通过实施支架策略教学提高英语语言学生的写作水平

IF 4.9 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Seyidu Kemal Hassen, Ebabu Tefera Adugna, Yenus Nurie Bogale
{"title":"通过实施支架策略教学提高英语语言学生的写作水平","authors":"Seyidu Kemal Hassen,&nbsp;Ebabu Tefera Adugna,&nbsp;Yenus Nurie Bogale","doi":"10.1016/j.system.2024.103439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper examined the effects of scaffolding strategies instruction on EFL students' writing achievement, and its consistency in writing sub-skills. The study followed a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design, and data were collected from 48 students in each comparison and experimental group. Results from paired-samples <em>t</em>-test confirmed a significant writing achievement score difference between the pretest and posttest for the experimental group (p = .001), but an insignificant difference for the comparison group (p = .426). Independent-sample <em>t</em>-test of post-test yielded a significant difference between the two groups favoring the experimental class (p = .001). The findings verified scaffolding teaching's feasibility for improving students' writing. Results from MANOVA proved writing sub-skills content, vocabulary, grammar, mechanics and organization jointly account for significant variance between comparison and experimental groups writing. Separate results of the variables revealed composing relevant content as the stronger predictor (F (1, 94) = 35.08, p = .001), but no mechanics' use disparity between the two groups, F (1, 94) = .42, p = .520. The findings verified the scaffolding strategies' substantial role in enhancing learners' overall writing achievement and all writing sub-skills except for mechanics. Results from the questionnaire showed participants' positive perceptions about scaffolding strategies instruction. Based on the findings, we recommend scaffolding strategies teaching for EFL students' writing improvements.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48185,"journal":{"name":"System","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 103439"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EFL students’ writing achievement via the execution of scaffolding strategies instruction\",\"authors\":\"Seyidu Kemal Hassen,&nbsp;Ebabu Tefera Adugna,&nbsp;Yenus Nurie Bogale\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.system.2024.103439\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper examined the effects of scaffolding strategies instruction on EFL students' writing achievement, and its consistency in writing sub-skills. The study followed a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design, and data were collected from 48 students in each comparison and experimental group. Results from paired-samples <em>t</em>-test confirmed a significant writing achievement score difference between the pretest and posttest for the experimental group (p = .001), but an insignificant difference for the comparison group (p = .426). Independent-sample <em>t</em>-test of post-test yielded a significant difference between the two groups favoring the experimental class (p = .001). The findings verified scaffolding teaching's feasibility for improving students' writing. Results from MANOVA proved writing sub-skills content, vocabulary, grammar, mechanics and organization jointly account for significant variance between comparison and experimental groups writing. Separate results of the variables revealed composing relevant content as the stronger predictor (F (1, 94) = 35.08, p = .001), but no mechanics' use disparity between the two groups, F (1, 94) = .42, p = .520. The findings verified the scaffolding strategies' substantial role in enhancing learners' overall writing achievement and all writing sub-skills except for mechanics. Results from the questionnaire showed participants' positive perceptions about scaffolding strategies instruction. Based on the findings, we recommend scaffolding strategies teaching for EFL students' writing improvements.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48185,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"System\",\"volume\":\"125 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103439\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"System\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0346251X24002215\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"System","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0346251X24002215","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究了支架策略教学对英语语言学生写作成绩的影响及其在写作子技能方面的一致性。研究采用了前测-后测的准实验设计,在对比组和实验组各收集了 48 名学生的数据。配对样本 t 检验结果证实,实验组学生的写作成绩在前测和后测之间存在显著差异(p = .001),但对比组的差异不显著(p = .426)。后测的独立样本 t 检验结果显示,两组之间存在显著差异,实验组更胜一筹(p = .001)。研究结果验证了支架式教学在提高学生写作水平方面的可行性。MANOVA 的结果证明,写作子技能内容、词汇、语法、力学和组织共同造成了对比组和实验组写作之间的显著差异。变量的单独结果显示,写作相关内容是更强的预测因子(F (1, 94) = 35.08, p = .001),但两组学生在力学使用上没有差异(F (1, 94) = .42, p = .520)。研究结果证实,支架策略在提高学习者的整体写作水平和除力学以外的所有写作子技能方面发挥了重要作用。问卷调查结果显示,参与者对支架式策略教学持积极态度。基于上述研究结果,我们建议采用支架式策略教学来提高英语语言学生的写作水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EFL students’ writing achievement via the execution of scaffolding strategies instruction

This paper examined the effects of scaffolding strategies instruction on EFL students' writing achievement, and its consistency in writing sub-skills. The study followed a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design, and data were collected from 48 students in each comparison and experimental group. Results from paired-samples t-test confirmed a significant writing achievement score difference between the pretest and posttest for the experimental group (p = .001), but an insignificant difference for the comparison group (p = .426). Independent-sample t-test of post-test yielded a significant difference between the two groups favoring the experimental class (p = .001). The findings verified scaffolding teaching's feasibility for improving students' writing. Results from MANOVA proved writing sub-skills content, vocabulary, grammar, mechanics and organization jointly account for significant variance between comparison and experimental groups writing. Separate results of the variables revealed composing relevant content as the stronger predictor (F (1, 94) = 35.08, p = .001), but no mechanics' use disparity between the two groups, F (1, 94) = .42, p = .520. The findings verified the scaffolding strategies' substantial role in enhancing learners' overall writing achievement and all writing sub-skills except for mechanics. Results from the questionnaire showed participants' positive perceptions about scaffolding strategies instruction. Based on the findings, we recommend scaffolding strategies teaching for EFL students' writing improvements.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
System
System Multiple-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
202
审稿时长
64 days
期刊介绍: This international journal is devoted to the applications of educational technology and applied linguistics to problems of foreign language teaching and learning. Attention is paid to all languages and to problems associated with the study and teaching of English as a second or foreign language. The journal serves as a vehicle of expression for colleagues in developing countries. System prefers its contributors to provide articles which have a sound theoretical base with a visible practical application which can be generalized. The review section may take up works of a more theoretical nature to broaden the background.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信