پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 932 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,654 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 12,496,897 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 8,887,429 |
A Comparison of the Effects of Task Repetition and Elicitation Techniques on EFL Learners’ Expository and Descriptive Writing | ||
| Journal of Language Horizons | ||
| مقاله 12، دوره 3، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 5، فروردین 2019، صفحه 243-267 اصل مقاله (1.57 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/lghor.2019.27890.1173 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Zahra Asadi Vahdat1؛ Kobra Tavassoli* 2 | ||
| 1MA Graduate, ELT Department, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran | ||
| 2Assistant Professor, ELT Department, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Due to the significance of the methods and techniques teachers use to engage learners in the learning process, many studies have been conducted on them. Accordingly, this study aimed at finding out the impact of two techniques, task repetition and elicitation, on EFL learners’ expository and descriptive writing ability. For this purpose, seventy 10th-grade female students in four intact classes were selected based on convenience sampling. First, Oxford Placement Test (OPT) was used to check their homogeneity and 56 who were in the acceptable range were selected. The classes were then randomly divided into two experimental groups, task repetition group (TG) and elicitation techniques group (EG), each comprising two classes. To measure the learners’ writing ability, two pretests of expository and descriptive writing were administered to both groups. During the study, TG received expository and descriptive topics to write about and one week later, the same topics were offered to be written about again. In EG, each session the participants received a writing task and the teacher used question and answer about the topics before learners were assigned to write about them. These were done several times during the study in each group. At the end, two posttests of expository and descriptive writing similar to the pretests were administered. The results of repeated-measures two-way ANOVA and MANOVA showed that both task repetition and elicitation techniques had positive effects on expository and descriptive writing of EFL learners; however, TG outperformed EG in their expository writing. Further conclusions are discussed. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Descriptive writing؛ Elicitation techniques؛ Expository writing؛ Task repetition؛ Writing | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| ﺗﺎﺛﯿﺮ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ تکرارﻓﻌﺎﻟﯿﺖ و ﺗﮑﻨﯿﮏﻫﺎی ﻓﺮاﺧﻮاﻧﯽ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎر ﺗﻮﺿﯿﺤﯽ و ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻔﯽ زﺑﺎن‌آﻣﻮزان | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| زهرا اسدی وحدت1؛ کبری توسلی2 | ||
| 1کارشناسی ارشد، گروه آموزش زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد کرج، کرج، ایران | ||
| 2استادیار گروه آموزش زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد کرج، کرج، ایران | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| روش ها و تکنیک‌هایی که توسط معلمان برای ارتقا و مشارکت زبان‌آموزان در فرایند یادگیری زبان استفاده می شود به قدری حائز اهمیت است که تحقیقات گسترده‌ای را به خود معطوف داشته است. بنابراین، تحقیق حاضر با هدف یافتن تاثیر دو روش تکرارکار و تکنیک‌های فراخوانی بر توانایی نوشتار توضیحی و توصیفی زبان‌آموزان انجام شده است. بدین منظور، 70 دانش‌آموز دختر کلاس دهم در چهار کلاس به روش نمونه‌گیری دردسترس انتخاب شدند. ابتدا آزمون OPT برای بررسی همگن بودن شرکت‌کنندگان برگزار گردید و 56 نفر از آنان که نمره‌شان در بازه مورد قبول بود انتخاب شدند. سپس این چهار کلاس بهصورت تصادفی به دو گروه آزمایش تکرارکار و تکنیک‌های فراخوانی تقسیم گردیدند. در ادامه، جهت اندازه‌گیری توانایی نوشتاری زبان‌آموزان، دو پیش‌آزمون نگارش توضیحی و توصیفی در هر دو گروه برگزار گردید. طی این مطالعه، در گروه تکرار فعالیت، به فاصله یک هفته، موضوعات ارائه شده برای نوشتن توضیحی و توصیفی تکرار می‌شد و زبان‌آموزان به نوشتن درباره ی موضوعات تکراری می‌پرداختند. در گروه تکنیک‌های فراخوانی، در هر جلسه به شرکت‌کنندگان موضوعی برای نوشتن ارائه می‌شد که پیش از نوشتن، معلم به سوال و جواب درباره آن موضوع می‌پرداخت. این مراحل چندین بار در هر گروه تکرار شد. سرانجام، دو پس‌آزمون نگارش توضیحی و توصیفی مشابه پیش‌آزمون در هر دو گروه برگزار گردید. نتایج حاصل از تحلیل واریانس دوسویه ی سنجش مکرر و تحلیل واریانس چندمتغیری بر تاثیر مثبت تکرارکار و تکنیک‌های فراخوانی بر توانایی نوشتاری توضیحی و توصیفی هر دو گروه دلالت داشت که البته این پیشرفت در گروه تکرارکار و بخصوص در نگارش توضیحی ایشان مشهودتر بود. نتایج تکمیلی مطرح شده اند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| نوشتار توصیفی, تکنیک‌های فراخوانی, نوشتار توضیحی, تکرارفعالیت, مهارت نوشتن | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Ahmadi, H., Ghaemi, F., & Birjandi, P. (2016). The effect of output-based task repetition on EFL learners’ speech act production. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL), 9(2), 1-32.
Ahmadian, J., & Tavakoli, M. (2011). The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 35-59.
Ahmed, R. Z., & Bidin, S. J. B. (2016). The effect of task-based language teaching on writing skills of EFL learners in Malaysia. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 6, 207-218.
Alsubaie, S. (2015). An analysis of classroom discourse: Elicitation techniques in EFL classrooms. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 3, 29-39.
Ardin, M. (2018). The effect of diagnostic assessment vs. dynamic assessment on EFL learners’ descriptive and narrative writing (Unpublished master’s thesis). Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran.
Baleghizadeh, S., & Asadi, R. (2013). The effect of task repetition and task recycling on EFL learners’ oral performance. Issues in Language Teaching (ILT), 2(2), 137-163.
Baleghizadeh, S., & Derakhshesh, A. (2012). The effect of task repetition and noticing on EFL learners’ oral output. International Journal of Instruction, 5(1), 142-152.
Bozorgian, H., & Kananian, M. (2017). Task repetition on accuracy and fluency: EFL learners’ speaking skill. International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies (AESS) Publications, 6(2), 42-53.
Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (2nd ed.). New York, USA: Pearson Longman.
Brown, J. D., & Bailey, K. M. (1984). A categorical instrument for scoring second language writing skills. Language Learning, 34(4), 21-38.
Burke, L., Poll, G., & Fiene, J. (2017). Response to an expository writing strategy across middle school RtI tiers. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 15(1), 85-101.
Bygate, M. (2006). Areas of research that influence L2 speaking instruction. In E. Uso-Juan & A. Martinez-Flor (Eds.), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four skills (pp. 159-186). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyer.
Bygate, M., & Samuda, V. (2005). Integrative planning through the use of task repetition. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language (pp. 37-77). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.
Doff, A. (1988). Teach English: A training course for teachers, trainer’s handbook. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press (in association with the British Council).
Edwards, L. (2007). Solutions placement test: Elementary to intermediate. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elbow, P. (1988). Writing with power: Techniques for mastering the writing process. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task performance in a second language. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Farahian, M., & Rezaee, M. (2012). A case study of an EFL teacher’s type of questions: An investigation into classroom interaction. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 161-167.
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Fernandez-Garcia, M., & Alvarez-Torres, M. J. (1999). The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49(4), 549-581.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Harlow, England: Pearson Longman.
Hawkes, M. L. (2011). Using task repetition to direct learner attention and focus on form. ELT Journal, 66(3), 327-336.
Hedge, T. (2005). Writing. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Hinton, P. R., Brownlow, C., McMurray, I., & Cozens, B. (2008). SPSS explained. London, England: Routledge.
Iranmehr, A., Salehi, N., & Rezaie, F. (2017). The effect of teaching critical thinking on descriptive and narrative English writing performance of Iranian EFL learners. English Language Studies Letters, 1(1), 1-9.
Kane, T. S. (1988). The new Oxford guide to writing. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
Kang, S. (2017). The effects of task repetition on Korean high school students’ acquisition of formulaic sequences. Studies in English Education, 22(4), 69-101.
LLC Learning Express (2014). 501 writing prompts (2nd ed.). New York, USA: Learning express.
Long, M. H. (1985). A role for instruction in Second Language Acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam, & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77-99). Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters.
Mojavezi, A. (2013). The relationship between task repetition and language proficiency. Applied Research on English Language, 3(1), 29-40.
Muijs, D. (2004). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. London, England: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 279-295.
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Nazemi, M., & Rezvani, E. (2019). Effects of task familiarity and task repetition on Iranian EFL learners’ engagement in L2 oral performance. Contemporary Research in Education and English Language Teaching, 1(1), 45-56.
Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Panavelil, A. (2015). Teaching and learning to write: Using a task-based approach in an EFL class. In R. Al-Mahrooqi, V. Singh Thakur, & A. Roscoe (Eds.), Methodologies for effective writing instruction in EFL and ESL classrooms (pp. 115-129). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Rahman, R., & Ambreen, M. (2018). Concept mapping for improving expository writing in second language. Pakistan Journal of Education, 35(2), 17-36.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (4th ed.). Harlow, England: Longman.
Rubdy, R. (1998). Task. ELT Journal, 52(3), 264-265.
Satiawatia, E. A. (2017). A study on elicitations for students’ talk in English classes: A descriptive study of EFL class on the eighth grades of a junior high school in Ayah, Kebumen (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto. Purwokerto, Indonesia.
Sinaga, M. (2017). The effect of roundtable and clustering teaching techniques and students’ personal traits on students’ achievement in descriptive writing. ALLS, 8(6), 69-75.
Tseng, C. C. (2001). Teaching and grading expository writing. New York, USA: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Uso-Juan, E., Martinez-Flor, A., & Palmer-Silveira, J. C. (2006). Towards acquiring communicative competence through writing. In E. Uso-Juan & A. Martinez-Flor (Eds.), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four skills (pp. 383-400). Berlin, Gemrany: Mouton de Gruyer.
Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3-23.
Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating classroom discourse. London, England: Routledge.
Walsh, S. (2013). Classroom discourse and teacher development. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
William, J. D. (2003). Preparing to teach writing: Research, theory, and practice. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wright, B. M. (2016). Display and referential questions: Effects on student responses. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 15(4), 160-189. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 585 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 562 |
||