The interplay of learning styles and use of idea generating techniques in the efl writing process a case study m a

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITYUNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES ______________________ THE INTERPLAY OF LEARNING STYLES AND USE OF IDEA-GENERATING TECHNIQUES I

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY

UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

THE INTERPLAY OF LEARNING STYLES

AND USE OF IDEA-GENERATING

TECHNIQUES IN THE EFL WRITING

PROCESS: A CASE STUDY

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL)

Submitted by PHAN VĂN QUANG

Supervisor NGUYỄN QUANG TIẾN, Ph.D.

RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS

I hereby state that I, PHAN VAN QUANG, being the candidate for thedegree of Master of TESOL, accept the requirements of the Universityrelating to the retention and use of Master’s Thesis deposited in the Library

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my thesisdeposited in the Library should be accessible for purposes of study andresearch, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Libraryfor the care, loan or reproduction of thesis

Ho Chi Minh City, May 2017

PHAN VAN QUANG

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

I hereby certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled:

“THE INTERPLAY OF LEARNING STYLES AND USE OF

IDEA-GENERATING TECHNIQUES IN THE EFL WRITING PROCESS: A

CASE STUDY”

In term of the statements of requirements for thesis in Master’sPrograms issued by the Higher Degree Committee

Ho Chi Minh City, May 2017

PHAN VAN QUANG

I wish to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis adviser Dr NguyenQuang Tien for his guidance and support throughout my thesis writing Hisinsightful discussions, valuable comments, enthusiasm and patience with meplayed a crucial role in the preparation and completion of this thesis

Next, my profound thanks are expressed to the International Programs

of Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology for permission for carryingout this thesis I also thank Mr Vo Trong Nguyen, my colleague, for hisenthusiastic cooperation and helpful suggestions as well as the students atHCM university of Technology for their participation in the survey for myresearch

On a more personal note, I need to thank my family for their love andencouragement during my studies, especially during the time when I wrotethe thesis

Writing plays an important mode of communication and is one of themost difficult skills in English language learning and teaching Therefore, ithas gained considerable attention both from researchers and teachers.However, little research has been found on the investigation of the interplay

of English writing skills and learners’ learning styles In the context of EFL(English as a foreign language) in Vietnam, few studies have been conducted

to explore this issue The current study, therefore, aimed at investigating theinterplay of learning styles and the use of idea-generating techniques in theEFL writing process This study was conducted at Ho Chi Minh CityUniversity of Technology in 2015 Twenty one students participated in thequestionnaire surveys, the think-aloud protocol, and the semi-structuredinterview On the basis of the results of this research, it can be concluded that

in most cases, the choice of techniques is a matter of habit or convenience,and in few cases, the choice of techniques is made under the influence of thewriter’s learning style preference Indeed, only the visual learners showconsistency in choosing their idea-generating technique (mind-mapping)while other types of learners do not show consistency in their choice Also,some implications for both instructors and students were considered

EFL : English foreign language

ESL : English second language

HCMUT : Ho Chi Minh University of Technology

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS i

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii

ABSTRACT iv

ABBREVIATIONS v

TABLE OF CONTENTS vi

LIST OF FIGURES x

LIST OF CHARTS xi

CHAPTER ONE 1

INTRODUCTION 1

1.1.Background to the Study 1

1.2.Statement of the Problem 4

1.4.Purpose of This Study 4

1.6.Significance of the Study 5

1.7.Organization of the Study 6

CHAPTER TWO 8

LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1.Cognitive Model of Writing Process 8

2.1.1.Task Environment 8

2.1.2.Long Term Memory 8

2.1.3.Writing Process 10

2.1.3.1.Planning 10

2.1.3.1.1.Generating Ideas 11

2.1.3.1.2.Organizing 14

2.1.3.1.3.Goal Setting 15

2.1.3.1.4.Translating 16

16

2.2.Learning Styles 17

2.2.1.Definition 17

2.2.2.Different Kinds of Learning Styles 19

2.2.3.Characteristics of Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learners 20

2.2.3.1.Visual Learners 21

2.2.3.2.Auditory Learners 22

2.2.3.3.Kinesthetic learners 23

2.3.Research on Writing Process and Learning Styles 23

2.3.1.Research on Writing Process 23

2.4.An Overview of Relevant Research to Learning Styles 26

2.5.Conclusion 30

2.6 Conceptual Framework 31

2.6.Summary 33

CHAPTER THREE 35

METHODOLOGY 35

3.1.Research Site 35

3.2 Participants 36

3.3 Research Questions 36

3.4.1 Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire (PLSPQ) 37

3.4.2 Think-Aloud Protocol 39

3.4.4 Semi- Structured Interview 43

3.5.Data Collection Procedure 44

CHAPTER FOUR 46

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 46

4.1.Findings .46

4.1.1.Research Question One 46

4.1.2.Research Question Two 47

4.1.2.1.The Use of Idea-Generating Techniques 48

4.1.2.2.The Causes of Using Idea-Generating Techniques 50

4.1.2.2.1.Data from the Think-Aloud Protocol 50

4.1.2.2.2.Data from the Semi-Structured Interview 51

4.1.3.Question Three 52

4.1.3.1.The Interplay between Learning Styles and Use of Idea-Generating Techniques in the Think-Aloud Protocol 52

4.1.3.2.The Interplay between Learning Styles and Use of Idea-Generating Techniques after the Writing Conference 53

CHAPTER FIVE 60

IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 60

4.2.Discussions 54

4.2.1.Research Question One 54

4.2.2.Research Question Two 55

4.2.3.Research Question Three 56

4.2.4 Summary 59

5.1.Implications 60

5.1.1.For the EFL Teachers 60

5.1.2.For EFL Learners 62

5.2.Limitations 64

5.3.Recommendations for Future Study 65

5.4.Summary 66

REFERENCES 68

APPENDIX A 76

APPENDIX B 79

APPENDIX C 82

APPENDIX D 83

APPENDIX E 85

APPENDIX G 88

APPENDIX H 89

LIST OF TABLESCHAPTER FOUR

Table 4.1 Overall percentages of learning style preferences of EFL

students………54

LIST OF FIGURESCHAPTER TWO

Figure 2.1 Structure of Cognitive Models of Writing Process 11Figure 2.2 Conceptual Framework 34

LIST OF CHARTSCHAPTER FOUR

Chart 4.1 Learning style preferences of EFL students………55Chart 4.2 Use of idea-generating techniques……….56Chart 4.3 The relationship between learning styles and use of idea-

generating techniques in the pre writing stage in the think aloudprotocol………58Chart 4.4 The relationship between learning styles and idea-generating

techniques students used after the writing conference…………59

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides readers with the background to the study bydisplaying the statement of the problem, theoretical framework, conceptualframework, purpose of the study, research questions, significance of thestudy, and a brief overview of the thesis

1.1 Background to the Study

This section provides a compelling understanding of the context of theproblem by highlighting the relevant facts about writing and learning styles oflearners in the EFL classroom

For the past decades, EFL writing teachers have used the two writingapproaches to teach English composition: product-oriented approach andprocess approach In this process approach, the cognitive model of writingprocess comprises three major elements: writing process, the taskenvironment and the writer’s long-term memory (Flower & Hayes, 1981).The writing process consists of three main sub-processes: planning,translating, and reviewing During planning, students take information fromthe task environment and from long-term memory, produce languagecorresponding to information in the writer’s memory (translate), and read/edit(review) to improve the quality of the text The writing process approach

among pre-writing, writing, and revising tasks,” (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996, p.19) during which they engage in the discovery and expression of meaning, butare not preoccupied with form (Silva, 1990, p 16) Flower and Hayes’ writingprocess model revealed some important insights, among which is the ideacomposing is a goal-driven behavior and that process is non-linear andinteractive.

The writing process approach focuses not only on the steps of writing(planning, drafting, revising /editing) but also on writing strategies such asselecting topics, generating ideas, and considering writing purpose andaudience Existing research on writing processes and strategies (e.g.,Matsumoto, 1995; Raimes, 1987; Leki, 1995; Zamel, 1983; Huynh, 2006; Le,2009), some of which (e.g., Matsumoto, 1995; Raimes, 1987; Leki, 1995)concluded that students took advantage of their past writing experiences inL1 writing to achieve their current writing tasks and compensate for the lack

of linguistic and educational experiences Besides, the research of Zamel(1983), Huynh (2006), Le (2009) showed that students, especially unskilledstudents ignored the use of idea-generating techniques in the planning stage;furthermore, they got trouble in using idea-generating techniques to find ideasfor their essays, which play a very important role in the writing processbecause writing is primarily about organizing information and communicatingmeaning (Whilte, 1991) Actually, getting started is one of the most difficult

and inhibiting step in writing and idea-generating is particularly important as

an initiating process Therefore, close attention should be paid to this stage

Additionally, some writing strategies, such as having a sense ofaudience, setting goals, organizing ideas, planning, monitoring, andevaluating performances are believed to be teachable and independent oflanguage proficiency (Cumming, 1989; Roca de Larios, Murphy & Marin,2002), for that reason, Weigle (2005) advocates that writing classes shouldprovide a balance between a focus on language and writing strategies

It is believe that differences between skilled and unskilled writers based

on the coordination of knowledge (e.g language, topic, and genre knowledge)and the strategy use variable Language learning strategies are defined as

“behaviors, techniques, or actions used by students to gain second or foreignlanguage skills” (Crookall et al., 1990) Much language learning strategyresearch has revealed that students often lack awareness of language learningstrategies, and the most efficient way to heighten this awareness is to helpstudents be aware of their learning style preferences (Reid, 1995)

In the process of learning the language, language learning style is one

of the factors that determine the success of a language learner (Sharp, 2004).Therefore, many researchers have investigated learning styles of learners invarious studies, which reflects the importance of learning styles in the field of

Alsafi, 2010; Hyland, 1993; Trinidad, 2008; Ong, 2006; Mulalic, 2009;Ismail, 2003; Nguyen, 2010; Luu, 2011) In these studies, the researchersfound that students’ learning preferences always influence the way that anindividual makes decisions and the choice of learning tasks suitable for thelearners because they have various ways of getting and processinginformation Thus, if students’ learning styles are known, teachers can expecttheir students’ preferences, take advantage of their strengths and minimizetheir weaknesses (Birkey & Rodman, 1995; Hartman, 1995).

1.2 Statement of the Problem

A careful review of existing research on EFL writing process andlanguage learning styles reveals several questionable issues Much of EFLwriting research focuses on composing processes and strategies; there arevery few studies that deal with the matching of EFL writing process andlanguage learning styles More importantly, there is scan research on theinterplay of the learning styles and use of idea-generating techniques in theEFL writing process Indeed, there is a clear need for a systematicinvestigation into this issue

1.3 Purpose of This Study

This research examined the interplay of learning styles and the use ofidea-generating techniques in the EFL writing process The learning stylesinvestigated in this study fall into three categories: visual, auditory, andkinesthetic The idea-generating techniques in this study have eight types:

freewriting, outlining, mind mapping, cubing, listing, group discussion,looping, and wh-questions.

1.4 Research Questions

This study addresses the following research questions:

1) What are students’ learning styles?

2) What idea-generating techniques do students frequently use in theprewriting stage?

3) How are the learning styles related to the use of idea-generatingtechniques in the EFL writing process?

1.5 Significance of the Study

Idea-generating techniques are frequently used in the prewriting stage

of English writing process in English writing classes They are showed theEnglish teaching guidelines for English teachers However, how they are used

in writing classes is not fully explored Learning style is another importantfactor of students’ foreign language learning Sarasin’s (1999) and Brown’s(2007) study showed that students respond differently in learning EFLdepending on what type of learners they are Therefore, the relationshipbetween types of learners and their use of idea-generating techniques in theEFL writing process is to be studied Thus, the results of this research wouldcontribute both theoretically and practically to the effective teaching of the

this study adds much needed information to the body of literature related tothe relationship of learning styles of learners and their use of idea-generatingtechniques At a practical level, the findings of this study may help EFLteachers to make informed decisions to select appropriate idea-generatingtechniques that can facilitate EFL students’ writing process, and provide atheoretically based module to train their students It may also help to informEFL students of some successful pre-writing strategies that can enhance theirwriting quantity and quality.

1.6 Organization of the Study

The current research is divided into five chapters Chapter oneintroduces the research background, discusses the statement of the problem,establishes the theoretical framework, the conceptual framework, explains thepurpose of the study, and states the research questions Chapter two reviewsrelevant literature related to the cognitive writing process model proposed byFlower and Hayes (1981) that provides theoretical basic for the currentresearch; research on EFL writing process and the impact of learning styles onthe learning process are also discussed in this chapter The last section ofchapter two examines the studies on the learning styles Chapter threediscusses the research design, the study context, the instruments, and datacollection Chapter four deals with the research findings and presents theresults of both qualitative and qualitative analyses that answer the three

research questions of this study The final chapter discusses the pedagogicalimplications, and suggests further research.

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews existing literature on both the writing process andlearning styles It includes three sections The first section provides thecognitive writing process model proposed by Flower and Hayes (1981) thatserves as the theoretical basic for the current research The second sectionexamines the impact of learning styles on a learner’s learning process Thethird section examines research on both the writing process and learningstyles

2.1 Cognitive Model of Writing Process

One of the most influential cognitive models of the writing processwas proposed by Flower and Hayes (1981) The model reveals the act ofwriting as comprising of three major elements, which are task environment,long term memory and writing process (Figure 2.1)

2.1.1 Task Environment

Flower and Hayes (1981) stated that task environment involves thethings the writer needs to consider, the things outside such as the topicchosen by the writers, the audience of the essay which determine the way thewriter writes, and the text he/she produce

2.1.2 Long Term Memory

According to Flower and Hayes (1981), long term memory involves

the writer’s background knowledge about the topic, recognition of theappropriate information and decision on the suitable writing plan to fit therhetorical situation of the essay in order that the content is relevant to theaudience.

Figure 2.1 Structure of Cognitive Models of Writing Process (Flower and

2.1.3 Writing Process

Flower and Hayes (1981) maintained that the writing process involvesthe planning made by the writer before writing, the translation of ideas intowords while writing, and the review, evaluation and revision of the essaybefore presentation to the audience

be more abstract than the writer’s prose representation will eventually be Forexample, a whole network of ideas might be represented by a single keyword Moreover, this representation of the writer’s knowledge will notnecessarily be made in language, but could be held as a visual or perceptualcode, e.g., as a fleeting image that the writer must then capture in words

Flower and Hayes (1981) stated that planning, or the act of buildingthis internal representation, involves a number of sub-processes The mostobvious one is the act of generating ideas, which includes finding relevantinformation from long-term memory Sometimes this information is so welldeveloped and organized in memory that the writer is essentially generatingstandard written English However, in some cases, writers may generate only

small parts or unconnected, even contradictory thoughts Planning containsthree sub-processes: generating ideas, organizing, and goal setting.

2.1.3.1.1 Generating Ideas

Generating ideas is the stage that writers use invention techniques toexplore ideas on a subject before he or she starts writing about it (Ilona Leki,1998) Idea-generating techniques commonly used are freewriting, listing,wh-questions, clusters or branches, looping, cubing, outlining, and groupdiscussions

Freewriting

Ilona Leki (1982) divided freewriting into two kinds The first type letsthe writers empty their mind temporarily of everyday concerns in order thatthey can focus on the task at hand In case the writers need to work on awriting assignment but cannot focus on it, this type may help them to cleartheir mind of the thoughts on their mind at that moment until they have gottenall distractions out of their system The other type; however, helps the writersstart exploring their ideas on a subject but have not yet decided what aspect ofthat subject they want to explore They can start it by writing down everythingcoming to their mind on this topic If writers cannot think of the words inEnglish, they write the words in their own language or leave a blank and keepgoing

According to Langan (2008), when writers decided on an aspect of atopic to write about, they have to find out what they know about it andanything related to it This technique is similar to free writing in principle.Writers also start writing down everything coming to their mind in words orphrases rather than sentences

Wh-questions

Langan (2008) maintained that by using wh-questions, writers usuallytry to write the first sentence to answer the following questions: who, what,when, where, why, how These questions can be used to generate ideas In thisway, they can identify the exact subject they are going to discuss

Mind Mapping

According to Langan (2008), a mind map or spider gram is a strategyused commonly to making notes on a topic, prior to writing Writers start bywriting the subject of their composition in the middle of a piece of paper andwrite down all the things which they associate with it They continue thisprocess by exploring associations for each of the things they have writtendown

Looping

Langan (2008) acknowledged that looping is different from free writing

in focusing your thought on finding the core or center and pinpointing a mainidea on which to elaborate

According to Langan (2008), cubing helps writers look at an idea fromsix different points of view, each of which presents one of the six sides of acube The subject will be looked at from these six angles in order that writershave several perspectives on the subject The following angles of the topiccan be examined One of the following angles of the topic examined

 Describe it (What does it look like? What do you see?)

 Compare it (What is it similar to? What is it different from?)

 Analyze it (What is it made of? What are its parts?)

 Associate it (What does it remind you of? What do you associate itwith?)

 Apply it (What can you do with it? What can you use it for?)

 Argue for or against it (Take either position Give any reasons, evencrazy ones.)

Outlining

Langan (2008) said that outlining can be a transition between inventingand writing a first draft It is considered as a plan for writing and extremelyuseful in dividing up the big task of writing a formal paper into the muchmore manageable task of writing small parts that will eventually make aunified and organized whole

Group Discussing

Group discussing is a way in which a group of people interacts withanother one to find out ideas for a certain problem This technique is widelyused because group members will give a variety of ideas, from which writerscould select those which are appropriate for the writing (Zemelman andDanniels, 1988)

2.1.3.1.2 Organizing

Flower and Hayes (1981) said that when the structure of ideas in thewriter’s memory is not adequately adapted to the current rhetorical task, thesub-process of organizing takes on the job of helping the writer to assignmeaning, that is, give a meaningful structure, to his or her ideas The process

of organizing appears to play a vital role in creative thinking and discoverybecause it is capable of grouping ideas and forming new concepts Moreimportantly, the organizing process permits the writer to identifycategories, search for subordinate ideas to develop a current topic, andsearch for superordinate ideas which include or subsume the current topic

At a higher or more advanced level the process of organizing also attends

to more strictly textual decisions about the presentation and ordering ofthe text That is, writers identify first and last topics, important ideas, andpresentation patterns However, organizing is much more than merelyordering points And it seems to be clear that all rhetorical decisions andplans for reaching the audience affect the process of organizing ideas at

all levels, because it is often guided by major goals that are establishedduring the powerful process of goal-setting.

2.1.3.1.3 Goal Setting

Flower and Hayes (1981) maintained that goal-setting is indeed a third,little-studied but major, aspect of the planning process The goals writers givethemselves are both procedural and substantive The most important thingabout writing goals is the fact that they are created by the writer.Although some well-learned plans and goals may be drawn intact fromlong-term memory, most of the writer's goals are generated, developed,and revised by the same processes that generate and organize new ideas.And this process goes on throughout composing Just as goals lead a writer

to generate ideas, those ideas lead to new, more complex goals which canthen integrate content and purpose

Flower and Hayes (1981) suggested that the act of defining one's ownrhetorical problem and setting goals is an important part of “being creative”and can account for some important differences between good and poorwriters They believe that the act of developing and refining one’s owngoals is not limited to a “pre-writing stage” in the composing process,but is intimately bound up with the on- going, moment-to- momentprocess of composing

2.1.3.1.4 Translating

Flower and Hayes (1981) stated that translating is the process of puttingideas into visible language Writers have chosen the term “translate” for thisprocess over other terms such as “transcribe” or “write” to focus on thepeculiar qualities of the task The information generated in planning may berepresented in various symbol systems other than language, such as imagery

or kinetic sensations When the planning process represents one’s thought inwords, that representation is unlikely to be in the elaborate syntax of writtenEnglish So the writer’s task is to translate a meaning, which may beembodied in key words and organized in a complex network ofrelationships, into a linear piece of written English

2.1.3.1.5 Reviewing

According to Flower and Hayes (1981), reviewing is a consciousprocess in which writers choose to read what they have written to evaluate orrevise the text The period of reviewing frequently leads to new cycles ofplanning and translating It includes two sub-processes: revising andevaluating, which along with generating, share the special distinction of beingable to interrupt any other process and occur at any time in the act of writing

2.1.3.1.6 The Monitor

According to Flower and Hayes (1981), as writers compose, they alsomonitor their current process and progress The monitor functions as awriting strategist which determines when the writer moves from one

process to the next For example, it determines how long a writer willcontinue generating ideas before attempting to write prose It is suggested thatthis choice is determined both by the writer’s goals and by individual writinghabits or styles As an example of varied composing styles, writers appear torange from people who try to move to polished prose as quickly as possible

to people who choose to plan the entire discourse in detail before writing aword

2.2 Learning Styles

2.2.1 Definition

There have been various definitions of learning styles in the literature.Riding and Cheema (1991) stated that learning style is usually adopted toreflect a concern with the application of cognitive style in a learning situationwhile Dunn (1990) believed that learning styles are influenced dramatically

by personality According to him, personality traits and characteristicsinfluence the way in which a person interacts with the world, throughout hislife The person’s experiences and society exert their influence: she/he adaptslearning processes and adopts strategies to succeed

Sarasin (1999) defined learning style as “a certain specified pattern ofbehavior and/or performance according to which the individual approaches

a learning experience, a way in which the individual takes in new

definition, understanding learning style included understanding behaviorswhen approaching a learning experience, when involved in a learningexperience, when evaluating a learning experience, and when applyingnew information and skills to situations in life.

Reid (1987) defines learning styles as the changes “among learners inusing one or more senses to understand, organize, and retain experience”.According to her, some learners may favor visual presentations, others mayrespond to hands-on activities It is clear that people learn differently andthese differences in learning abound ESL/EFL settings In Reid (1987)study, three learning styles referred to the Perceptual Learning Stylepreference These are divided into auditory (listening to lectures and tapes),visual (reading and studying diagram), kinesthetic (physical activity andmovement)

Learning styles are defined by Fleming (2001) as “an individual’scharacteristics and preferred ways of gathering, organizing, and thinkingabout information VARK is in the category of instructional preferencesbecause it deals with perceptual modes.” VARK means Visual (V), Aural (A),Read/Write (R), and Kinesthetic (K)

According to Fleming (2001), visual learners like to learn by maps,charts, graphs, diagrams, pictures, highlighters, and different colors Aurallearners prefer to learn by discussing the topics with their teachers and otherstudents, explain new ideas to others, and use a tape recorder Read/write

learners like to learn by essays, textbooks, definitions, readings, and takingnotes Kinesthetic learners prefer to learn by field trips, doing things tounderstand them, laboratories, and hand-on approaches.

As it can be seen, the definitions provided above vary in terms

of scope and depth Currently, the involvement of several dimensionswhile defining learning styles leads to confusion since it is difficult tocontrol and focus on all of them simultaneously Thus, in this study, thedefinition provided by Reid (1987) “learning style is a term that describes thevariations among learners in using one or more senses to understand,organize, and retain experience” will be taken as a basis

2.2.2 Different Kinds of Learning Styles

Researchers used various theories to classify learning styles The mostimportant kinds of learning styles are as following

Gregorc (1985) and Butler (1988) identified style in terms of the labelsConcrete, Abstract, Sequential, and Random According to Gregorc andButler, learners can be classified into one or a combination of these styles

Ronald (1995) proposed another kind of learning style which addressedthe individual’s processing perspective They made efforts to understand howsomeone might process new information so as to best understand it by usingthe classifications Cognitive, Affective, Perceptual, and Behavioral

progress through life In her “4MAT Learning Styles Wheel”, she employedterms such as “Analytic” and “Imaginative” and “Dynamic/CommonSensible” to describe different learning styles.

In 1993, Gardner produced a theory called multiple intelligences Heproposed eight different intelligences including: linguistic intelligence,logical-mathematical intelligence, spatial intelligence, bodily-kinestheticintelligence, musical intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, intrapersonalintelligence, and naturalist intelligence to account for a broader range ofhuman potential in children and adults

Based on Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences, Smith (1998)proposed a model which assumed that learners differ in terms of preferringvisual or auditory or kinesthetic modes of learning According to this model,students of different learning styles may respond to aural and visual messagesdifferently This approach can be easily translated into strategies in apostsecondary classroom setting

In this study, the researcher takes Smith’s classification of learningstyles in terms of visual, kinesthetic, and auditory learning styles as a basic

2.2.3 Characteristics of Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learners

Smith (1998) supposed that sensory preferences can be decomposedinto three main areas: visual, auditory, kinesthetic

2.2.3.1 Visual Learners

Scarcella (1990) portrayed that visual students like to read and obtain agreat deal from visual stimulation Lectures, conversations, and oral directionswithout any visual backup can make visual learners confusing Visuallearners will prefer written instructions and be able to recall what they seeand Also, these students are sight readers who enjoy reading silently.Furthermore, they will learn by observing and enjoy working with graphic,maps, graphs, charts, diagrams, or text with a lot of pictures Moreover, visuallearners need to interact visually with new information Butler (1988) hasgiven these learners labels such as global, affective, dependent, concept-oriented, field-sensitive, field-dependent, and abstract random or concreterandom They have tendency to understand the whole concept rather than itsindividual parts Visual learners are generally group-oriented, respond well toenvironmental influences or social cues, and work better in informal ratherthan formal learning situations

According to McCarthy (1990), the visual learners can be compared tolabels of her 4MAT system to identify learners and their needs, students withvisual strengths or preferences tend to fall somewhere in the quadrant one orfour range These quadrants represent concrete experience skills, so suchstudents tend to “Sense and Feel”

2.2.3.2 Auditory Learners

According to Sarasin (1999), the auditory learners are described as theindependent learners That means that they are competitive and achievement-oriented and have the ability to analyze pieces of information They are alsoconsidered as perceptual students, who need to understand relationships andconnections between concepts and pieces of information In addition, auditorylearners concentrate on the tasks or objectives at hand, tend to be moreconceptual by nature, concerned with how concepts relate to pieces ofinformation, and are very skill-oriented and memorize things well

In contrast to visual learners, auditory students are comfortable withoutvisual input and thus enjoy and profit from unembellished lectures,conversations, and oral directions They are interested in classroominteractions in role-plays and analogous activities Students with this stylewill be able to memorize what they hear and will prefer oral instructions;therefore, they can recreate what they hear by focusing on previous lessons.These students should be introduced to new information by hearing it (Dunn,1990) They also learn best when interviewing, debating, giving oral reports,

or taking part in oral discussions of written material, but they occasionallyhave difficulty with written work

The auditory learning style can be compared to the labels used by otherresearchers Learners with auditory strengths tend to fall somewhere in thequadrant two or three range of the McCarthy (1990) 4MAT System for

identifying learner needs These quadrants represent abstract thinking andconceptualization skills; they are the “Thinking” quadrants Thecharacteristics of auditory learners are similar to the Concrete Sequential andAbstract Sequential learners in Gregorc’s (1985) study, and to the Abstractand Reflective learners as defined by Harb, Durrant, & Terry (1993).

2.2.3.3 Kinesthetic learners

According to Scarcella (1990), kinesthetic students are those who likelots of movement and enjoy working with tangible objects, collages, andflashcards Sitting at a desk for long is not for them; they prefer to havefrequent breaks and move around the room Kinesthetic learners also learn bymanipulating objects They need to involve their whole body in learning

2.3 Research on Writing Process and Learning Styles

2.3.1 Research on Writing Process

In a study named “The composing processes of advanced ESL students:

six case study”, Zamel (1983) investigated the composing processes of six

students The results of the study showed that the participants of the studyexperienced a process of discovering and creating meaning To the skilledwriters, they showed recursiveness in their writing process and understoodthat writing involves the relationship of thinking, writing, and rewriting Theunskilled writers, however, took less time to write and revise than the skilled

techniques was absent from the writing process of these two groups ofwriters.

Raimes (1987) in her research titled “Language proficiency, writing

ability, and composing strategies: A study of ESL college student writers”

employed interviews, language proficiency scores, think-aloud protocols, andthe students essays to examine the composing strategies of eight ESL students

in remedial and nonremedial groups It was discovered that several commoncomposing strategies (e.g., rescanning, planning, revising, editing wereemployed by ESL writers across course placement and language proficiencylevels and to L1 and L2 writers Nevertheless, the students in the remedialgroup planned, rehearsed, rescanned, revised, and edited less, despiteindividual variation Furthermore, the researcher showed that L2 writersemployed similar writing process and strategies to those used by L1 writers.Leki (1995) conducted a study to explore the strategies students used inwritten assignments The participants of the study were 5 ESL studentsjoining a university in the USA A variety of instruments includingparticipants’ interviews, class observations, and course written documents,such as class notes, exams, written drafts, final drafts with professors’comments and evaluations were used in her study She found that the students

in her research employed various useful strategies to cope with the demand ofthe written assignments More specifically, they relied on past writingexperiences to achieve their current writing tasks and took advantage of first

language to compensate for the lack of linguistic and educational experiences.Besides, the research showed that these students already possess some writingstrategies from past learning experiences.

In his study related to the processes and strategies of EFL students,Matsumoto (1995) interviewed four Japanese EFL learners who werepermitted to provide any information related to their habits and behaviorsregarding their academic writing The content of the interviews were audio-recorded, listened and taken detailed notes The findings of the study revealedthat the participants used word processing for planning: generating andorganizing ideas during the planning process Also, when they brainstormedand generated ideas, they used their L1 More importantly, the participantsreported that the participants followed the same process and used the samestrategies with respect to the L1 and L2 writing processes All of themconsidered the writing process as non-linear and dynamic

In Vietnam, there are several studies concerned on this issue Huynh’sstudy (2006) showed that the first-year students in Ho Chi Minh cityUniversity of Technology got into trouble in doing the prewriting act such asgenerating, organizing ideas, finding out appropriate expressions Shesuggested several solutions to help learners overcome this problem One ofthem is that teacher should instruct students to do the prewriting act by

Le (2009) conducted the research on the effects of using samples inprewriting on the quality of written texts produced by final-year students at

Ba Ria-Vung Tau teacher training college Her study indicated that moststudents were incapable of determining ideas for their piece of writing.Furthermore, analyzing samples related to an assigned writing topic was amore effective solution to the improvement of the students’ writing abilitythan brainstorming and group discussion

2.4 An Overview of Relevant Research to Learning Styles

So far a huge number of researchers have examined learning stylesfrom different aspects These studies on learning styles in the EFL learnershave emerged from a concern about identifying and describing the features ofeffective language learners

Reid (1987) investigated the learning styles of 90 students who werestudying at a Chinese university in the USA The result of the study showedthat the participants preferred kinesthetic In addition, Melton’s study in 1990involving 331 students joining five schools in China showed the similarresult like Reid’s that kinesthetic learning styles were the students’ preferredlearning styles After that, Rossi-Le distributed a survey to 147 students inthe USA in 1995, the results of the study were consistent with Reid’s (1987)findings in the sense that the participants showed the kinesthetic stylepreference as their major learning styles Another study by Sharifah & Wan(1995) among the Malay students in a Malaysian institution showed

similar findings to the previous findings because kinesthetic learning styleswere preferred by the students, and added to these, other styles such as visualand auditory styles were the participants’ preferences.

Stebbins (1993) investigated the learning styles of 600 ESL students in

8 university-affiliated intensive English programs They came from 63countries and majored in 92 fields of study The results of the study showedthat the participants in this study strongly preferred kinesthetic learning stylesmore than native English speakers These were in parallel with Reid’s (1987)findings in the sense that and group learning was the least preferred learningstyle by most native speakers of English and ESL students

In her study, Rosniah Mustaffa (2005) examined learning stylepreferences among Bachelor of Arts students in English language studies atthe University of Kebangsaan Malaysia during eight months It was revealedthat auditory, visual, and kinesthetic learning styles were preferred bystudents as the major styles

Alsafi (2010) studied learning styles among 90 Saudi Second-yearmedical students at King Abdul-Aziz University The findings discovered thatKinesthetic and Auditory learning styles were preferred by the participantswhile they did not favored visual learning styles

In order to confirm part of the above results about the most preferred

reported that Japanese learners preferred auditory, kinesthetic styles anddisfavored visual styles.

Trinidad (2008) adopted VARK Learning Preference Test of Fleming(2001) to 298 students from Southern Illinois University Carbondale andRanken Technical College The findings revealed that the highest number ofthe participants favored kinesthetic learning style

Ong (2006) applied Reid’s Learning Style Preference questionnaire asthe main instrument for data collection, Ong found that kinesthetic learningwas their major learning style This means most of the students like to beactive in the classroom Auditory learning was the least preferred learningstyle

However, a few studies examining the same research in learning styles

of students revealed the opposite results They showed that some preferredlearning styles as previously discussed were learners’ negative learning styles

in such studies For example, Mulalic (2009) investigated 160 students at theDepartment of Language and Communication in the University of TenagaNasional in Malaysia The findings showed that those students preferredkinesthetic learning styles as their negative preferences, and auditory andvisual learning styles were their minor preferred Also, the findings obtained

by Hariharan and Ismail (2003) from surveying secondary school students inKedah of Malaysia revealed that the students did not have any major learningstyle However, they selected kinesthetic and group as their minor learning