One Hand Washes the Other and Both Wash the Face: Individuality versus Collaboration in L2 Writing

Pub Date : 2019-03-23 DOI:10.32601/EJAL.543789
Merve Savasci, Seval Kaygısız
{"title":"One Hand Washes the Other and Both Wash the Face: Individuality versus Collaboration in L2 Writing","authors":"Merve Savasci, Seval Kaygısız","doi":"10.32601/EJAL.543789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this pre-experimental study is twofold: (1) to investigate the comparative effectiveness of individual, pair, and group writing conditions in L2 writing classes, and (2) to explore students’ perceptions about each of these conditions. The participants were university-level Turkish EFL learners studying in the English Preparatory Program of a state university. The data for investigating the effectiveness of these writing conditions came from in-class paragraph writing tasks whereas students’ perceptions were investigated through an open-ended questionnaire and semi-structured focus group interviews. The quantitative data were analyzed by running descriptive statistics analysis, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and the Friedman test, and the qualitative data were content analyzed. As the findings indicated, when the participants wrote in groups they outperformed those who worked individually or in pairs regarding the (a) fluency, (b) accuracy, (c) complexity, (d) length, and (e) overall score of the paragraphs. Besides, perceived advantages and disadvantages of both collaborative writing (i.e., pair and group writing) and individual writing were pointed out by the participants. Based on the findings, some pedagogical implications and suggestions for further research are presented.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32601/EJAL.543789","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The aim of this pre-experimental study is twofold: (1) to investigate the comparative effectiveness of individual, pair, and group writing conditions in L2 writing classes, and (2) to explore students’ perceptions about each of these conditions. The participants were university-level Turkish EFL learners studying in the English Preparatory Program of a state university. The data for investigating the effectiveness of these writing conditions came from in-class paragraph writing tasks whereas students’ perceptions were investigated through an open-ended questionnaire and semi-structured focus group interviews. The quantitative data were analyzed by running descriptive statistics analysis, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and the Friedman test, and the qualitative data were content analyzed. As the findings indicated, when the participants wrote in groups they outperformed those who worked individually or in pairs regarding the (a) fluency, (b) accuracy, (c) complexity, (d) length, and (e) overall score of the paragraphs. Besides, perceived advantages and disadvantages of both collaborative writing (i.e., pair and group writing) and individual writing were pointed out by the participants. Based on the findings, some pedagogical implications and suggestions for further research are presented.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
一只手洗另一只手,两只手都洗脸:二语写作中的个性与合作
本实验前研究的目的有两个:(1)调查第二语言写作课中个人、配对和小组写作条件的比较有效性;(2)探索学生对这些条件的看法。参与者是在一所州立大学英语预备课程学习的大学水平的土耳其英语学习者。调查这些写作条件的有效性的数据来自课堂上的段落写作任务,而学生的看法是通过开放式问卷和半结构化焦点小组访谈来调查的。定量资料采用描述性统计分析、Wilcoxon sign -rank检验和Friedman检验进行分析,定性资料采用内容分析。正如研究结果所表明的那样,当参与者分组写作时,他们在段落的流畅性、准确性、复杂性、长度和总分方面的表现都优于单独或两人一组的人。此外,参与者还指出了合作写作(即结对和小组写作)和个人写作的优缺点。在此基础上,提出了一些教学启示和进一步研究的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1