NGUYEN THI NHUNG

Dai Nam University - Hanoi

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i5-25

Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT

The primary purpose of the study was to measure the use of writing strategies of participants. The secondary purpose aims at finding out strategies mostly used by high level of proficiency students compared those of level of proficiency at different stages of writing, namely before, during and after the writing assignment. The study was conducted among 137 English majored students. The findings reveal that before writing high proficiency students used strategies more often than the other two groups, namely medium and low levels of proficiency. The mean of before writing strategies uses were M=3.48; M=2.30; M=1.98 respectively. The mean of during writing strategies uses were M=3.36; M=3.03; M=2.57 respectively. The mean of after writing strategies uses were M=3.55; M=1.99; M=2.06 respectively. Among the group of Before Writing Strategy (BWS), Students with high proficiency level often discuss what they were going to write with other students or with teacher before they write (M=3.86). The figure for low level of proficiency students was M=1.50. The high level students also do extra study outside the classroom to improve his/her writing (M=3.86), while the low level students was M= 1.32. The high level students reported that they think of the relationships between what they already know and new things that they learn (M=3.71). The use of this strategy for low level students were only M=1.68. Among the group of During Writing Strategy (DWS), students with low proficiency use native language first and then translate it into English most often (M= 3.86). The high proficiency students did not use this strategy while writing (M=1.57). The low proficiency students also reported that they used dictionary a lot when they write (M=3.25), the figure for high proficiency students was only M=1.29). Another strategy that was employed by most low level students was “I use a grammar book to check things I am not sure about when I write” (M=3.97) while the high level students used this strategy at low frequency (M= 1.29). Among the group of After Writing Strategy (AWS), students with high proficiency reported that they often go back to his/her writing to edit the grammar, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation. (M=3.81) compared with M=2.80 of low proficiency students. High proficiency students also often record the types of errors he/she has made so he/she does not keep making the same (M=3.80), while the figure for low proficiency students were M= 1.20.

KEYWORDS:

writing strategies, before writing strategies, during writing strategies, after writing strategies

REFERENCES

1) Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

2) Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd edition). Addison Wesley Longman.

3) Carroll, L. A. (2002). Rehearsing new roles: How college students develop as writers. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

4) Chamot, A. (1999). Children's learning strategies in language immersion classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 319-339.

5) Chamot, A. (2005). Language learning strategy instruction: Current issues and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112-130.

6) Cohen, A. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.

7) Dörnyei, Z. and Skehan, P. (2003) Individual differences in second language learning. In C. Doughty and M. Long (eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell, 589–630

8) Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

9) Flower, L., and Hayes, J. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–87.

10) Gregrsent, T. (2001). Can foreign language learning strategies turn into crutches? A pilot study on the use of strategies by successful and unsuccessful language learners. Revista Signos, 34(49), 101-111.

11) Griffiths, C. (2013). The strategy factor in successful language learning. Multilingual Matters.

12) Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

13) Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. Essex: Pearson Education.

14) Hofstee, E. (2006). Constructing a Good Dissertation: A Practical Guide to Finishing a Masters, MBA or PhD on Schedule. Johannesburg, South Africa: EPE.

15) Horowitz, D. (1986). What Professors Actually Require: Academic Tasks for the ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 445-462.

16) Kim, H. (2020). Profiles of undergraduate student writers: Differences in writing strategy and impacts on text quality. Learning and Individual Differences, 78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101823

17) Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. New Haven: Yale University Press.

18) Lavelle, E. & Bushrow, K. 2007. Writing Approaches of Graduate Students. Educational Psychology, 27(6), 807-822.

19) Liebman-Kleine, J. (1986). Two Commentaries on Daniel M. Horowitz’s “Process, Not Product: Less Than Meets the Eye”: In Defense of Teaching Process in ESL Composition. TESOL Quarterly, 20(4), 783-788. 20) Lillis, T. (1999). Whose Common Sense? In Jones, C., Turner, J., & Street, B.V. (eds). Students’ Writing in the University, 127-147. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.

21) Matsuda, P. K. (2003). Second language writing in the twentieth century: A situated historical perspective. In Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 15–34). Cambridge University Press.

22) Mastan, M. E. B., Maarof, N., & Embi, M. A. (2017). The Effect of Writing Strategy Instruction on ESL Intermediate Proficiency Learners’ Writing Performance. Journal of Educational Research and Review, 5(5), 71–78.

23) Murat. H. (2000). Language learning strategies in foreign language learning and teaching. The Internet TESL Journal, 3(8), http://iteslj.org/Articles/Hismanoglu-Strategies.html retrieved on 8/12/2016.

24) Oxford, R. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: Concepts and relationships. IRAL, 41(1), 271-278.

25) Oxford, R. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Routledge.

26) Oxford, R. (2017). Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-Regulation in Context (2nd edition). Routledge.

27) Raoofi, S., Binandeh, M., & Rahmani, S. (2017). An Investigation into Writing Strategies and Writing Proficiency of University Students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8, 191. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0801.24

28) Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9(1), 41–51.

29) Skehan, P. (2003). Individual Differences in Second Language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.

30) Soiferman, L. K. (2012). “University and high school are just very different”: Student perceptions of their respective writing environments in high school and first-year university (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca

31) Spack, R. 1988. Initiating ESL Students into the Academic Discourse Community: How Far Should We Go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29-51

32) Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

33) Thaiss, C. & Zawacki, T. (2006). Engaged Writers, Dynamic Disciplines: Research on the Academic Writing Life. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, Heinemann.

34) Wenden, A.L. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ; London: Prentice Hall.

35) Williams, M. & Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

36) Winne, P. (1995) Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30, 173–187.

37) Xia, C. (2011). Learners’ Strategies in English Writing. Sino-US English Teaching, 8(4), 221-226.

VOlUME 06 ISSUE 05 MAY 2023