马来西亚ESL课堂写作方法的比较分析

S. T. Palpanadan, Elizabeth M. Anthony, N. Ngadiran, Hazila Kadir, Ahmad Zainal
{"title":"马来西亚ESL课堂写作方法的比较分析","authors":"S. T. Palpanadan, Elizabeth M. Anthony, N. Ngadiran, Hazila Kadir, Ahmad Zainal","doi":"10.30845/jesp.v6n3p17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is an enormous literature in the Malaysian schools’ context that reveals writing skills deficiency in English among the students. Hence, this study conducted a comparative analysis of the two popular writing approaches (product approach and process approach) practised widely as writing instructions in the educational settings. A case study was conducted on the selected teachers to study their writing instructions in ESL classrooms. The investigation revealed that language teachers largely practice product writing approach. In addition, the paper also provides some insights that as compared to product writing approach, process writing approach is more effective. Process approach provides students more opportunities for independent writing, creative writing and evaluative writing which lead towards developing higher order thinking skills. Hence, this paper recommends that Malaysian schools should adopt strategies of process writing approach to teach English in ESL classrooms to produce students who can write more competently in future.","PeriodicalId":170810,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Education & Social Policy","volume":"113 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Writing Approaches Practised in Malaysian ESL Classrooms\",\"authors\":\"S. T. Palpanadan, Elizabeth M. Anthony, N. Ngadiran, Hazila Kadir, Ahmad Zainal\",\"doi\":\"10.30845/jesp.v6n3p17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is an enormous literature in the Malaysian schools’ context that reveals writing skills deficiency in English among the students. Hence, this study conducted a comparative analysis of the two popular writing approaches (product approach and process approach) practised widely as writing instructions in the educational settings. A case study was conducted on the selected teachers to study their writing instructions in ESL classrooms. The investigation revealed that language teachers largely practice product writing approach. In addition, the paper also provides some insights that as compared to product writing approach, process writing approach is more effective. Process approach provides students more opportunities for independent writing, creative writing and evaluative writing which lead towards developing higher order thinking skills. Hence, this paper recommends that Malaysian schools should adopt strategies of process writing approach to teach English in ESL classrooms to produce students who can write more competently in future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Education & Social Policy\",\"volume\":\"113 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Education & Social Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30845/jesp.v6n3p17\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Education & Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30845/jesp.v6n3p17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在马来西亚学校的背景下,有大量的文献揭示了学生英语写作技能的不足。因此,本研究对两种流行的写作方法(产品方法和过程方法)进行了比较分析,这两种方法在教育环境中作为写作指导广泛使用。本研究以个案研究的方式选取教师,研究他们在ESL课堂上的写作指导。调查显示,语言教师多采用产品写作法。此外,本文还提供了一些见解,与产品写作方法相比,过程写作方法更有效。过程法为学生提供了更多的独立写作、创意写作和评价性写作的机会,从而发展了更高层次的思维技能。因此,本文建议马来西亚学校在ESL课堂教学中采用过程写作策略,以培养未来写作能力更强的学生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparative Analysis of Writing Approaches Practised in Malaysian ESL Classrooms
There is an enormous literature in the Malaysian schools’ context that reveals writing skills deficiency in English among the students. Hence, this study conducted a comparative analysis of the two popular writing approaches (product approach and process approach) practised widely as writing instructions in the educational settings. A case study was conducted on the selected teachers to study their writing instructions in ESL classrooms. The investigation revealed that language teachers largely practice product writing approach. In addition, the paper also provides some insights that as compared to product writing approach, process writing approach is more effective. Process approach provides students more opportunities for independent writing, creative writing and evaluative writing which lead towards developing higher order thinking skills. Hence, this paper recommends that Malaysian schools should adopt strategies of process writing approach to teach English in ESL classrooms to produce students who can write more competently in future.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
From RAE to REF: Trust and Atmosphere in UK Higher Education Reform Religious Education of Lifelong Learning in Taiwan Weixin Shengjiao I Ching University The Manifestation of Alienation in Sylvia Plath’s the Bell Jar Female Technology Leaders Overcome Barriers to Climb the US Industry Ladder Debunking Hattie: Evaluating the Contribution of Academic Studies to Policy Development and Implementation in Australia
×
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