The Effect of Writing Task and Task Conditions on Colombian EFL Learners’ Language Use

McDonough, Kim; Fuentes, CÃ©sar GarcÃ­a

doi:10.18806/tesl.v32i2.1208

Cited by 36 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the second hypothesis was accepted. This result agrees with the results of some studies which found that CBCW yielded the production of better quality texts (e.g., Abrams, 2019;Al-Shumaimeri, 2011;Arslan & Sahin-Kizil, 2010;Bailey & Judd, 2018;Beltrán, 2010;Daskalogiannaki, 2012;Dobao, 2012;Doult & Walker, 2014;Kessler & Bikowski, 2010;Mak & Coniam, 2008;McDonough & García-Fuentes, 2015;Mills & Exley, 2014;Myers, 2014;Shukor & Noordin, 2014;Strobl, 2014;Togatorop, 2015;Villarreal & Gil-Sarratea, 2019;Wichadee, 2011;Yeh, 2014;.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Some studies found a positive effect for CBCW on writing quantity (e.g., Daskalogiannaki, 2012;Doult & Walker, 2014;Mak & Coniam, 2008;Mills & Exley, 2014;Myers, 2014;Storch, 2011;Yim, Wang, Olson, Vu, & Warschauer, 2017) and quality (e.g., Abrams, 2019;Al-Shumaimeri, 2011;Arslan & Sahin-Kizil, 2010;Bailey & Judd, 2018;Beltrán, 2010;Daskalogiannaki, 2012;Dobao, 2012;Doult & Walker, 2014;Kessler & Bikowski, 2010;Mak & Coniam, 2008;McDonough & García-Fuentes, 2015;Myers, 2014;Shukor & Noordin, 2014;Strobl, 2014;Togatorop, 2015;Villarreal & Gil-Sarratea, 2019;Wichadee, 2011;Yeh, 2014;. Therefore, the researcher decided to investigate the effect of CBCW on both the quantity and quality of EFL students' writing.…”

Section: Cbcw and Writing Quantity And Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cloud-Based Collaborative Writing to Develop EFL Students’ Writing Quantity and Quality

Ahmad¹

2020

IES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study has devoted itself to examining the effect of using cloud-based collaborative writing on EFL students' writing quantity and quality. Twenty-one EFL students studying at Jubail College of Education, IAU University participated in the study. They were pretested in writing quantity and quality before the treatment then they practiced cloud-based collaborative writing for a whole semester before being posttested in both measures. Results from non-parametric Wilcoxon Signed Ranks revealed no significant difference between the pretest and the posttest regarding writing quantity whereas it revealed a significant difference with regard to writing quality. It was concluded that cloud-based collaborative writing can be used to improve the quality of essays written by EFL students. Recommendations and research suggestions were introduced.Through the researcher's experience as an associate professor of TEFL at Jubail College of Education, IAU University, she noticed that writing is indeed a problematic area for most EFL students and that most students get low grades in their writing exams. Furthermore, she administered a writing test to a group of these students. Through analyzing their answers, the researcher found that they wrote insufficiently and she discovered that they committed many errors in coherence, grammar, spelling, structure, word choice, punctuation, phoneme clusters, and use of prefixes and suffixes. Therefore, the need arose to search for a solution for Saudi EFL students' inability to write effectively regarding both quantity and quality. Based on the researcher's search for effective strategies that can improve EFL writing quantity and quality, cloud-based collaborative writing seemed as a promising one.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Cbcw and Writing Quantity And Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Cloud-Based Collaborative Writing to Develop EFL Students’ Writing Quantity and Quality

Ahmad¹

2020

IES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results are also in line with Williams' (2012) claim that writing tasks can push learners to evaluate and analyze their linguistic knowledge and hence improve their L2 vocabulary knowledge. Therefore, it can be concluded that writing tasks can reinforce and encourage EFL learners to extend their knowledge of learning new lexical items (McDonough & Fuentes, 2015;Zou, 2017). In the delayed productive test, the paragraph writing task was also superior to other tasks in the retention of the target words.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Probing the Effects of Task Types on EFL Learners’ Receptive and Productive Vocabulary Knowledge: The Case of Involvement Load Hypothesis

Tahmasbi

Farvardin

2017

Sage Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effects of task types on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners' receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge. To this end, 130 (70 female and 60 male) EFL learners were randomly assigned to one of six tasks of learning 30 target words. The design of the tasks was based on the involvement load hypothesis (ILH) arguing that learning of unfamiliar words to be contingent on the amount of task induced involvement. The components of involvement in ILH include need (N), search (S), and evaluation (E). In this study, the tasks induced the same or different involvement loads regarding the presence and strength of each component: paragraph writing (+N, +S, ++E), sentence writing (+N, +S, +E), combining (+N, -S, +E), fill in the blank (+N, -S, +E), translation (+N, -S, +E), and control (-N, -S, -E). After the last treatment session, both receptive and productive knowledge of the target words were measured. Moreover, a delayed posttest was administered 1 month later. The results revealed that all output tasks were more effective than the control task in enhancing the participants' receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge. Moreover, paragraph writing task was found to be the most effective task.

show abstract

“…Research on collaborative writing in the last decade and a few years before have covered some of the focuses: collaborative writing features (Storch, 2002;Watanabe & Swain, 2007;Yong, 2010), traditional face-to-face collaborative writing and the comparison of sub focuses such as gender, proficiency, EFL and ESL (Azkarai, 2015;Biria & Jafari, 2013;Esquinca, 2011;Jafari & Ansari, 2012;Storch, 2007;Thomas, 2014), comparing group, pair, and individual work (Dobao, 2012;Hunzer, 2011;McDonough & Fuentes, 2015), relationship between collaboration and L2 acquisition (Nassaji & Tian, 2010), collaborative writing processes (Storch, 2011) and online (computer-assisted) collaborative writing (Choi, 2014;Lee & Wang, 2013;Limbu & Markauskaite, 2015;Musk, 2016;Suwantarathip & Wichadee, 2014;Wichadee, 2013;Yeh et al, 2011). However, the verbal interaction aspects that featured collaborative writing have become the focus of research for years.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaction in collaborative writing between international and domestic students in an Indonesian university

Rahayu

2020

SiELE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research investigates verbal interaction in collaborative writing between students from two countries with different L1 when writing an academic essay in a foreign language writing class. Eight students from Indonesia and China participated, and were divided into Indonesian-Indonesian pairs and Indonesian-Chinese pairs. Using the method of qualitative content analysis, the transcripts from their communication were coded inductively and then categorized. The findings denote that there are three categories in their spoken interaction: what to write (ideas), where to write (structural organization), and how to write (language-related). Similarly, all pairs focused their discussions on ‘what to write’ (ideas to be written in the essays). However, Indonesian-Indonesian pairs also discussed ‘the language-related aspects’ mostly about lexical choice and the meaning, more than the mixed pairs. The Indonesian-Chinese pairs conversed, in most of their time, about the content through sharing, explaining, and negotiating their ideas. As the implication, in order to produce an essay with the same length and type, the mixed pairs executed more time in their spoken interaction.

show abstract

The Effect of Writing Task and Task Conditions on Colombian EFL Learners’ Language Use

Cited by 36 publications

References 23 publications

Cloud-Based Collaborative Writing to Develop EFL Students’ Writing Quantity and Quality

Cloud-Based Collaborative Writing to Develop EFL Students’ Writing Quantity and Quality

Probing the Effects of Task Types on EFL Learners’ Receptive and Productive Vocabulary Knowledge: The Case of Involvement Load Hypothesis

Interaction in collaborative writing between international and domestic students in an Indonesian university

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About