Recent developments in EIKEN and TEAP testing in Japan try to ensure that students can write to a suitable standard and express their thoughts concisely whilst making use of correct academic conventions. However, as many teachers are aware, a large percentage of their university students are incapable of writing even the most fundamental sentences, despite having studied the language for six years. Indeed, large numbers of students wishing to attend universities in the UK and other overseas countries find it difficult to convey meaning accurately in English. They face similar problems with content and structure. This paper examines how three classes, one of 35 students and two of 34 students, at one university were assessed on their written ability and demonstrate that, even with the most rudimentary instruction and feedback, many were able to increase their writing performance significantly. I write this paper before the onset of a more detailed active research project I hope to conduct and feel confident that the initial findings substantiate further research into this field. Additionally, I am collaborating with a colleague to develop assessment software for the educational sector. In the following paragraphs I will discuss the methodology and reasoning behind the research project before discussing the findings. I teach English at a number of institutes from junior high schools to universities and I have always wondered how I might be able to help or encourage my students to improve upon their writing skills. Since I also grade written work for EIKEN pre-first examinees and TEAP examinees as well as deliver seminars on correct EAP conventions, I noticed that a large number of students make similar and repetitive mistakes in their written work. At the time of writing, I am collaborating with a colleague to develop assessment software for the EFL market and I wanted to test the appropriateness of this software on a number of students, receive their feedback and suggestions and make any necessary alterations to the planned software design before making an investment.
Table of Contents
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This study investigates the impact of diverse instructional methods and detailed feedback on the writing performance of first-year university students in Japan over a three-week period, aiming to determine if such interventions can significantly improve student writing outcomes.
- Comparison of three different instructional approaches across student groups
- Analysis of writing improvement through quantitative and qualitative data
- Exploration of the effectiveness of formative assessment and feedback
- Evaluation of student perceptions regarding their own writing development
- Development and testing of assessment software for EFL environments
Excerpt from the Book
Method
In this section of the paper, I will briefly discuss the participants and then focus on the procedure of the action research and provide a rationale for my reasoning.
Many tests at Japanese high schools, it appears, are only interested in grading student ability to memorize archaic grammar, vocabulary without context, and short sentence structure. Little is done to help students become creative writers or to use academic conventions correctly. Reinking, Hart and von der Osten (2001) discuss the qualities of good writing and explain reasons for behind it. Many students, it seems, lack this awareness and see writing as a burden rather than a means of expression. I believe this to be a major flaw in the Japanese system, and it is a problem to which my assessment software should directly address. I chose an action research project as according to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011.344) it ‘is a powerful tool for change and improvement at the local level.’ As educators, we have ample opportunity on a daily basis to try to make changes for the better for our students, and for ourselves, and it is incumbent that we seize these opportunities. The following framework for an action research project (Figure 1) is based on Tripp’s (2003) cycle of reconnaissance, planning, acting, research action and evaluating action and is found in Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011).
As can be seen, at each stage of the research, time is given to reflection in order to consider the best approach to the next step. The process is continuous and upon completion of step (8), the cycle begins again in an attempt to further solving or managing any particular problem area. Hirose (2018) discusses how many studies on student writing focus on factors such as fluency, lexical and syntactic complexity. The aim of this study is to discover whether students could respond quickly and over a short period to classroom feedback and instruction. Many educators perhaps make the wrong assumption that students, upon entering university, are aware of proper conventions regarding essay structure. Hirose (2018) also points out that many students only practice writing at the sentence level and do not have much experience or practice of structuring essays. This study attempted to discover if students were able to improve upon this shortcoming in a short period of time and after minimal instruction.
Summary of Chapters
Abstract: Provides an overview of the challenges Japanese university students face with English writing and summarizes the study's aim to evaluate the effectiveness of targeted instruction and feedback.
Introduction: Outlines the author's motivation for the research, rooted in the desire to improve teaching practices and develop effective assessment software for the EFL market.
Results: Presents quantitative data from the three-week study, demonstrating significant improvements in writing performance and error reduction for groups receiving feedback compared to the control group.
Discussion: Interprets the findings by linking them to existing literature on language proficiency development and the psychological importance of teacher immediacy and individualized feedback.
Conclusion: Synthesizes the initial results, reaffirming that formative assessment and structured feedback empower students to become more autonomous writers, while acknowledging the need for further research.
Keywords
Action research, written analysis, timed-writing, quantitative findings, qualitative findings, formative assessment, student autonomy, EFL, feedback, pedagogical methods, language proficiency, writing development, educational technology, teaching immediacy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research?
The research examines how specific methods of instruction and varying levels of feedback influence the writing development and performance of first-year university students in an EFL context.
What are the central themes addressed in this paper?
The central themes include the effectiveness of formative assessment, the role of teacher-provided feedback in error reduction, the importance of structure in academic writing, and the promotion of student autonomy.
What is the primary objective of this study?
The primary objective is to determine if short-term, intensive feedback and basic structural instruction can result in observable, positive improvements in students' writing ability.
Which scientific methods were employed?
The author utilized an action research framework, incorporating both quantitative analysis (word counts and error tracking) and qualitative analysis (student questionnaires and surveys).
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body details the methodology, including participant demographics and procedural steps, followed by a comprehensive presentation and interpretation of quantitative data and student survey responses.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include Action research, written analysis, timed-writing, student autonomy, formative assessment, and EFL instruction.
How did the control group compare to the other classes?
The control group showed less progress in both structure and error reduction compared to the classes that received specific feedback and structural guidance.
Why did the author use a correction code system?
The correction code was implemented to help students identify their own errors and engage in self-correction rather than having the teacher simply provide the correct answers.
What role does the proposed assessment software play?
The software is intended as a teaching aid to provide real-time feedback, enabling students to become more aware of their own shortcomings and those of their peers to foster autonomy.
- Citar trabajo
- Gerry Mclellan (Autor), 2018, Analysis of 120 student's written work and how to improve their Writing Performance, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/441757
