Examining the Impact of Novel Pre-activity Tasks on Macroskills: The Case of Group Discussion on Writing Ability

Hooshang Khoshsima, Esmail Zare-Behtash, Mahboobeh Khosravani

Abstract


The main concern of most researchers in the field of second and foreign language teaching is lessening the problems and eliminating the hinders on the way of learning a language. Writing is considered as one of the most challenging and complicated tasks for learners to perform particularly when they have to write in a second or foreign language. Numerous studies were done on the importance of the pre-writing stage and activities which are directly and indirectly related to the theme of the writing. Accordingly, the main aim of this study was to examine the effects of group discussion as a pre- activity task on writing ability. To this aim, 27 Iranian EFL learners, who were at the same level –intermediate- studying at Shokuh and Safir Institutes, Birjand, Iran were chosen randomly. Two groups- one control and one experimental group- were studied. In control group the conventional method was used in teaching writing, while in experimental group, group discussion pre-activity task was administered. After 16 sessions, the obtained data of the pretests and posttests was analyzed by SPSS software. According to the results, researcher strongly concluded that group discussion has no significant effect on writing ability of Iranian intermediate learners. This study can help teachers and syllabus designers in choosing and applying an effective pre-activity task.

Keywords: writing ability, pre-activity task, group discussion, EFL learners


Full Text:

PDF

References


Blackburn-Brockman, E. (2001). Prewriting, Planning, and Professional Communication. English J, 91(2), 51-53.

Brown, H. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Chastain, K. (1988). Developing second language skills: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Chicago: HBJ.

East, M. (2008). Dictionary use in foreign language writing exams: Impact and implications. International Journal of Lexicography, 22(3), 344-348.

Emdin, C. (2010). Dimensions of communication in urban science education: Interactions and transactions. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. doi: 10.1002/sce.20411

Johnson, D. (2005). Cooperative learning: increasing college faculty instructional productivity. Available Online at: www.ntlf.com/html/lib/bib/92-2dig.htm.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998). Advanced cooperative learning (2nd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book.

Kessler, C. (1992). Cooperative language learning: A teacher resource book. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Larson, B. E. (2000). Classroom discussion: A method of instruction and a curriculum outcome. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 661-677.

Marcum-Dietrich, N. (2010). A scientist: Using science symposiums in the classroom. The Science Teacher, 77(4), 43.

Mitchell, I. (2010). The relationship between teacher behaviours and student talk in promoting quality learning in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 171-186.

Mousapour Negari, G. (2011). A Study on Strategy Instruction and EFL Learners’ Writing Skill. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1(2), 299-307. doi:10.5539/ijel.v1n2p299

Nuttal, C. (1982). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. Oxford: Macmilan Publishers.

Pishghadam, R., & Ghanizadeh, A. (2006). On the Impact of Concept Mapping as a Prewriting Activity on EFL Learners’ Writing Ability. IJAL Journal, 9(2).

Rao, Z. (2007). Training in Brainstorming and Developing Writing Skills. ELT Journal, 61(2), 100-106.

Reid, J. (1993). Teaching ESL Writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Regents Prentice Hall.

Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thorne, S. (1993). Prewriting: A basic skill for basic writers. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 20(1), 31-36.

Tompkins, G. E. (2001). Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Widdowson, H. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six cases studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 165-187.

Zamel, V. (1987). Recent research on writing pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 21(4), 697-715.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2010-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

Advances in Language and Literary Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.