Collaborative writing and process writing approach: The effect and students perception

Winarti; Bambang Yudi  Cahyono

doi:10.21070/jees.v5i2.773

(1) * Winarti Universitas Negeri Malang
Indonesia
(2) Bambang Yudi Cahyono Universitas Negeri Malang
Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v5i2.773

Abstract

Over the last few years, the researchers and practitioners have acknowledged the potential benefits attained from collaborative writing activity which was based on the well- known theories of social constructivist and output hypothesis. Grounding from these theories, this study examined the collaborative writing combined with writing process approach to find out the effect of the task on students' ability in writing an explanation essay and students perception about the task. Two intact classes involving 30 students in each class participated in this study. One class as the experimental group completed the writing task using process writing in pairs while the other class completed the task individually. The students in experimental group were given a questionnaire right after the treatment to pool their views on the task. Post-test by administering the writing test was conducted to see the effect of the treatment. Data analysis revealed that students employing collaborative writing using process writing had better writing ability than students working individually. It was also found that most students felt that they gained many benefits from doing collaborative writing. These findings suggested that collaborative writing combined with process writing can be implemented in EFL writing pedagogy to improve students' writing ability.

HIGHLIGHTS

1. Collaborative writing has the positive effect on the overall writing ability and on each element of writing skill.
2. Collaborative writing not only encouraged the students to share the knowledge they had to other members but also it gave them remarkable input they needed in improving the
writing skill.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Winarti, Universitas Negeri Malang

Winarti received her undergraduate degree in English Language Teaching and English
Literature in 2009 at Universitas Negeri Malang. In 2010, she continued her study at Graduate
Program in English Language Teaching at Universitas Negeri Malang and graduated in 2012.
She is pursuing her Doctorate Degree in English Language Teaching at the same university. Now
she is active as an ESP lecturer and English trainer in Language Center at Universitas Islam
Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang, Indonesia. She has some experiences in presenting
papers for national and international conferences and writing some modules for English for
Specific Purposes (ESP). Her research interest is teaching writing and developing materials for
English Specific Purposes.

Bambang Yudi Cahyono, Universitas Negeri Malang

Prof. BambangYudi Cahyono, P.hD. earned his undergraduate and graduate degrees in English Language Teaching from the Institute of Teacher Training and Education at Malang (now Universitas Negeri Malang), Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics from the TESL Centre, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada (2000), and Ph.D from the Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics of the University of Melbourne, Australia (2006). In 2007, he was awarded Professorship in Applied Linguistics at Universitas Negeri Malang, East Java, Indonesia. He is actively involved in professional development programs for English language teachers in Indonesia through the “ELT Indonesia”net-work.

References

Akinwamide, T. K. (2012). The influence of Process Approach on English as second language Students’ performances in essay writing. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n3p16 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n3p16

Alodwan, T. A; Ibnian, S. S. (2014). The Effect of Using the Process Approach to Writing on Developing University Students’ Essay Writing Skills in EFL Dr. Talal Abd Alhameed Alodwan 1 and Dr. Salem Saleh Khalaf Ibnian 2. International Journal of Linguistic and Communication, 2(2), 147–163.

Baleghizadeh, S. (2009). The effect of pair work on a word-building task. ELT Journal, 64(4), 405–413. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp097 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp097

Bayat, N. (2014). Sürece dayali{dotless} yazma yaklaşi{dotless}mi{dotless}ni{dotless}n yazma başari{dotless}si{dotless} ve kaygi{dotless}si{dotless} üstündeki etkisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 14(3), 1123–1141. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.3.1720 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.3.1720

Chen, R., & Hird, B. (2006). Group work in the Efl classroom in China: A closer look. RELC Journal, 37(1), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206063476 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206063476

Faraj, A. K. A. (2015). Scaffolding EFL Students ’ Writing through the Writing Process Approach. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(13), 131–142.

Fernández Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(1), 40–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.002

Fung, Y. M. (2010). Collaborative writing features. RELC Journal, 41(1), 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688210362610 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688210362610

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of Language Teaching. Longman.

Hyland, K. (2019). Second Language Writing. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Prentice Hall.

Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012

Lamminpää, J., & Vesterinen, V. M. (2018). The use of humour during a collaborative inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 40(14), 1718–1735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1508926 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1508926

Mirzaei, A., & Eslami, Z. R. (2015). ZPD-activated languaging and collaborative L2 writing. Educational Psychology, 35(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.814198 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.814198

Nassaji, H., & Tian, J. (2010). Collaborative and individual output tasks and their effects on learning English phrasal verbs. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 397–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375364 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375364

Näykki, P., Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., & Järvenoja, H. (2014). Socio-emotional conflict in collaborative learning-A process-oriented case study in a higher education context. International Journal of Educational Research, 68, 1– DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.07.001

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.07.001

Neumann, H., & McDonough, K. (2015). Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 84–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.009

Pour-Mohammadi, M., Abidin, M. J. Z., & Fong, C. L. (2012). The effect of process writing practice on the writing quality of form one students: A case study. Asian Social Science, 8(3), 88–99. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v8n3p88 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v8n3p88

Rusinovci, X. (2015). Teaching Writing Through Process-Genre Based Approach. US-China Education Review A, 5(10), 699–705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-623X/2015.10A.006

Saunders, W. M. (1989). Collaborative writing tasks and peer interaction. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90019-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90019-0

Shehadeh, A. (2011). Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(4), 286–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.010

Storch, N. (2002). Relationships formed in dyadic interaction and opportunity for learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3–4), 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00007-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00007-7

Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002

Storch, N. (2007). Investigating the merits of pair work on a text editing task in ESL classes. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807074600 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807074600

Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2013). Pairing learners in pair work activity. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812457530 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812457530

Swain, M. (1995). Three Functions of Output in Second Language Learning. In B. Seidlhofer (Ed.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford university Press.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99–118). longman.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes.

Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880607074599 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880607074599

Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104670 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104670