MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY -------- ∞0∞-------- PHAM THI THU HA THE IMPACTS OF COLLABORATIVE WRITING ON EFL STUDENTS’ PARAGRAPH WRITING PERFORMANCE MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL HO CHI MINH CITY, 2022 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY -------- ∞0∞-------- PHAM THI THU HA THE IMPACTS OF COLLABORATIVE WRITING ON EFL STUDENTS’ PARAGRAPH WRITING PERFORMANCE Major: Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages Major code: 8 14 01 11 MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL Supervisor: Assoc. NGUYEN THANH TUNG HO CHI MINH CITY, 2022 TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC MỞ CỘNG HÒA XÃ HỘI CHỦ NGHĨA VIỆT NAM THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH Độc lập – Tự do – Hạnh phúc KHOA ĐÀO TẠO SAU ĐẠI HỌC GIẤY XÁC NHẬN Tôi tên là: PHẠM THỊ THU HÀ Ngày sinh: 27/11/1996 Nơi sinh: Bình Thuận Chuyên ngành: Lý luận và phương pháp dạy học bộ môn Tiếng Anh Mã học viên: 1881401110012 Tôi đồng ý cung cấp toàn văn thông tin luận văn tốt nghiệp hợp lệ về bản quyền cho Thư viện trường đại học Mở Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Thư viện trường đại học Mở Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh sẽ kết nối toàn văn thông tin luận án/ luận văn tốt nghiệp vào hệ thống thông tin khoa học của Sở Khoa học và Công nghệ Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Ký tên (Ghi rõ họ và tên) Phạm Thị Thu Hà STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP I certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled “The impacts of collaborative writing on EFL students’ paragraph writing performance” as the statement of requirements for thesis in Master’s Programs at Ho Chi Minh City Open University, issued by the Higher Degree Committee.
Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis does not contain material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma. No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of the thesis. This thesis has not been submitted for any degree in any other tertiary institution. Ho Chi Minh City, November 2022 PHAM THI THU HA i RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS I hereby state that I, Pham Thi Thu Ha, being the candidate for the degree of Master of TESOL, accept the requirements of the University relating to the retention and use of Master’s Theses deposited in the Library.
In terms of these conditions, I agree that the original of my thesis deposited in the Library should be accessible for purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Library for the care, loan or reproduction of theses. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend my special thanks to all the following people for helping me complete this thesis. Firstly, I am deeply grateful for all the help of Assoc. Nguyen Thanh Tung, a senior lecturer of the Department of English at Ho Chi Minh City University of Education.
Without his extremely tremendous support, ultra–careful revision as well as thoroughly critical comments in a really intensive period of time, my thesis would not have been finalized. I really learned from my devoted supervisor a lot, especially his research methodology. I also would like to acknowledge all the staff in the School of Graduate Studies, particularly Dr. Nguyen Thi Xuan Lan and Prof.
Nguyen Minh Ha, as well as those in the Office of Collaboration Affairs and Research Management for their constant assistance during my absence in work. In addition, my gratitude is reserved for all the teachers and eighty students of the two classes at Tran Hung Dao High school for the gifted who enthusiastically joined my research. Finally, my parents deserve my most special thanks for their unlimited support whenever I am almost giving up. iii ABSTRACT Collaborative writing is widely researched for its effects on students’ writing accuracy; however, very few previous research studies were conducted in the teaching and learning context of Vietnam.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to fill these gaps. Eighty students at a high school in Phan Thiet city, Vietnam, participated in the study. One difference in the treatment between the two groups was the composing stage. Forty students from the control group composed essays individually after they worked together for idea development to make an outline, whereas forty students from the experimental group composed essays collaboratively.
Data collection was from students’ pretests, posttests of both individually and collaboratively written papers, and from the questionnaire. The study reveals that collaborative writing had great effects on students’ writing performance in their papers. Moreover, the students had positive attitudes towards collaborative writing so that teachers could employ to their writing classrooms if they wish to. Keywords: paragraph writing, CW, performance, attitudes iv TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP.
i RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS .v LIST OF TABLES. vii LIST OF FIGURES. vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.
Background to the study. Statement of the problem. Research aims and research questions. Significance of the study.
Overview of thesis chapters. 6 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW. Definitions of collaborative writing. Features of collaborative writing.
Models of collaborative writing. Procedures for applying collaborative writing into teaching and learning paragraph writing .21 CHAPTER 3: DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY. Research sites and participants. Research design and methodology.
Validity and reliability. 38 CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS. Impacts of using collaborative writing. Challenges of using collaborative writing.
Students’ learning outcomes. Improvement of students’ paragraph writing performances. Students’ attitudes towards collaborative writing. 54 vi CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
Main conclusions of the study. Evaluation of research methodology. Implications for teachers. Implications for students.
Recommendations for further research .70 Appendix 1: Lesson plan .70 Appendix 2: Procedure of the intervention .77 Appendix 3: Students’ paragraph writing performance before the study .78 Appendix 4: Students’ paragraph writing performance after the study .79 Appendix 5: Scoring rubric for written work .89 Appendix 9: Raw calculations .86 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Distributions of participants in the study .2: Quasi–experimental design of the pretest and posttest.4: Summary of the questionnaire .5: Key to understanding the average .6: Inter–rater reliability coefficient on the test scores .1: EFL students’ pretest performance between the two groups.2: EFL students’ pretest performance on five components of writing .3: EFL students’ posttest performance between two groups .4: EFL students’ posttest performance on five components of writing .6: EFL students’ enjoyment of CW .9: EFL students’ enjoyment of writing activities using CW .7: Impacts of using CW in learning English writing .8: Impacts of using CW in learning English writing .9: Challenges of using CW in learning English writing .10: Challenges of using CW in learning English writing .11: EFL students’ learning outcomes of using CW in learning English .12: EFL students’ learning outcomes of using CW in learning English .13: Future demands for CW to learn English writing .14: Students’ expectations of using CW in learning English writing. 49 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Model of teaching CW .1: Specific components of writing. 33 ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS L1 First language L2 Second language EFL English as a foreign language EG Experimental group ESL English as a second language IELTS International English Language Testing System CG Control group CW Collaborative writing IW Individual writing VSTEP Vietnamese standardized test of English proficiency CEFR Common European framework of reference MoET Ministry of Education and Training SPSS Statistical package for the social sciences x CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION This chapter comprises five main sections. The first section presents the rationale underlying the study.
It describes the background of the study and provides the context that raises the research issue. The sequential sections focus on research aims, research questions, and significance of the study, followed by the description of the organization of the study. Background to the study In the domain of foreign language learning, to be competent in English, learners need to master four skills, namely reading, listening, speaking, and writing. Among the four skills, writing is the most vital but difficult skill for L2 learners to acquire (Kellogg, 2001; Lin & Maarof, 2013; Renandya & Richards, 2002).
In addition, writing is an integrative ability and a significant, productive, and complex learning process (Hussin et al. By definition, writing is a productive learning process from the generation of ideas and gathering required data to the publication of the finalized text. It is a means of communicating and a major cognitive challenge and thinking process (Kellogg, 2001) because when someone starts to write, their thinking and act of writing are inseparable. After all, it is a perceptible means of communication that appears in a written form.
According to Uusen (2006), writing is a skill that integrates knowledge and skill. It is an action that contains language, thought, experience, feelings, emotions, mechanical actions, and different strategies. Writing is an activity of expressing, developing, and organizing ideas into written form. There are two aspects that need to be considered by the writer.
First, the writing process relates to pre–writing, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing (Fachrurrazy, 2011). Second, micro and macro skills of writing, such as the ability to use word diction, grammar, and writing mechanics including the use of capital letters, spelling, and punctuation (Brown & Lee, 2015). According to Sapkota (2013), writing has the function to present a language to convey some meaning, the reader can grasp the information. Additionally, Weigle (2002) stated that there are several cognitive and metacognitive activities like brainstorming, planning, outlining, organizing, drafting, and revising involved in writing making it a complicated skill to master.
Furthermore, 1 writing is a powerful tool that needs a variety of skills. Harklau (2002) regarded the role of writing as an instrument for communication and explained its key role in understanding how second language (L2) acquisition takes place in the classroom. It means that writing is a way to understand how they learn a foreign language to write e– mails, lists, notes, covering letters, reports, curriculums, assignments, and essays. All of these writing tasks have a communicative purpose and a target audience.
Moreover, writing is essential because it helps to express one’s personality, foster communication, develop thinking skills, make logical and persuasive arguments, give a person a chance to later reflect on his/her ideas and re–evaluate them, provide and receive feedback, and prepare for school and employment (Chappell, 2011). As Klimova (2012) said, writing is important because it is extensively used in higher education and the workplace. If students do not know how to express themselves in writing, they will not be able to communicate well with professors, employers, or peers. All in all, it is necessary to master writing skills.
With regards to the importance of writing, higher Education students in Vietnam are increasingly expected to write in English for university and professional purposes (Evans, 2019). After graduation, high school learners are expected to meet the third level (B1) in the Vietnamese standardized test of English proficiency (VSTEP) consisting of six levels that are compatible with the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training, 2008) and university students in non–Anglophone contexts are increasingly required to graduate with a level of English proficiency (Lillis and Curry, 2006, 2010; Nunan, 2003). Vietnamese students are now obliged to learn four English skills, one of which is writing, at all levels of education (Harman et al. In 2008, the Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training (MoET) initiated ‘Decision 1400’, or ‘Project 2020’ to improve foreign language teaching across Vietnam so all learners can use English competently in their work and communications by 2020.
MOET had prioritized the need for better training for English language teachers (Dang et al., 2013, Manh et al.