen may suggest to students that all is well even in the presence of logical, grammatical and stylistic errors. Despite that, computers can make the rearrangement of words, sentences and paragraphs and other revisions far easier. Similarly, some more recent programmes can spot spelling, grammatical mistakes and suggest corrections. One important point highlighted by Lankshear and Snyder (2000) is that writing, in the sense of making language visible always involves the application of technology of some kind, whether quill, pencil, typewriter and each innovation involves new skills applied in new ways. Though this can only be accessible to few schools because having computer laboratories can be costly and would further require more time on teachers as well as learners. On the other hand, Richards (2003) feels that it is important to recognize, however, that computers are no more likely to bring about learning improvements by themselves than other teaching tools such as blackboards and overhead projectors. Warschauer as cited in Richards (2003) further says that technology is not a method but a resource which can support a variety of approaches. Like all tools and methodologies, to him it is the ways they are used that can change student writing behaviours. According to Browne (1999) children do not automatically know about the uses of writing and cannot always see the immediate benefits of becoming a writer. When learners are unable to recognise this significance of what they are being taught they might pay little attention to the teaching they are receiving and engage in learning activities in a desultory way. If this is the reason for some children‟s difficulties the solution is likely to be in the teacher‟s hands. The starting point will be to examine the writing programme for the class. Teachers might want to ask themselves whether the writing activities children undertake are framed in ways that make the uses of writing 44
60. clear. They may ask themselves whether they have an audience, a purpose and an outcome that children can recognise as relevant. They might also want to consider whether writing is given status through being planned to take place over a number of days. For example, do children have the opportunity to: Plan their writing? Students generate ideas by brainstorming and discussion. The teacher remains in the background during this phase, only providing language support if required, so as not inhibiting students in the production of ideas. Draft it? At this stage students extend ideas into note form, and judge quality and usefulness of ideas. Revise what they have written? Students write the first draft. This is done in class. Discuss their writing with others? Drafts are exchanged, so that the students become the readers of each other‟s work. Make decisions about how to present it? Students come up with the strategies that they will use to present their writing and what they will present. Share it permanently through a display, in a book or by giving it to others to read it? Students once again exchange and read each other‟s work and perhaps even write a response or reply. Browne (1999) also added that increasing the number of writing tasks that are planned in this way and including opportunities for children to choose what they want to write about can improve children‟s motivation. For some children the solution to their difficulties with composition may lie in reducing the number of writing tasks and the amount of writing involved in each activity that they are being asked to undertake. Therefore, limiting their writing to a few lines may help them to see that writing is manageable and help them to concentrate on the essential information they wish to include. Responses to some tasks could take the form of a picture, a sequence of 45
61. illustrations, diagrams charts or on tapes. Some writing might be undertaken collaboratively with a partner or an adult. Wallace, Stariha, and Walberg (2004) stipulated that great writers have often had not only their own writing ability but also strong motivation, inspiring teachers, informative literature and direct experiences, as well as exposure to skilful peers and fine writers. This suggest that all students can be encouraged to write as well as they are able. Similarly, teachers may not only conduct skilful lessons but also stimulates all students to become better writers, and identify talented writers for special encouragement and lessons. According to them, to become better writers, students may need to read good even great literature that can serve as a model for their effort. They further suggested that hearing and reading about the lives of great men and women writers and how they developed their talents may stimulate them and direct contacts with professional writers, such as novelists and news reporters, may be inspirational. Meanwhile, having topics that a person cares deeply about, as a consequence of personal interest and investigation, may prove decisive for a fine writing and even lead to a life devoted to writing ( Wallace, Stariha and Walberg:2004). For example, it will be better for teachers to give learners essay topics that they are familiar with so as to arouse their interest. This is also supported by (Shen as cited in Myles: 2004) in his statement that any appropriate instruction must take into consideration familiarity with writing topics and distinct cultural and instructional socialisation. Furthermore, students may be able to communicate more effectively if they are exposed to models of not only standard paragraphs and essays, but also a variety of genres of writing, including flyers, magazine articles, letters and so forth. By examining a variety of written texts, students‟ awareness can be raised with regard to the way words, structures and genre contribute to purposeful writing (Raimes:1991). Again, “through 46
+1-315-636-4485
+91 98151-74050 
