000070051 THE EFFECTS OF GENRE- BASED APPROACH ON WRITING MOTIVATION AND WRITING QUALITY AMONG STUDENTS AT HA TAY COMMUNITY COLLEGE ẢNH HƯỞNG CỦA PHƯƠNG PHÁP TIẾP CẬN THỂ LOẠI ĐẾN ĐỘNG LỰC VIẾT VÀ CHẤT LƯỢNG VIẾT CỦA SINH VIÊN TẠI TRƯỜNG CAO ĐẲNG CỘNG ĐỒNG HÀ TÂY
B ackground to th e stu d y
T heoretical b a c k g ro u n d
Globalization has cemented English as a global medium of communication, linking people across continents As a result, English is taught throughout Vietnam in schools, colleges, and universities to support communicative goals To communicate effectively, learners must develop the four core language skills—reading, listening, speaking, and writing—and writing stands out as one of the most important skills for many English as a foreign language learners because it stimulates thinking and helps organize ideas Strengthening writing not only enhances academic performance but also enables learners to express themselves clearly, argue logically, and participate more confidently in real-world communication.
Raimes (1983, p 3) notes that writing increases learners’ ability to summarize, analyze, and critique He argues that, besides speaking, people frequently need to communicate in writing Writing, he suggests, offers a chance to be adventurous with the language—going beyond what has already been learned to say When students write, they become involved in the new language, striving to express ideas, and using the eye, hand, and brain as a coordinated effort to articulate their thoughts and discover better ways to find the right word and the right sentence.
Writing is a fundamental skill in both academic and professional contexts In academic settings, high school students are often asked to write paragraphs that express personal views, describe school activities, or discuss someone they admire for exams At tertiary and graduate levels, students regularly produce English articles, essays, research papers, proposals, theses, and application letters In professional settings, English writing underpins business communication and advertising in international organizations and global trade, making clear, effective writing essential for success.
Given the importance of writing mentioned above, it is clear that effective writing has long been an essential part of teaching and learning English as a foreign language, and the development of writing ability is a requirement for all levels, especially tertiary ones However, writing in a second or foreign language is not easy for learners, as it demands mastery of grammar and vocabulary, awareness of discourse structure, and the ability to express ideas clearly, all within the constraints of limited exposure and feedback.
Writing is not simply the product of an individual; it is a social and cultural act shaped to fulfill a specific purpose for a defined audience and within a particular social context It functions as a meaning-making activity, indicating that learning to write involves far more than just mastering grammar and vocabulary From this perspective, effective writing arises from how language is used in social settings to convey intention, making audience and purpose central to the writing process (Ham-Lyon & Kroll, 1997, as cited in Krisanachinda, 2006; Weigle, 2002).
Douglas (2000, as cited in Krisnachinda, 2006) defines language related to writing as comprising four interrelated types of knowledge: grammatical knowledge, which concerns the fundamental building blocks of language; textual knowledge, which covers how these blocks are assembled to form coherent texts; functional knowledge, which encompasses how language is used to perform a range of communicative functions; and sociolinguistic knowledge, which involves using language appropriately in different social settings.
Because writing is a challenging skill, teachers have increasingly focused on making instruction more effective A range of teaching methods has been used, including the controlled-to-free practice approach, the paragraph pattern approach, the communicative approach, the product approach, the process approach, and the Genre-Based Approach (GBA) Historically, the traditional product approach dominated essay-writing instruction, but the process approach has gained prominence in recent times In modern education, there is a shift toward newer methods, with many teachers seeking to adopt GBA Researchers and writing teachers have found that GBA can bring substantially greater effectiveness to students’ essay writing, and numerous positive changes have been observed after applying GBA.
Practical b a c k g ro u n d
Hatay Community College currently offers bachelor's programs in English language, food technology, agriculture, basic sciences, technical technology, accounting and banking, economics, and environmental science Each bachelor’s degree in these fields typically lasts three years The English program trains students to become primary and secondary school English teachers English is the department’s major for all students, and the curriculum covers the four core language skills—Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing—through dedicated courses For example, the Reading section focuses primarily on reading activities, while other skills may be integrated into lessons with less emphasis.
Figure 1.2: M ean scores o f four language sk ills’ scores
Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2 show that among the four skills, Writing scores are consistently lower than Listening, Speaking, and Reading over three years The mean gaps indicate that Listening, Speaking, and Reading exceed Writing by 10.7, 11.35, and 11.8 points, respectively.
Students at H TC C said that the fear o f w riting m ay relate to poor w riting perform ances, low marks and m ay im pede the developm ent o f w riting skills.
The method of teaching writing can contribute to students' writing apprehension, shaping how they approach and respond to the task However, adopting a suitable writing approach can make writing more engaging for students and help them produce high-quality, well-crafted written works.
Regarding language skills, writing in English as a foreign language is a critical task for many learners in the Faculty of Foreign Languages at HTCC It is not surprising that, beyond limited language knowledge, these students face challenges in developing composing skills and the strategies needed to complete writing tasks and produce coherent writing Moreover, a key weakness is poor organization, which leads to incoherent text.
In academic settings, writing is not limited to expressing personal views or describing campus activities; it also requires analyzing information, arguing alternative perspectives, and presenting ideas through effective writing Critical thinking, closely linked with argumentation and the creation of argumentative essays, is often assessed by tasks that ask students to identify an issue, weigh different viewpoints, and develop and support their positions At HTCC, students have been observed writing explanations when asked to persuade, which suggests they lack persuasive writing skills and reveal limited strategies for this genre.
Improving students' writing skills is linked to reduced apprehension among EFL writers, and low-quality writing can result from factors related to students, as discussed earlier, as well as from teachers who have not yet adopted effective instructional methods.
In o ther w ords, the m ethods the teachers use to teach w riting for students do not show enough effectiveness to help m otivate and im prove the stu dents’ skill o f w riting At
At HTCC, both product- and process-oriented approaches to teaching writing have proven effective, yet they may not be the most suitable for all students Considering these limitations and other factors, the writer advocates adopting the Genre-Based Approach (GBA) over alternative methods to teach writing at HTCC, with a particular emphasis on argumentative essay writing for third-year students The writer believes that applying the Genre-Based Approach to argumentative writing can address many of the problems previously noted It is hoped that these new dimensions will reduce students’ writing apprehension and help them perform better on argumentative writing tasks.
A im s o f the s t u d y
This study investigates the effects of the genre-based approach on writing motivation among students at Ha Tay Community College and also examines how this instructional method influences the quality of students’ writing By addressing both motivation and writing quality, the research aims to determine whether genre-based pedagogy enhances engagement with writing tasks and improves the overall caliber of students’ written work within this college context.
1 Does the genre-based approach to teaching writing m easurably motivate writing am ong the EFL students at H T C C more than the process approach?
2 To what extent does each approach affect the quality o f students' writing?
There are four hypotheses for the research questions:
All students showed a significant reduction in writing apprehension, as measured by pre- and post-questionnaires on the Writing Apprehension Test At the end of the study, the experimental group reported a significantly lower level of writing apprehension than the control group.
Participants with the highest level of writing apprehension at the study's outset in the experimental group experienced a significantly greater reduction in writing anxiety by the study's end than similarly ranked students in the control group.
In the post-test, a substantial proportion of students in the experimental group produced compositions of significantly higher overall quality than those written by students in the control group.
Students in the experimental group show superior performance in basic writing elements compared to students in the control group They demonstrate clearer organization—intro, body, and conclusion—and stronger linguistic features, including the use of argumentative verbs in essays and more varied sentence structures.
Scope o f the s t u d y
This study employed a classroom‑based design involving the researcher as the teacher, another teacher from the Faculty of Foreign Language at HTCC as a rater, and 32 third‑year students enrolled in Writing V, an argumentative writing course at HTCC in Semester 2 of the 2012 academic year The control group was instructed using a process approach, while the experimental group received an instructional treatment based on a Genre‑Based Approach (GBA) for teaching argumentative essay writing The research spanned eight weeks, and Chapter Three—Methodology provides a detailed description of the design along with the data collection and analysis methods.
Significance o f the s t u d y
This study investigates the effectiveness of traditional teaching writing approaches, specifically the product and process methods, when applied to HTCC students, and suggests these approaches might not be effective The findings will be useful for teachers and researchers who seek effective strategies for teaching writing in EFL contexts In addition, the study highlights practical implications and benefits for classroom practice and future research in English as a Foreign Language writing instruction.
The w riter hoped that research results could provide som e m ore additional findings that support the previous research in the field o f GBA to essay writing.
At HTCC, both teachers and students stood to benefit from the research, with its findings providing practical recommendations for educators seeking to incorporate GBA into their own teaching practices These insights can guide classroom strategies, enhance learning outcomes, and support ongoing professional development for teachers who implement GBA in their curricula.
The study’s findings directly assist the third-year English students at HTCC in developing effective essay writing, and Chapter 2, the Literature Review, identifies the gaps in the research area that this study aimed to address.
O utline o f the t h e s i s
The thesis consists o f five chapters w ith a list o f references and appendixes, w hich are sum m arized as follows:
Chapter 1, Introduction, presents the background and reasons for conducting the study, outlines the aims of the research and the guiding research questions, defines the scope and boundaries of the work, and explains the significance of the study It also provides an overview of the thesis structure, briefing readers on how the document is organized and what to expect in subsequent chapters.
Chapter 2, Literature Review, surveys the existing literature to establish the theoretical framework for the study, detailing approaches to teaching writing, defining the argumentative essay, and outlining its organization The chapter also presents an overview of prior research and clarifies how the current study fits with and contributes to the broader research landscape in this area.
C hapter 3 , M ethodology, states the research questions, selection o f subjects and the description o f the setting o f the research, data collection procedure, data collection instrum ents, training procedure and assessm ent.
C hapter 4: R esults and D iscussions, analyses, discusses the d ata and provides the m ajor findings.
C hapter 5: R ecom m endations and C onclusion: provides a recom m endation, lim itation and suggestion for further study The last section o f this chap ter is conclusion for the w hole study.
The final part o f the thesis contains the R eferences and A ppendixes.
This chapter presents a literature review to establish the theoretical framework of the study, focusing on teaching writing skills, instructional approaches to writing, and the definition and organization of the argumentative essay It surveys prior research to map the current state of knowledge and identify gaps that the present study addresses By situating the study within the broader scholarly conversation, it clarifies how the research contributes to and aligns with existing work in the field.
Teaching w riting s k i l l s
Principles o f teaching w r itin g
There are several principles o f w riting But according to To Thi T hu H uong and N guyen Thi Thuy M inh (2007, p 58, cited in Dung (2008)) teachers should consider some following principles w hen teaching writing.
Teachers should provide abundant opportunities for students to write because writing improves with practice; simply asking students to write more isn't enough By designing writing tasks that draw from listening, reading, and speaking lessons, teachers can introduce different writing styles—such as letters, emails, and essays—helping students build versatility and confidence in their writing.
Teachers should provide feedback that is helpful and meaningful, offering detailed comments at the end of students’ writings Such feedback should empower students to become independent writers by guiding them to recognize and correct their own errors rather than fixing every mistake for them In this approach, emphasis is placed on developing learners’ self-editing skills and confidence, so they can revise effectively and improve over time.
N ext, to evaluate students’ w ritings clearly and exactly, teachers should m ake criteria for each item such as spelling, accuracy o f vocabulary, use o f cohesive devices, etc.
Besides, as often as possible teachers should create the right conditions for students’ generation o f ideas, and teachers consider them selves as a resource for inform ation and language w hen necessary.
Finally, teachers should provide students with communicative writing activities These tasks engage students by guiding them to determine three key elements: the genre (what they are writing), the audience (for whom), and the purpose (why) By focusing on these questions, students produce writing that mirrors authentic, real-life tasks, helping them see the relevance of classroom writing to everyday communication.
A pproaches in teaching w r itin g
P roduct a p p r o a c h
During the 1960s and into the early 1970s, the product approach to teaching writing was very popular For a long time, it was claimed to dominate the field of writing instruction In this approach, the main focus is on presenting text models and teaching students how to copy these models, emphasizing the final written product over the writing process.
According to Brown (1994, p 320, as cited in Dung, 2008), the product approach to writing concentrates on linguistic knowledge—vocabulary, syntax, and cohesive devices—and aims to enable learners to produce texts that closely resemble a model Robinson (1991, cited in Chinh, 2007, p 12) argues that this approach typically begins with a model text that is analyzed, and then a task is designed to lead learners to write an exactly similar text, a process that Robinson summarizes as a model–analysis–task sequence.
M odel te x t ^ com prehension/analysis/ m anipulation ^ N EW INPUT
* PA R A LL EL TEX T Figure 2.1: M odel o f Product A pproach
Two strong points of the product approach are widely recognized in writing pedagogy First, it makes it easier for beginner writers to progress—from learning how to write a good sentence to combining sentences into a coherent paragraph, and then connecting paragraphs to form a complete essay—through imitation and repetition from textbooks or the teacher, while gaining essential linguistic knowledge about texts Not every learner can produce a polished essay right away, so a step-by-step, scaffolded process supports gradual mastery Second, the teacher still imparts important writing theory, including grammatical structures, word choices, cohesive devices, methods for varying content, and effective ways to organize the essay within this framework.
A key weakness of the product-oriented approach is that process skills, such as planning a text, play only a small role, and the knowledge and skills that learners bring to the classroom are undervalued (Badger & White, 2000, p 57).
The other lim itation o f the product approach is that students are very passive and less creative All learners’ know ledge o f w riting skill is based on the teachers and textbooks
Regular writing practice is essential to maintain and grow the skills you’ve learned; when practice is lazy or sparse, progress can retreat to the textbooks or fade from lectures Working mainly alone with your own thoughts can lead to a narrow, less varied approach and reduce creativity In contrast, discussing and brainstorming with peers helps you discover new ideas, stay motivated, and build the self‑confidence needed to articulate your own thoughts and craft strong first and final drafts.
Finally, a product-focused approach to writing can discourage students from writing more, because errors are corrected harshly during the act of composing Many beginner writers worry about common mistakes, which can undermine confidence and motivation Therefore, mistakes should be treated as a natural part of the writing process to motivate students and support ongoing practice.
Under the product approach, writing is viewed as knowledge about the structure of language, and writing development is seen as the result of imitating input—specifically, the texts provided by the teacher (Badger & White, 2000).
Process a p p ro a c h
Since the mid-1970s, the process approach to writing has largely supplanted the product approach In process-oriented writing instruction, the focus shifts to the individual writer and to teaching students a toolkit of decontextualized strategies such as brainstorming, drafting, and self-editing The core influence of this approach is its cognitive foundation, which regards writing as a thinking process rather than simply a finished product.
Under the process approach to writing instruction, emphasis is placed on the writing process rather than the finished product Writers decide how to begin, how to organize their ideas, and how to revise, instead of under a restricted time frame producing a topic and handing it in for correction This approach supports exploratory drafting, planning, and iterative editing Consequently, teachers act as learning facilitators, guiding strategy use, providing feedback, and helping students become more autonomous, self-directed writers.
According to the process approach, writing is a recursive and complex activity, as described by Zamel (1983, p 147) and Raimes (1985, p 231), cited in Dung (2008) While there are identifiable stages in the writing process, writers often revisit any of these stages multiple times before a text is completed.
B adger and W hite (2000) stated that in process approach, the teacher prim arily facilitates the learners' w riting and provides input or stim ulus is considered to be less im portant.
The process approach to writing centers on collaborative learning and teacher guidance, helping students discover effective techniques and strategies as part of writing instruction Writing is viewed as a social process in which students support one another in composing texts, rather than focusing solely on the final product With student-controlled topics, learners gain ownership and engagement, while authentic writing for real audiences enhances meaning and thinking As a result, writing improves thinking and communication skills, producing work that reflects deeper understanding.
Errors are considered natural and are corrected in the final stages o f the w riting process
G ram m ar points are given throughout the w riting process S tudents’ w riting works are evaluated through their total w riting process.
Chieko (2010) demonstrates that through the writing process learners maximize their knowledge and skills by leveraging the support and collaboration of teachers and peers, while being encouraged to freely express their thoughts and feelings in written messages; this approach provides ample time to reconsider and revise their work at each stage and guides them to seek assistance from external resources, such as the instructor.
Badger and White (2000) highlight several strengths of the process approach to writing The primary advantage is that this approach foregrounds the writing skills involved and recognizes that what learners bring to the writing classroom contributes to the development of their overall writing ability.
Brown (2001) argues that the process approach empowers learners to take charge of their writing by allowing them to think as they compose In this view, students convey their messages to readers through a sequence of writing steps—prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing—so meaning emerges through the act of writing itself.
Internal factors play a central role in the process approach to language learning Brown (2001) argues that this approach benefits students because learners are the creators of language and should focus on content and message, with their intrinsic motives valued This perspective helps students develop language skills more effectively, as they can choose topics and writing techniques they excel at while the teacher guides and organizes group or pair work A more relaxed classroom atmosphere emerges when mistakes are treated as natural, enabling students to become more independent and creative in their writing In this setting, interaction and cooperative work among students enrich the content, and peers can help one another outline supporting ideas and check punctuation and spelling.
Finally, the teacher does little direct instruction and acts mainly as an observer during class Learners take a central, active role, making their own decisions about what to write and how to write it for a real audience.
Although the process-oriented approach can enhance learner motivation through in-class discussion and collaboration, it has limitations in sustaining meaningful discussion and cooperation It prioritizes fluency and participation over accuracy, paying less attention to grammar and structure—grammar points, word choice, cohesive devices, and patterns of essay organization—and it places relatively little emphasis on the final product (Reid, 2001).
Another disadvantage of the process approach is that it treats all writings produced by the same set of processes as if they are uniform in nature; it downplays the kinds of texts writers produce and the reasons why those texts are produced; and it offers learners insufficient input, particularly in terms of linguistic knowledge, to enable successful writing.
Additionally, Horowitz (1986) argues that the process approach is regarded by some as unrealistic because it overemphasizes multiple drafts, a practice that may hinder ESL students who face single-draft exam restrictions, a concern also noted by Leki (1992).
In brief, the process approach encourages students’ creativity and m otivation in writing
Adopting a learner-centered approach, this model encourages students to play an active role in their writing while the teacher acts as an observing guide who offers timely feedback and strategic scaffolding Although student autonomy is central, writing development benefits from explicit teacher guidance to help move ideas from draft to polished text Kroll (1990) emphasizes that the process approach treats writing as an evolving activity in which learners move through planning, drafting, revising, and editing with ongoing support and reflection By combining independent practice with targeted teacher input, this approach strengthens students' writing abilities and supports durable learning outcomes.
“provided a w ay to think about w riting in term s o f w hat the w riter does (planning, revising) instead o f in term s o f w hat the final product looks like (patterns o f organization, spelling, and gram m ar)” (p 96).
G enre- based a p p ro a c h
Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) provides the theoretical foundation for this approach Developed by M.A.K Halliday and influenced by earlier linguists, SFL views language as a resource for meaning and social use rather than a set of isolated rules Consequently, the method is sometimes referred to as SFL GBA (Dang Thi Kim Anh, 2002).
According to Gee (1997, as cited in Saowadee, 2003), the notion of genre has been used across many fields, including folklore studies, the sociology of language, and applied linguistics In literary studies, genre serves to categorize different kinds of writing—such as novels, short stories, and science fiction In contemporary education, genre extends beyond these literary forms to encompass everyday text types that appear in work and study contexts The concept of genre is also linked to first and second language teaching.
Genre has also been defined as the w ays that w e get things done through language - the w ays we exchange inform ation and know ledge and interact socially Genre, as m entioned above, has also been defined by M artin (2000, p 25) that “genre is a staged, goal- oriented, purposeful activity in w hich speakers engage as m em bers o f our culture” and he explained further this definition that “genres are referred to as social processes because m em bers o f a culture interact w ith each other to achieve them , as goal oriented because they have evolved to get things done; and as staged because it usually takes m ore than one step for participants to achieve their goals”
The key influence in the G BA is the functional linguistics Functional linguists stress that language is a social phenom enon, different texts with different purposes to the different audience, for instance, a letter w ritten to apologize is quite different from a com plaining letter and a personal letter o f apology is not the sam e as a business letter o f apology.
In the 1980s, the genre-based approach (GBA) gained popularity as the idea that student writers benefit from studying different kinds of written texts Genre approaches are relatively new to English Language Teaching (ELT) but they share important similarities with product approaches: both treat writing as a linguistic activity, yet genre approaches emphasize that writing varies with the social context in which it is produced This leads to a range of genres—such as sales letters, research articles, and reports—each linked to specific situations Not every learner needs to cover all social contexts, so teachers can tailor the writing syllabus to the genres most relevant to their students Genre is also shaped by other situational features, including the subject matter, the writer–audience relationship, and the overall pattern of organization.
Genre theory aims to unite language, content, and the context of discourse—from production to interpretation (Paltridge, 2001) Its core belief is that writing is purposeful, not just a neutral act of expression; it is a deliberate process designed to achieve a specific outcome (Hyland, 2003, p 18; cited in Millar, 2011).
The Genre-Based Approach (GBA) to language teaching seeks to raise learners’ awareness of the structure of a particular genre, clarify the range of strategies available to users to manage their communicative purpose, and identify the linguistic features that realize these strategies, while offering sociological and psychological explanations for these choices of structure, strategy, and linguistic features (Henry & Roseberry, 1999).
Genre-based approaches emphasize the social purpose of language rather than its form alone The genre under study is generally defined by the social purpose of the communication, and classifications of genre can vary depending on the theoretical influences guiding each approach If a student wants to join a particular English-language discourse community, they will need to produce texts that meet readers' expectations in terms of grammar, organization, and context.
Genre-based approaches start with whole texts as the unit of analysis rather than isolating individual sentences, focusing on the complete discourse through which communication achieves its purposes By examining entire texts, these methods reveal how genre shapes meaning and function across an extended piece of writing, offering a holistic view of how communicative aims are realized (Lin, 2003).
As educators, we must go beyond simply giving students opportunities to succeed in writing; effective writing instruction also provides explicit guidance on how to craft strong texts Central to this is genre knowledge: teaching students the features, structures, and language choices appropriate to different writing purposes so they can select the right form, tone, and organization Grounded in the genre-based approach associated with Derewianka, teachers can model text exemplars, guide planning and drafting, and support revision with genre conventions in mind, resulting in more coherent and purposeful writing across subject areas.
(1991), cited in Lin, B (2003)) argued that by “draw ing on the notion o f genre teachers could m ore effectively assist students in developing control o f w ritten texts.”
Genre-Based Approach (GBA) to teaching writing is often referred to as the Curriculum Genre or Curriculum Cycle According to Hyun (1996), genre-based pedagogy, in all its forms, involves some kinds of classroom consideration of genres and the contexts in which they are found.
The teaching model comprises several stages that teachers and students move through to help learners gain independent control of a particular genre These stages are typically arranged in a circular sequence, signaling multiple entry points so students can join the progression at a point that matches their needs.
The curriculum cycle comprises three major stages: Modeling of text, joint negotiation of text, and independent construction of text Some scholars extend the model by adding one or two additional stages, such as Preparation, as proposed by Gibbons (2002).
This study follows the stages of the teaching cycle within the Genre-Based Approach (GBA), generally aligning with Derewianka’s (1990) model described in Exploring How Texts Work The author outlines the curriculum cycle, which comprises four stages: Building Knowledge of the Field, Modeling of Text, Joint Construction of Text, and Independent Construction of Text.
Figure 2.3: Stages o f the Teaching and Learning Cycle
It includes the stage Building Knowledge o f the Field, w hich is im portant for the students’ critical thinking and revising general know ledge.
One of the most significant contributions of the Genre-Based Approach (GBA) is its explicit analysis and teaching of the generic structure and distinctive language features of the major genres, as shown in models and exemplars that students study to develop their writing skills By learning these genre fundamentals at the whole-text level, students can rework and adapt them when writing for different communicative tasks (Derewianka, 1991).
A rgum entative w r iti n g
D e fin itio n
Argumentative writing, often called persuasive writing, is a type of essay organized around a clear thesis In an argumentative–persuasive essay, the writer aims to persuade the reader to share a viewpoint about a topic and perhaps to take a specific action as a result The writer argues the point, presents reasons and evidence to support it, and works to convince the reader of the position (Pham Doan Thuy, 2007, p 61).
A ccording to Pham D oan Thuy (2007, p62), there are at least tw o w ays to organize an argum entative essay as show n in Figure 2.4
II W eakest argum ent that supports your opinion
III Stronger argum ent that supports your opinion
IV Strongest argum ent that supports your opinion
Structure for argum entative e s s a y
III IV V A rgum ents that support your opinion, aư an ged from least im portant to most im portant point or vice verse.
Figure 2.4.Tw o B asic O rganizational Plans for A rgum entative essays
Previous r e s e a r c h
G ap in previous r e s e a rc h
As shown in the studies reviewed above, various approaches to teaching writing skills in Vietnam and in several other countries have produced positive effects on students’ writing outcomes While these findings have significantly contributed to the improvement of writing instruction and learning, a gap remains that future research should address.
Firstly, the study on writing apprehension by Siti (1994) focused on the process approach rather than on GBA, and since English was the participants' second language, its applicability to Vietnam, where English is a foreign language, remains questionable.
Secondly, studies em phasized on genre-based approaches in teaching w riting genres such as D iscussion in D an g’s study (2002) and Recounts (Personal, Biography and
H istorical) in K risn ach in d a’s research Saow adee (2003) chose Exposition, Description,
Chen and Su (2012) offer a concise discussion and narrative of their study, noting that participants came from diverse majors They warn that comparing students’ writing quality across different disciplines could confuse readers and obscure the study’s findings, so the analysis emphasizes overall writing performance rather than major-specific differences.
Recent research suggests that the Genre-Based Approach (GBA) can enhance students’ writing ability, and most studies propose solutions to improve the quality of teaching and learning English Building on these findings, a broader discussion of approaches, methods, and techniques for teaching and learning EFL in the Vietnamese context is warranted Accordingly, this study seeks to investigate the effects of GBA on writing motivation and writing quality at HTCC, with a particular focus on argumentative essays.
This chapter outlines the study’s research design and methodology, detailing the research questions, participant selection, and the study setting It explains the data collection methods and instruments, including the procedures for administering pre- and post-writing tests and pre- and post-questionnaires, and it concludes with the training procedure and the assessment framework used to evaluate results.
R esearch m e th o d o lo g y
This study used a quasi-experimental design comprising three core components: the sample, which included students assigned to control and experimental groups; the treatment, combining the process approach and GBA; and the measurement of the treatment, which involved a pre-questionnaire and pre-writing test, followed by a post-questionnaire and post-writing test.
R esearch q u e s tio n s
This study examines whether Game-Based Assessment (GBA) motivates students in writing at HTCC and assesses its impact on the quality of students’ writing To achieve these aims, the research intends to address the following research questions.
1 Does the genre-based approach to teaching writing m easurably m otivate writing among the EFL students at H TCC more than the process approach ?
2 To what extent does each approach affect the quality o f students' writing?
There are four hypotheses for the research questions:
Across all students, writing apprehension significantly declined from pre- to post-assessment as measured by the Writing Apprehension Test scores on the pre- and post-questionnaires Moreover, at the end of the study the experimental group exhibited a significantly lower level of writing apprehension compared with the control group.
Among students who started the study with the highest levels of writing apprehension, those in the experimental group showed a significantly lower level of writing apprehension at the end of the study than similarly ranked students in the control group.
A large number of students in the experimental group produced post-test compositions with significantly higher overall quality than those produced by students in the control group.
Students in the experimental group demonstrated superior performance in essential writing elements compared with those in the control group, particularly in organization (introduction, body, and conclusion) and linguistic features (the use of argumentative verbs and varied sentence structures) as reflected in their essays.
S u b je c ts
T e a c h e r s
Two teachers participated in this study as markers The lead researcher, an experienced English teacher who is well organized, has taught at the research site for almost eight years and is currently pursuing a Master’s degree in TESOL at Hanoi University A colleague from the Faculty of Foreign Languages at HTCC was invited to co-mark the writing tests with the researcher, bringing six years of English teaching experience at HTCC and three additional years at a high school She earned a Master’s degree in TESOL from Vietnam National University, College of Foreign Language She was chosen as the second marker because she has served as a second writing marker with the researcher at HTCC for six years.
S tu d e n ts
Thirty-two third-year English students from diverse regions were selected for the study and assigned to experimental and control groups based on their performance on a pre-writing test and a pre-questionnaire The participants had studied English for six to nine years and represented different parts of the country Among them, thirty were female and two were male, a gender distribution commonly observed in language classes within the college’s Faculty.
Writing apprehension and poor organization are the main problems facing these students, making writing tasks particularly difficult and problematic, especially in the areas of writing Thirty-two students were invited to participate in this research during the second semester of their third year.
3 - year program A ccording to the curriculum , the second sem ester o f th ird year is for
Under the plan, eight weeks were allocated for argumentative essays and seven weeks for graphics and visuals, but due to time constraints, only the eight-week module for teaching argumentative essays was implemented.
S e ttin g
The study was carried out in classrooms at Hanoi Technical College (HTCC) in Chuong My district, Hanoi Class sizes at HTCC are large, ranging from 22 students in the English class to 81 in banking and accounting classes, while English program classes typically host 22 to 32 students Each year comprises a single class group with one supervisor Working in the role of “teacher-as-researcher” (Stake, 1995, p 91), the researcher taught writing argumentative essays to the students for seven weeks.
The tertiary-level research site was selected for several reasons, foremost of which is that the researcher had nearly eight years of teaching experience at HTCC, providing easy access to the site and enhancing the study’s feasibility By teaching within the college’s regular timetable and conducting sessions in an ordinary classroom with the participants, the study could be carried out in a natural setting that reflects everyday practice This approach aims to minimize disruption and avoid artificially staged conditions, so that the teacher and students do not perceive the class as arranged for research, thereby reducing reactivity and preserving authentic behavior.
Another key reason relates to the argumentative genre, which is widely regarded as challenging, making the tertiary level an appropriate and relevant target because students at this stage are required to write such genres (Dudley-Evans, 1997) At the tertiary level, learners are expected to think conceptually, write analytically, and read critically.
D ata collection p r o c e d u r e
A t H TCC, there is only one class o f students in English m ajor each y ear so I asked the
R ector for p erm ission to split the nom inal class o f 32 third year students into 2 small groups in experim ental duration.
The study w as im plem ented in a w riting course, a com pulsory course for English major
According to the curriculum, Writing V (30 periods) is taught in the second semester of the third year in a three-year program, including eight weeks (16 periods) for argumentative essays and seven weeks (14 periods) for graphics and visuals; for my experiment I chose to teach argumentative essays, so both groups were exposed to two different instructional approaches, with teaching and learning activities lasting eight weeks The program consisted of seven sections over seven weeks, with one week allocated for the post-questionnaire and post-writing test, and each session lasting 90 minutes The data collection procedure proceeded in three stages.
Figure 3: T he study’s Q uasi-experim ental design
In the study's initial phase, the pre-writing test and pre-questionnaire were collected before the experiment The results were used to assign 32 students into two small groups, ensuring they were comparably similar in writing ability and writing apprehension.
During the second stage, from week 1 to week 7, the control group emphasized traditional writing process activities—prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing The experimental group, meanwhile, received an instructional treatment using a Game-Based Approach (GBA) embedded in the same timeline, consisting of two stages: (1) Building knowledge of the field and (2) Modeling of the text.
(3) Joint C onstruction o f Text and (4) Independent C onstruction o f Text The total experim ental duration w as seven 90 - m inute lessons
In the third stage, at w eek 8, students w ere again asked to answ er the D aly-M iller’s questionnaire to identify the effects o f both m ethods in w riting m otivation M oreover,
32 post-test w riting sam ples o f the students w ere collected at the end o f the study and were analyzed to determ ine the effects o f both m ethods on students’ w riting quality
Writing samples were the most important data source for the research, providing substantial evidence about whether the applied GBA would help HTCC students overcome writing apprehension and produce high-quality writing.
During the study, the teacher-researcher taught both the experimental and control groups The researcher has eight years of teaching experience at HTCC Although the teacher had been exposed to the theory of GBA instructions, she had not used it in her classes and had no prior experience with the study’s particular experimental treatment.
D ata collection in s tru m e n ts
T he q u estio n n aire
Writing Apprehension Test (WAT), a 26-item questionnaire adapted from Daly and Miller (1975), was used at both pre-test and post-test The items are weighed either negatively or positively, half in each direction Scores are obtained by adding 78 to the total of positively weighted items and then subtracting the total of negatively weighted items, so that writing apprehension = 78 + positive scores − negative scores The resulting total scores range from 26 upward.
130 The responses “strongly agree” have a value o f one If a student strongly agrees v ith statem ent 1, a positive statem ent, then one point w ill be added (R efer to A ppendix
On this Likert-type scoring system, the response "strongly disagree" is worth five points; if a student strongly disagrees with statement 2, a negative statement, five points are subtracted from the total score The other response options have these values: agree = two, uncertain = three, disagree = four Each selected option adds or subtracts points accordingly, and the total score can range from 26 (an extremely apprehensive writer) to 130 (a very confident writer).
Before the intervention, a pre-questionnaire was administered to 32 students to divide them into two small groups—the control and the experimental group—ensuring that the groups were comparably similar in writing apprehension at the start of the study prior to the researcher teaching them using different instructional approaches.
26-item scale o f questionnaire was used to investigate o f G BA on stu d en ts’ w riting apprehension after the treatm ent.
'The results o f the pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire w ere com pared to answ er research question 1 (hypothesis 1 -2).
A 60-minute pre-test from the Writing IV program was used to assign 32 students into two equal groups of 16, ensuring control and experimental groups were baseline-equivalent in writing ability before any instruction began, after which the groups received different teaching approaches Students were given a Writing IV prompt: "Show the similarities and differences between living in a dormitory and living at home with your family," with a target length of 250–300 words.
"he 60-m inute w riting p ost-test was chosen to investigate the effects o f G B A on su d en ts’ w riting after the treatm ent period A topic o f controversial issue “ Should sudents have part tim e jo b s ” w as given to students o f bo th groups P articipants were m couraged to practice those techniques and principles w hich they learn during the teatm ent period.
T raining p r o c e d u r e
P rocess approach tr a in in g
P re-w riting, com posing/drafting, revising, editing and publishing are stages in process w riting
3.7.1.1 Pre-w riting: T he purpose o f stage is help students to generate ideas for their w riting essay S tudents are asked to go through it to find som ething to w rite about any subject chosen P re-w riting also helps them discover w hat is im portant or true for them about any subject at a particu lar time.
A t this stage learners are asked to generate ideas by considering the audience, purpose and tone o f w riting and gather inform ation for w riting.
Brainstorming: is an activity in prew riting stage, w hich m eans thinking about the topic and noting w hatever is rem em bered w ithout considering the relevancy W riting more quickly and saving tim e in the later stage are useful o f brainstorm ing.
During the lesson, the teacher starts with group brainstorming, asking students to generate ideas on a writing topic in small groups Then the teacher demonstrates how to organize those group-generated ideas and fit them into the clear structure of an essay Finally, students transition to independent work by brainstorming ideas individually to expand and refine their content.
Three useful brainstorm ing technique listing, free w riting and clustering are introduced to students.
The teacher introduces the listing technique, a quick brainstorming method that helps students focus on the topic and rapidly list any words or phrases that come to mind The goal is to generate as many ideas as possible in a short time, creating a broad pool of potential directions for further exploration.
Clustering is a brainstorming technique that involves forming words related to a stimulus The related words are circled and linked by lines to form clusters Clustering is especially useful for students who know what they want to say but struggle to express it, as it helps organize ideas and build vocabulary for writing.
Free w riting is w riting dow n the w ords and phrases about a topic in listing freely and quickly, students think about certain points o f the subject and list them under certain titles.
3.7.1.2 C om posin g/D rafting: The learners begin the w riting production A t the drafting stage, the students focus their attention on developm ent o f the content; students do not pay m uch attention to the surface structure or gram m atical accuracy, audience and purpose
3.7.1.3 R evising: A t this stage, the teacher asks students to check and change w hat they have w ritten in order to change it Students check it over for content and organization, including unity, coherence, and logic Students can also add or delete m essages to m ake the essay interesting T his stage m ay revise the drafts by them selves, w ith their peers or their teachers.
3.7.1.4 E diting: T his stage is used to help students edit the language o f their essay for grammar, sentence structure, spelling, and punctuation.
Teachers guide students to verify that each paragraph aligns with the overall essay, ensuring the paragraph supports the central argument Students check for unity by identifying and removing any off-topic sentences that disrupt coherence They also ensure there are enough supporting details and concrete examples to express ideas clearly and persuasively.
3 7 1 5 Publishing: T his refers to presenting the final pro du ct or sharing w ith others
Sharing can be accomplished in a variety of ways, and for students, it’s essential to submit a final copy of their work in the correct format, including their name, class, and student ID number Proper formatting not only ensures consistency across submissions but also makes documents easier to review, grade, and publish.
G enre- based approach tr a in in g
Tie G BA consists o f four stages as follow s as m entioned in D erew ian ka (1990), sim m arized from C allaghan & R othery (1998), R ahm atunnia (2008) and K risnachinda (1006)
During this stage, as the name implies, the goal is to build students’ background knowledge on the topic they will write about and to equip them with the necessary English vocabulary The teacher can pose questions related to the text to guide discussion and provide a basic understanding of the material for students who are not yet familiar with it.
To introduce a new text type, the teacher discusses the key vocabulary associated with that text type, plans activities to familiarize students with both the subject matter and the text type, and locates sample texts to use as modeling In this initial stage, a range of activities—listening, speaking, reading, information gathering, and note-taking—can be organized to support students’ understanding and practice of the text type.
During this stage, the teacher activates students' prior knowledge about the field and contextualizes the text, while introducing key vocabulary from the text in meaningful ways At the end of the stage, students are invited to write their own ideas on the topic, providing a practical writing activity that reveals how well they can use this text type The teacher can support learning by asking targeted questions to assess understanding and guide students toward stronger comprehension and expression.
During this stage, the focus is on preparing students for the next phase of writing The teacher explicitly introduces a model that mirrors the text the class will later co-create through joint construction To connect learning with real-world use, the teacher may invite students to discuss the purposes for which this text is used in society and in daily life This approach helps students become familiar with the text’s purpose, its overall structure, and the linguistic features of the text type they are going to write.
A set of engaging activities helps students understand how argumentation is introduced, how its textual organization unfolds, and what distinctive language features mark argumentative writing Through guided analysis and practice, learners examine how authors present claims, introduce evidence, address counterarguments, and build logical progressions, while identifying rhetoric and stance markers, modality, hedging, and evaluative language that shape tone and persuasiveness By focusing on both structure and language, these activities equip students to analyze, construct, and critique argumentation across different texts, strengthening comprehension and writing skills for academic and real-world contexts.
F.rst, the teacher introduces students to the function and social context o f the genre
A teacher may ask students questions like “What is its function?” and “How is it organized?” to check understanding and guide analysis To reinforce reading comprehension, the teacher can distribute the same model-text sample to every student and have them read it and answer questions about the text’s content and purpose, as well as how its structure supports meaning.
The teacher introduces the generic structures of the model text by guiding students to identify its overall structure To support understanding, the teacher may ask targeted questions and discuss the responses with the class When students demonstrate mastery of the overall structure, the teacher then asks more specific questions about the individual stages and their related generic structures to reinforce learning and assess comprehension.
Third, the teacher provides careful guidance to help students identify the language features of the model text, including the writer’s attitude, action verbs, technical terms, evaluative language, and connectors This targeted instruction helps learners recognize how word choice and sentence structure convey stance and meaning, strengthening their analytical skills and improving exam performance.
T he teacher can p resen t other text in the genre as well.
B efore students w rite independent texts, it w ould be useful for them to participate in group writing.
First, the teacher asks students to form groups of four, with members chosen by the students themselves The teacher then informs them that the activities in this stage will differ from what they are used to: they will collaborate in group work to write a full-length text, not just paragraphs as before, across several sessions, with the teacher available for consultations.
Before the teacher and students begin working with the text, the teacher should invite students to propose topics or suggest several options and then select one to write about Students should locate and take notes on relevant field information, while the teacher guides them to organize their ideas and information through clear headings or column layouts.
In this stage, the teacher helps students contribute ideas and information to jointly construct a text, or guides them in creating the text with acceptable linguistic features and schematic structures through targeted questions and suggestions The teacher also approaches each group to see if they have difficulty starting their writing, and for those who struggle, asks guiding questions to scaffold their process.
Fourth, the teach er helps the students to revise the linguistic features and to im prove the schem atic structures o f genre in focus by referring to the m odel text.
In the final step of this stage, consultation provides targeted feedback on students' first writing attempt The teacher often begins by praising the draft’s strengths, even if the text does not yet include all the language features and generic structures of a strong composition After acknowledging what went well, the focus shifts to the aspects that still need improvement, offering concrete guidance for revision and next steps to strengthen overall quality.
In the final stage, students independently construct an argumentative essay while the teacher acts as a facilitator, offering targeted consultations only when needed A model text is provided to guide drafting, and each student writes a draft on a related topic using the model as a reference After drafting, the teacher delivers comments and targeted suggestions to help students produce stronger, more coherent compositions The process culminates with editing and publishing, marking the completion of the assignment.
A s s e s s m e n t
P articipant m a r k e r s
A teacher-researcher marked the writing tests, with another teacher from the Faculty of Foreign Languages at HTCC marking alongside the researcher The two raters discussed the marking criteria before scoring, and the post-test essays from two groups were coded and mixed to mirror the real final test conducted at the research site.
M arking c r ite r ia
Two m arking criteria w ere used
- W riting A pprehension T est (Q uestionnaire) See A ppendix 1
- Sample descriptors o f rating scale for a w riting-m arking schem e (see A ppendix 3).
This chapter presents the study results and discusses the major findings In line with the two research questions, the results are organized into two parts: the questionnaire and the writing test.
In tro d u c tio n
Participants in this study completed two assessment instruments: a questionnaire and a writing test Each instrument was administered twice—before the study began and after it ended—to yield pre- and post-assessment data Specifically, there was a pre- and post-questionnaire and a pre- and post-writing test.
Before the study, participants completed a pre-questionnaire and a pre-writing test to establish baseline measures of writing apprehension and writing quality These assessments helped us understand each participant's writing anxiety and skill level and enabled us to divide the class into two comparably matched groups in terms of writing apprehension and writing quality prior to applying the treatments.
A post-questionnaire and a post-writing test were administered to both the control and experimental groups at the end of the study to assess and compare the effects of each treatment on writing apprehension and writing quality The post-writing sample is flexible enough to allow students to draw on their past experiences to develop their essays while rhetorically adopting an argumentative model of writing Since the data used in this study are in the form of written tests.
T he r e s u lts
The p re -re s u lts
The results o f pre-questionnaire and pre- w riting test were both used to split the class o f
32 students into tw o control and experim ental groups w ith the com patible sim ilarity in writing apprehension and w riting quality.
4.2.1.1 The pre-questionnaire (Writing Apprehension Test) results
The pre-questionnaire was given to 32 students Q uestionnaire’ scores range from a low
26 (an extrem ely apprehensive w riter) to a high o f 130 (a very confident writer).
N o o f student M ean score N on- A pprehensive A pprehensive
Table 4.1 shows the results of the pre-questionnaire (Writing Apprehension Test) The mean score on the pre-questionnaire was 78.86 Of the 32 students who completed the test, fourteen were apprehensive, with scores ranging from 49 to 109, as defined on page 69 (Appendix 4).
The pre-w riting test w as also given to 32 students The results o f the test are described ii table 4.2 as follows:
M ean score Excellent Good A verage Poor
T able 4 2 The result o f pre-w riting test
From Table 4.2, the mean score of the pre-questionnaire was 60.03 The highest percentage of students’ points appeared at the Average level (56.25%), while 25% were at the Good level, 18.75% at the Poor level, and 0% at the Excellent level The concrete scores are defined in Appendix 6 (page 71).
Tie results o f pre-questionnaire and pre-w riting test w ere used to split 32 students into tvo small groups as follows:
W ritin g 's M ean score 60.03 60 fable 4.3.Mean scores of pre-questionnaire and pre-writing test o f control and experimental groups
As shown in Table 4.3, the control and experimental groups are comparable in both writing apprehension and writing quality The observable effects of each instructional process—the process approach and the genre-based approach (GBA)—can be inferred by comparing the post-questionnaire and post-writing test results between the control and experimental groups.
The post r e s u lt s
4 2.2.1 The post-questionnaire results (Writing Apprehension Test)
Following the process-oriented treatment for the control group and GBA for the experimental group, the post-questionnaire, The Daily-Miller Writing Apprehension Test, was administered at the end of the study.
Post-questionnaire results indicate that both hypotheses related to writing apprehension showed significant similarity Both the control and experimental groups demonstrated reductions in writing apprehension, but the experimental group reported a significantly greater decrease, with lower levels of writing apprehension than the control group.
Table 4.4 Pre- and post- questionnaires (Writing Apprehension Test) mean scores for both groups
Tible 4.4 show s that both groups reduced their w riting apprehension; H ow ever, the e>perimental group students reduced to a greater extent than students in the control gnup The difference betw een m ean for pre- and po st-questionnaire scores o f control wis 3.4 (82.4-79) w hile in the experim ental group, the difference betw een m ean for pre- ard post-test scores w as 11.75 (90.5-78.75) The difference o f the m ean scores presented in T able 4.4 also confirm s that all students in the experim ental group w ould report low er levels o f w riting apprehension at the end o f the study than w ould sim ilarly raiked students in the control group.This m eans that h yp othesis 1 (All students w ould re)ort a significant reduction in w riting apprehension as m easured by pre- and post- qiestionnaire (W riting A pprehension Test scores) and students in the experim ental group w ould report a significantly lo w er levels o f w riting ap prehensio n at the end o f the study than w oul d the students in the control group) is accepted.
M oreover, the high apprehensives in the experim ental group (students: num ber 3, 4, 7,
9, 11, 12 and 14) reported significantly low er levels o f w riting apprehension than high apprehensives (students: num ber 2, 5, 7, 11, 13, 14 and 16) in the control group (see appendix 4 page 69)
Table 4.5 Pre- and post- questionnaires mean scores for high apprehensives in both groups
Table 4.5 shows that highly apprehensive students in both the control and experimental groups reduced their writing apprehension by the end of the study, with the reduction being greater in the experimental group Specifically, the pre- to post-questionnaire difference for the control group was 4.5 points (72.7 to 68.2), while for the experimental group the difference was 14.3 points (80.7 to 66.4), confirming hypothesis 2.
To conclude, the n u m b e r o f A pprehensive and N on -A pprehensive students is different between tw o g r oups as presented as follows:
Group No o f student A pprehensive N o n- A pprehensive
T able 4.6 The result o f post- questionnaire (W riting A p preh ension Test)
Table 4.6 shows substantial improvement among students in the experimental group, with apprehension decreasing by 57% In the control group, improvement was more modest, with apprehension dropping by 14% At the end of the study, three students in the experimental group remained apprehensive, compared with six in the control group.
At the end of the study, a writing test was administered to compare writing quality between the experimental and control groups Participants were asked to produce an argumentative essay following the researcher’s instructions They were encouraged to apply the techniques and principles learned during the treatment period The test was time-controlled and standardized in its administration All essays were scored by two trained raters Sixteen students participated in the experimental group and an equal number—sixteen students—participated in the control group.
Results from the pre-writing test and the post-writing test for both the control group and the experimental group were analyzed and compared to examine differences in writing quality before and after the experiment The analysis tracked changes in performance from the pre-writing test to the post-writing test and highlighted how the experimental group differed from the control group in writing quality after the experiment.
This study evaluated the effectiveness of GBA instruction on argumentation writing by comparing the experimental group's writing test results with those of the control group The outcomes for both groups are summarized in Table 4.7, which details the scores and comparative performance, forming the basis for conclusions about the impact of GBA instruction on argumentative writing.
As shown in the table, the means and standard deviations for the two groups in essay writing indicate that the experimental group achieved higher mean scores than the control group, suggesting superior performance under the experimental condition.
Hypothesis 3 posits that a large proportion of students in the experimental group will produce post-test compositions with significantly higher overall quality than the post-test compositions written by students in the control group This anticipated difference would serve as a clear, measurable indicator of the intervention’s impact on writing quality and supports a straightforward comparison between the experimental and control groups.
W riting scores w er e used to com pare the result o f tw o gro up s’ essay w ritings.
Table 4.7 shows a statistically significant difference in writing competence between the two groups’ essay writing (p = 0.036, p < 0.05) The GBA-based teaching approach produced a greater improvement in students’ performance than the process-approach Specifically, the experimental group achieved a mean score of 72.9, compared with 63.8 for the control group, yielding a mean gain of 9.1.
The results from comparing the two groups' essay writings indicate that the experimental group generally exhibited higher writing competence and a higher overall mean quality than the control group However, the experimental group did not outperform the control group in all live sections, contrary to expectations.
Figure 4.1 The general results o f control and experim ental groups’ w riting tests c° O' vC?
Results show that the excellent level was 12.5% in the experimental group versus 0% in the control group The poor level was 0% in the experimental group, while 12.5% of students in the control group were at the poor level The experimental group also achieved a higher proportion in the good level (50%) and a lower proportion in the average level (37.5%) compared with the control group, which had 31.25% in the good level and 56.25% in the average level.
Hypothesis 4 posits that students in the experimental group will demonstrate superior basic writing elements—especially organization (introduction, body, and conclusion)—and enhanced linguistic features, including the use of argumentative verbs and varied sentence structures, compared with students in the control group This finding would suggest that the experimental intervention improves core writing skills relative to standard instruction.
The study defines the introduction as having three main components: a clear thesis statement, sufficient background information, and the presentation of two-sided viewpoints An effective conclusion should restate the thesis and summarize all arguments presented in the body paragraphs Table 4.6 shows the characteristics of the introduction and conclusion for students in the control and experimental groups of an argumentative essay.
Percentage (%) Introduction -contain a clear thesis s ta te me nt
-contain sufficient ba ckg ro u nd
- contain 2-sided point o f vi ew
- su m m a r i z e all main argum ents
Table 4.8: The Introduction and Conclusion o f the students in control and experimental groups