3. Understanding Issues in Writing Skills... by Zakiya Ansari & T. Narayana

Introduction

Technological advancements in each and every sphere of life have become so common that their absorption into the system passes by without much notice. The introduction of technology in the EFL classroom has yielded effective teaching pedagogy, more student participation and better results. Here, in this Paper, we will be discussing technology which can be infused with the Language teaching process, wherein the focus will be on Writing skills. Studies have consistently shown that students have positive attitudes about computer technology being used in the classroom and that such technology does have a positive impact (Warden, 1995; Chen, 1988; Nash et al., 1989; Brady, 1990; Herrmann, 1987; Johnson, 1988; Phinney & Mathis, 1988).

Background

Computers have had their pervasive effect tangible in the EFL classroom. The current picture of ELT with issues in writing skills shows difficulty in unsuitable curriculum design, lack of familiarity with computer usage, anxiety associated with learners of writing skills, etc. In this backdrop, I intend to introduce technology with innovative designs, to identify the problem areas, to improve writing skills by examining lexicon, sentence structure, ingenuity of ideas, narrative/descriptive quality, clarity etc.

Environment

Purpose

I have integrated the Writing skills proposed model with the ‘Conceptual structural equation model’ (Li-An-Ho, 2009), which focuses on the learner through all its components of eLSQ, TR, LB and LO. According to Weinstein and Mayer (1986)’learning strategies (LS) are “behaviors and thoughts that a learner engages in during learning’, which are ‘intended to influence the learner’s encoding process.”(pg. 315).

Method

In order to put forward this model, I had gone through literature review sessions, for data and backup information.

Discussion

Since the aim of this procedure is effective writing skills in ELT, we shall be looking into the three areas which provide us scope for improvement, viz, improvement in the learning and teaching strategies, and upgrading relevant evaluation techniques.

Writing assignments can be evaluated on a scale, with clear directions on the constructs to be measured. Writing essays can be done in the usual style; or paraphrasing Demorah Hayes, ‘analyze assignment-plan essay-write drafts-revise writing-edit product-publish product.’

Stage 4: Final Size-up

This stage is at the end of the last (fourth) month of the semester. Also this procedure helps the Instructor to gauge how far his/her teaching pedagogy has been effective. It also gives him the opportunity to relook areas of instructional activity, create a more conducive classroom environment, increase user-friendly computer systems, revise subject content etc.

Conceptual Structural Equation Model:

This model (Li-An-Ho ,Roslyn Heights, 2009), was the result of a study made in Taiwan where the objective was to find out the impact of external and internal factors (where e-learning was implemented in junior high schools) on the learners’ online learning behavior, which consequently affects their learning outcome. Thus, this model investigates the relationships among e-Learning system quality (eLSQ), technology readiness (TR), learning behavior (LB), and learning outcome (LO). It came up with results revealing

1) Both eLSQ and TR have a direct and significant impact on LB.

eLSQ +TR -------------> LB

2) It further goes on to state that eLSQ and TR influence LO indirectly through LB.

3) Also, LB has a direct and positive impact on LO.

LB -----------> LO

4) The final equation stands thus:

Integrating this model with my proposed model of evaluating writing (with the four stages):

Figure 1.3 Ways in which Writing tasks can be administered

Proposition of the Model.

In this proposed model there are four stages (Figure 1.4) through which we can identify learner weaknesses and strengths, conduct effective classroom sessions and evaluate with technological aid. I have also proved it by integrating it with the Conceptual structural equation model (Li-An-Ho. Roslyn Heights) , which will be discussed in detail later on in the Paper.

Figure 1.5 Integrated Proposed Writing Model

Since this Paper deals with e-learning and technological aids in identifying difficulties and helping learners improve their writing skills, I have tried to prove that by the time, the learner writes the Final Size Up test ( an evident eLSQ and TR(WS)), there is bound to be some progress in his writing abilities ( LB is formed) , which manifest themselves in ‘LO’(Learner Outcome). Drawing a comparison with my proposed model, it can be explained thus; initially, the eLSQ would be the same; TR, here, in this Paper, would be the readiness of working with the system in trying to improve his writing abilities , LB would be the gradual improvement in his writing skills i.e. his ability to analyze, frame correct sentences, the changes in his thinking pattern , expression of ideas, understanding of texts, cogent thinking, etc. thereby taking him to higher standards with his writing ability and eventually shaping his learning behavior; and lastly LO, which would be the result of his Final Size Up test. In other words, LO would be the final quality of progress made in his writing skills after a semester-long session. Thus eLSQ and TR (WS) create a pattern of LB in the learner. This LB further has an impact on the LO. The equation, after integrating the Proposed Writing Model with the Conceptual structural equation model would be thus:

Figure 1.4 Proposed Writing Model

• • Stage 1: Identify me (diagnostic test is given)

  • Stage 2: Tune-up (practice sessions)

  • Stage 3: Appraise-Apprise (review, feedback sessions)

  • Stage 4: Final Size-up (final test is administered)

Description of the model:

Stage 1: Identify Me

The objective of this stage is to assess the English language writing skills of the new students at the start of the academic year, and identify their strengths and weaknesses. This will help the Instructor with his instructional plans, teaching pedagogy, grouping level, time allocation for chapters etc. Since instruction is useful only when it moves ahead of development (John Schweieter, 2010), the students are briefed about the constructs in writing they will be assessed on. These constructs which have been arrived upon after comparing various conceptual models of writing (Isaacson, 1984) are five in number. With a slight variation I have represented them as Sentence construction, Vocabulary, Fluency and Mechanics of grammar.

Stage 2: Tune-up

This stage has classroom practice, group discussions and individual tasks (computer-aided). The instructor alternates the kind of activity, regularly monitors the progress made by the student and helps the learner internalize the concepts. Thus, over a period of one month, planned repetitive activity occurs, with alternating concepts and topics. This approach is supported by John W.Schweieter, who feels that subsequent corrections on the same piece of writing show greater improvement in writing tasks. At the end of the month, the learner attempts a computer test individually. This happens for three months (the three sets of dotted lines in the figure.

Stage 3: Appraise-Apprise

Appraise (to assess/ evaluate) and apprise (to inform) happens at the end of every month’s classroom practice. This is a one-one session where the Instructor and learner sit, review and discuss the suggested changes. The feedback helps the learner to rethink, reinvigorate and incorporate the necessary changes. This pedagogy is supported by the notion that feedback can help writing improve with additional revisions of the same piece of writing ( see also Chaudron,1984;Connor and Asenavage, 1994;Hedgcock and Lefkowitz ,1992;Mendonca and Johnson,1994;Nelson & Murphy,1993;Villamil & de Guerrero,1996,1998).This happens in a cyclic manner, till the end of the fourth month, i.e. the end of the semester. Thus, at the end of three months, the student will have had three appraisals, thereby bringing about notable progress in his writing skills.

The Integrated Proposed Writing Model - Explanation

Stage 1. Identify me

Here, the presence of eLSQ in the learner is identified, besides how willing he is to use technology for his writing tasks, TR (WS).

Stage2. Tune up

With his writing skills being constantly honed, either with the help of the system or with the assistance of the Instructor, there are noticeable trends in eLSQ and TR (WS) developing, gradually.

Stage 3. Appraise-Apprise

The movement to the third stage and then again to the second stage which happens at recorded intervals, facilitates learning behavior (LB) to be formed, improved and again improved further. This LB is nothing but the changes in the ability of the learner with regard to better expression of ideas, critical thinking, sentence formation (with comparative ease), self-evaluation, appropriateness of ideas, logical thinking, etc. Thus with three monthly tests, at the end of the fourth (last) month, the LB would have become distinctly evident in the learner. Thus

eLSQ +TR(WS) ---------------> LB ( gradual forming

of a moldable LB )

Stage 4. Final Size Up

In the final stage, i.e. stage 4, which happens at the end of the semester, the effect of practice sessions in class, individual study, technology-friendly behavior etc. will have manifested themselves in measurable proportion. Thus, with a distinct and pronounced learning behavior, the final test shows the learner outcome (LO). Thus

eLSQ + TR (WS) ---------> LB -------> LO

(Improved (Effectively

TR & WS) improved

TR & WS)

Results

The students could be graded thus –weak, average, good and outstanding. Since this module is not evaluated by the system, the teacher gives his remarks, and suggests areas for improvement.

Conclusions and Further Research

ELT infused with technology is a realm gaining momentum, with newer and better forms of technology emerging as frequently as one can think of. ‘Focused work needs to be undertaken if sophisticated software for language learning and assessment is to become a reality.’(Carol Chapelle). There is a wider coverage of subject content for both classroom study and also for evaluation. It saves a lot of time during evaluation, which could be put to good use in classroom practice sessions. Human error, if any, could be avoided too.

Also, the computer is unable to give feedback on the writing abilities of the student and fails to give recommendatory measures to improve. If made possible, this would ameliorate writing skills and save further time, which could be used productively elsewhere. Computers and computer-aided education have acted as catalysts in the pursuit of education and more so, to ELT. Let us hope that they continue their beneficial role in ameliorating educational standards.