Developing a Task-based Writing EFL Instruction for

Students: A Case Study in Chung Hwa University of Medical

Technology
Chen, Chien-Ying

General Education Center, Chung Hwa University of Medical Technology

Abstract
For years, technical vocational colleges have increasingly placed great emphasis on the
quality of English education. However, more and more English instructors and educators
are concerned about the issue of how to arouse college students awareness and desire for
enhancing their present English proficiency level. The subjects in this study were 60
second-grade students in Chung Hwa University of Medical Technology in the Tainan
County during the 2009 academic year. The purpose of this study aims to investigate the
effects of a task-based EFL instruction on the teaching and learning of writing. In data
collection, the students writing tasks, along with the student responses to the
questionnaires entitled The Scale of Writing Attitudes (SOWA) were analyzed quantitatively
and qualitatively. Based on the data analyses, the finding of the study indicated that almost
90% of the subjects enjoyed the task-based writing instruction and that they were willing to
grasp more opportunities to learn writing in English.

Key words: Task-based Writing EFL Instruction; Technical Vocational Colleges

the most important communication tools

for people from academic to business
field. Among the four language skills,
writing not only provides an available

1. Introduction
In the twenty-first century, the
English language is regarded as one of
1

access to effective communication but

also enables people worldwide to keep
up with this rapidly-changing world.
When it comes to an effective approach
to the teaching of writing, there is no
one size for all during a class design
(Raimes, 1991). As it is, EFL teachers
need to be equipped with recognitions of
the diversity of students and of the
complexity of language teaching and
learning. Overall, EFL teachers should
prepare themselves for the sound
knowledge of teaching theories and
beware of learners individuals needs
respectively.

text, how to avoid composing Chinese

English writing task, and most
important of all, how to express their
ideas in a well-organized way.
As a result, most students seem to
have no problems with listening,
speaking, and reading, but they have
encountered difficulties writing in
English. Generally, they do not know
how to generate writing ideas, how to
organize coherently, how to use
discourse markers and rhetorical
conventions to put them cohesively into
a written text, how to revise text for
clearer meaning, how to edit text for
appropriate grammar, and how to
produce a final product in terms of
second
language
(L2)
writing.
Frustrated, some students even give up
writing because they think, I feel
comfortable when I chat with my
American friends. We can talk for more
than two hours with no problem. How
come you always say there are so many
donts in my writing?

1.1 Statement of the Problem

English is a global language
(Crystal, 1997). Many parents in Taiwan
are very willing to make their children
learn English as early as one year old,
for they hope that their children may
have a chance to master the English
language, get a good job, and live a
better life. It might therefore be assumed
that these children are able to own a
high
English
proficiency
level.
However, they need to make more
efforts in the learning of writing even
though they may perform better in the
field of listening, speaking, and reading.
Whats worse, more than 10,000
candidates out of over one hundred
thousand testers got a zero point in the
composition task of their English test in
last years JCEE (the Joint College
Entrance
Examination).
Who
is
responsible for such an disappointing
outcome? Parents expose their children
to the English learning environment as
early as can be; teachers try their best to
help students learn English well;
students attempt to live up to parents
and teachers expectations. Nevertheless,
the very sad fact is that the majority of
students who take the JCEE can read
every word of the writing guidelines
only to be worried about how to
generate useful ideas from the source

1.2 Purpose of the Study

The main purpose of this study was
to explore the effects of a task-based
writing EFL instruction on college
students of low English proficiency level
(EPL). Specifically, the study tried to
probe in an EFL classroom how the
teacher and students acquired best
interaction, how the teacher actively
engaged students in writing activities,
how the teacher made students
motivated in learning in and outside of
the classroom.
1.3 Research Questions
This current study was composed
of a task-based EFL writing instruction
and a questionnaire survey. A survey
instrument, The Scale of Writing
Attitudes (SOWA), was used to collect
the data for investigating EFL college
2

students responses to a task-based

writing instruction. The current study
focused on the following research
questions (RQ).

approach. Since then, the process

approach has become a new trend in the
teaching of L1 and L2 writing.
Specifically, this approach encourages
students to explore a topic through
discussion, reading, and writing. Instead
of emphasizing accuracy and patterns,
the process approach is featured by the
growing use of peer tutoring, and even
revision (Topping, 1998; Raimes,
1991). With respect to the use of peer
tutoring and revision, students share
drafts with peers as well as teachers, and
they revise the following draft by using
each previous draft and by consulting
peer and teacher feedback as a basis of
improvement. The above characteristics
lead the process approach to a studentcentered approach, especially allowing
students to acquire autonomy in
language learning (Brandl, 2002; Ning,
2008).

1. What was the effectiveness of

applying a task-based EFL
writing
instruction
to
teaching college students of
low EPL?
2. What were EFL college students
attitudes toward a task-based
EFL writing instruction?

2. Literature Review
To help college students develop
EFL writing ability, along with good
interactive and social learning, the
teacher-researcher has conducted the
current study by the adoption of the
process-oriented
writing
approach,
interwoven with guided writing and the
task-based instruction. On the other
hand, to explore EFL college students
attitudes toward the teaching and
learning of writing in an EFL classroom,
the following two sections of literature
were carefully reviewed studies on: (1)
the process approach to writing, (2)
guided writing, and (3) the task-based
instruction.

In order to help students acquire

autonomy in language learning, together
with developing L2 literacy through
writing, explicit instruction in effective
writing produces significant benefits for
students who have difficulty in learning
to write (Afzali & Fakharzadeh, 2009;
Al-khatib, 2005; Almog & HertzLazarowitz, 1999; Ning, 2008). A
number of studies have shown that
writing is a series of complex
composing
processes,
including
planning, translating, and reviewing
(Flower & Hayes, 1980, 1981).
According to their studies, the planning
process contains setting goals, and
generating and organizing ideas. The
translating process converts the writers
ideas into words. Reviewing, inclusive
of evaluating and editing, takes place
when the writer is not satisfied with his
own work, considers alternative ideas, or
fail to plan his work successfully. In
other words, it is the writers awareness
of the interaction between the above
composing processes that enables a
language learner to produce a

2.1 The Process Approach to Writing

Over the past decades, educators
have adopted a form-dominated
approach to teach writing to EFL
students. From the pedagogical point of
view, the instructors who apply the
form-centered approach to their teaching
emphasize accuracy and patterns
when students practice and present their
writing tasks (Raimes, 1991).
In the late 1970s, more and more
teachers and researchers reacted against
a form-dominated approach to writing,
and gradually developed a process
3

meaningful, satisfactory writing (Badger

& White, 2000; Hyland, 2004).

understanding about what has been

learned at school or at work.
Accordingly, writing represents a social
activity, in which social learning helps
individual learning, cognitive structure
and interaction between people (Bereiter
& Scardamalia, 1987; Brown, 2001;
Topping, 1998; Rada, 1998).

2.2 Guided Writing

Guided writing has two advantages
as follows. To begin with, it
communicates high expectations and
improves the quality of student writing
(Chickering & Gamson, 1987). The
phased production of draft, and final
production of draft, and final product,
with teacher and peer feedback at each
stage, enables students to learn how to
cut off redundant information and
organize their ideas into an interesting
writing.

2.3 The Task-based Instruction

Based on the theory of task-based
learning, a number of positive findings
have
supported
the
pedagogical
advantages of this approach (Stoller,
1997; Omaggio-Hadley, 2001). It is
acknowledged that the task-based
learning is potentially motivating,
stimulating,
empowering,
and
challenging. Besides, the task-based
instruction lies at the heart of autonomy
in language learning. Some supporting
research has shown that a task-based
approach offers learners an encouraging
way to achieve a range of goals in terms
of effective language learningbeing
responsible for deciding what is to be
learned, when, how, in what order, and
by what means (Holec, 1981; Legutke &
Thomas, 1991). Therefore, students can
work on their own, in small groups, or
as a class to complete a project, sharing
their ideas and real life experiences
(Brandl, 2002).

Secondly, this method has both a

process and product orientation
(Brandl, 2002). Since one of the
characteristics of the process approach is
that students are allowed to have some
time to decide on the topic of writing,
such EFL learners as college students
may benefit more from actively
interacting with peers and teachers in the
classroom, still more complete a
meaningful writing draft.
As Brown
points out, the current emphasis on
writing must of course be seen in the
perspective of a balance between
process and product (Brown, 2001, p.
337).

Seeing
that
the
task-based
instruction is student-centered, the
teacher plays an important role in
providing support and guidance
throughout the learning of writing in and
out of the classroom. After the
experience of writing a meaningful final
product, the students have found
themselves more capable of expressing
their own ideas in English and
evaluating peers work. Simultaneously,
they have gradually developed a sense
of dignity and even mental growth,
while improving their own language.

Broadly speaking, writing is a way

of life. As far as students are concerned,
without a good ability to translate their
ideas into words, they cannot pass the
course. Writing is crucial to students
academic performance and success.
Besides, writing opens a door to
better communication between people.
Writing has played an important part in
ones life. Partly because writing is the
most effective means by which one can
translate ideas into words in the absence
of the writer. Partly because writing
enables
people
to
show
their
4

The textbook entitled Get the Point

2, published by Caves Books in 2009,
was originally selected to teach basic
grammar, sentence structures, and a
number of writing strategies to all the
second-grade students at Chung Hwa
University of Medical Technology. This
textbook might be a basic resource to
guide those students and improve their
writing ability. However, taken the
learners interest and real life
experiences into consideration, an
interesting reading material other than
the textbook would be another good
choice to arouse the college students
interest in what to read and what to
write.

3. Methodology
3.1 Population
The population of this study was
composed of sixty students who majored
in Nursing and took an English course at
Chung Hwa University of Medical
Technology. They were in their second
year at college. This study was
conducted from December 10 to 24,
2009. It was designed as a three-week
in-class writing workshop, included in
an 18-week English course during the
first semester of the 2009 academic year.
The purpose was that these college
students would be encouraged to have
the experience of writing regardless of
their low English proficiency level. Just
one out of the sixty students had passed
the GEPT elementary level, while the
rest either were not equipped with a
good English ability or were quite afraid
to take the GEPT test. Dont tell me
that I am old enough to take the test. Im
not ready for it, said more than half of
the class. All of them had studied
English for more than six years, and had
two 50-minute-long classes per week.
The teacher-researcher has more than 5year experience of teaching English at
college.

Therefore, the teacher-researcher

first asked the students to offer some
interesting stories they had heard before.
Among the stories mentioned, the
students voted for Three Little Pigs.
When asked why they preferred to this
one, dozens of the students agreed, The
story is easy to understand and the
names of the characters are convenient
to remember. In consequence, the
teacher-researcher
selected
the
storybook entitled Three Little Pigs,
published by Ladybird Books in 1993
(see Appendix A for the full text).

3.2 Sample Selection and Procedures

3.3 Procedures

For most of the EFL instructors,

grading and correcting students writing
drafts may be rather time-consuming.
Yet, one possible effective solution is the
writing workshop. Since 59 out of the
sixty students did not pass the GEPT
elementary level, it was assumed that the
class belonged to the elementary English
proficiency level. Moreover, only one
out of the 60 subjects had just passed the
GEPT elementary level, and she agreed
to work with the other classmates in a
group. Therefore, all of them were
classified as elementary level, with no
other experimental group to compare.

One of the aims of this study is to

examine the effectiveness of applying a
task-based writing EFL instruction to
teaching college students of low EPL,
while the other to explore these college
students attitudes toward the writing
activities related to the task-based
writing instruction.
3.3.1 Writing Stage
To create an interactive learning
environment in which college students
of low EPL may enjoy the learning of
English writing, the teacher-researcher
5

managed to develop a 3-week task-based

EFL writing course, and then conducted
a questionnaire survey to evaluate the
effects of this writing instruction on
college students. The frame of this study
is shown in Figure 1.

workshop,
the
teacher-researcher
shared with the students how the
workshop would wok best for them and
why they were encouraged to read the
story at home before the first week of
writing stage in this study.
To the teacher-researchers great
relief, more than half of the students
amazingly did finish reading the story
before the first writing class started. The
teacher spent fifty minutes asking the
ten groups twenty text-related questions,
in the form of group-competition. To
create an exciting and challenging
atmosphere, each group had one minute
to deal with questions asked by the
teacher--thirty seconds to discuss
possible answers, thirty seconds to
answer in complete sentences. The
group that failed to make it could not get
a point, and, at the same time, the other
groups had a chance to answer and win a
point. The number of points won by
each group would be a bonus added to
their final examination. In addition to
the bonus plus, the students were
reminded of the importance of
understanding the close connection
between good reading comprehension
and successful writing performance.

Task 1. Preparing (by reading a text)

Task 2. Interacting (by asking and

answering text-related questions)

Task 3. Planning (by discussing

ideas in small groups)

Task 4. Organizing (by translating

group ideas into a 120-word draft)

Task 5. Editing (by teacher and peer

evaluating the first draft)

To make good use of limited time

and resources, each group were given 15
minutes to decide on how to exhibit their
comprehension of the text The Three
Little Pigs. Before the writing task
started, the students were required to
follow simple criteria for deciding
whether they finished their writing task
or notno less than 120 words, which
was the basic rule used both in the
English composition test of JCEE and
GEPT intermediate level. Although most
of the students complained that this is
an impossible job, yet after 15-minute
discussion, nine of the groups chose to
revise some of the plot based on the
original story. Only one out of them had
no idea what to do. The moment an

Task 6. Reviewing (by re-writing the

first draft in small groups)

Task 7. Responding (by teacher and

peer evaluating the second draft)

Task 8. Feedback (by answering

their own responses to the SOWA)
Figure 1. The Framework of This Study
In preparation for the writing
6

agreement was reached, each group

began to work on their first 120-word
draft during the remainder of class,
about 32 minutes left. Six groups
finished within 35 minutes; four within
48.

previously, the teacher then distributed

the first drafts randomly to the ten
groups. Each member in each group
received one copy. For example, Group
B got Group As first draft, with six
copies of the same draft for each
member in Group B. At the sight of the
copy, everyone was surprised to see no
red marks on it. All the members did
not know what to do. The teacherresearcher encouraged Group B to read
aloud the draft together and circle any
segment that looked wrong in the
peers writing. Then they could discuss,
consult the dictionary, and tried to write
down the correct answer beside the
error. Particularly, they would get one
point as they found one mistake; they
would get another point when they could
correct each error.

As Zeiser (1999) emphasizes,

writing is a recursive process which
involves a dynamic of thinking, writing,
rethinking, and rewriting. Through the
processes of thinking and writing, the
students in this study moved forward
and worked together to complete their
writing task. Two thirds of the students
said, Wow! I cant believe it. I made it
at the last minute. This is my first time
to write more than 50 words in English
although I did this job with my
classmates. But I think I am as cool as a
cucumber! Group As first draft writing
sample for the Three Little Pigs is shown
as follows.

Next, every group was given fifteen

minutes to read, think about, and
correct possible errors in the draft
writing which was finished by one of the
other groups. While they did so, the
teacher circulated around the classroom,
scanning the drafts, ascertaining that
every student was trying hard to find any
possible error, and acting as a resource.
Group As first draft writing was
corrected by Group B after fifteenminute discussion and is shown as
follows.

My name is a big bad pig. I

likes to eating baby wolf. I love
drink oranges soda and apples
juice. I no eat breakfast this
morning. I am hungry, and also
thirsty too. I wanting to eat, but I
am no way find it. There is a
straw house in the Ocean Road. I
want to walk inside house and
saw a tiny wolf. he look very cute
and delicious. I am wanting to eat
it. I think I can eat one minute. I
am so happy and I take a shower
before I start eat big meal. When
I was taking a shower, the mother
come home. She see me and hit
me. I soon run out of the straw
house. Im very hungry, but Im
lucky because I am not die.

Im a big bad pig. I like to

eat baby wolf. I love to drink
oranges soda and apples juice. I
dont eat breakfast this morning.
I am hungry, and thirsty too. I
want to eat, but I cant find it.
There is a straw house in the
Ocean Road. I want to walk
inside house and saw a tiny wolf.
He look very cute and delicious. I
want to eat it. I think I can eat
one minute. I am so happy and I
take a shower before I start to eat
big meal. When I was taking a
shower, the mother come home.

For the workshop in the following

week, the teacher discussed some of the
most common problems such as
punctuation, singular and plural forms of
countable nouns. To reinforce the correct
usage of the grammatical rules taught
7

For the workshop in the third week,

all the ten groups submitted their revised
drafts, not less than 120 words. Because
of the stimulation of their imagination,
and the writing activities, most of the
groups were able to write wellconstructed paragraphs within the
limited time, no more than 35 minutes.
Group As second draft is shown as
follows.

She sees me and hit me. I very

fast run out of the straw house.
Im very hungry, and Im lucky
because I no die.
Honestly speaking, it is quite
difficult for teachers to motivate low
achievers to learn with interest.
However, the teacher-researcher has
found that most low achievers enjoy the
feelings of being encouraged through
reachable gifts like scores, which
gives a guarantee of their hard work.
Moreover, the 5-year experience of
teaching at college helps the teacherresearcher figure out the fact that low
achievers are willing to outdo
themselves as long as they keep their
mind on learning, with a reachable target
and simple criteria agreed by the teacher
and the students. For example, the first
rule is that every group has to submit a
120-word writing draft, otherwise each
member of the group fail to get 10
points in their final exam. The second
rule is that each groups member can get
one point when they can find a mistake
in the writing draft and one more point if
they can correct the mistake. Take Group
As first writing draft for example. I
likes to eating baby wolf. Group B
corrects the sentenceI like to eat baby
wolfand they can get four points
because of two correct answers like
and eat.

Im a big bad pig. I like to

eat baby wolves. I love to drink
orange soda and apple juice. I
dont eat breakfast this morning.
I am hungry and thirsty too. I
want to eat, but I cant find it.
There is a straw house on the
Ocean Road. I ran to the house. I
walk inside the house and sees a
tiny wolf. He look so cute and
delicious. I want to eat it. My
mouth is watering. I think I can
eat it one minute. I am so happy
and I take a shower before I start
to eat big meal. When I was
taking a shower, a mother wolf
comes back home. She sees me
and hits me. I run out of the straw
house very fast. I am lucky
because I do not die.
3.3.2 Evaluating Stage: Administering
the SOWA
To understand EFL college
students attitudes toward the task-based
writing instruction, a survey instrument
entitled The Scale of Writing Attitudes
(SOWA), was used for gathering the
study data. Besides two demographic
items, the 10-item SOWA was an
important tool to investigate EFL
learners writing attitudes (WA). A fivepoint Likert-type scale was adopted to
measure the items of the SOWA:
Strongly Agree = 5, Agree = 4,
Uncertain = 3, Disagree = 2, and
Strongly Disagree = 1. The higher the
score is, the more positive the attitude

As Zeiser (1999) emphasizes,

writing is a recursive process which
involves a dynamic of thinking, writing,
rethinking, and rewriting. Through the
processes of thinking and writing, the
students in this study moved forward
and worked together to complete their
writing task. Two thirds of the students
said, Wow! I cant believe it. I made it
at the last minute. This is my first time
to write more than 50 words in English
although I did this job with my
classmates. But I think I am as cool as a
cucumber!
8

expresses (see Appendix B for the

SOWA items).

96.67%).
Additionally, this study identified
two types of students in term of the
amount of time spent on English
learning experiences: 6 to 8 years, and 9
to 10 years or more. About three-fourth
respondents (n = 43, 71.67%) reported
that they had studied English for 6-8
years, and 17 respondents (28.33%) for
9-10 years or more.

After a pilot study, the revised

survey questionnaires were distributed
to 60 students. A total of 60 responses
were collected. Among the 60 surveys,
all of them were usable, resulting in a
100% usable return rate.
The first part of the survey
instrument comprised three items of
demographic information pertaining to
learners gender, English proficiency
level, and English learning background.
The respondents demographic data were
summarized in Table 1. Data on
respondents gender show that two of the
respondents were male students (n =2,
3.33%) and female students (n =58,

Analyzing the data about these

subjects learning experiences, the
teacher-researcher
cannot
help
wonderingHow come many of them
turn out to be learners of low English
proficiency level or low achievers after
having learned English for over 6 years?

Table 1. Summary of Respondents Demographic Data

Characteristics
Gender
Male
Female
English Proficiency Level
elementary
English Learning Background
6-8 yrs
9-10 yrs or more

Frequency

Valid Percentage

2
58

3.33
96.67

60

100

43
17

71.67
28.33

Note. n = 60.
many as forty-three students have told
the teacher-researcher, Its not easy, but
this is my first time to write down my
ideas in English. I dont know it is so
wonderful to talk in class, especially
when our group can talk together and
happily finish the work. How cool!
When are we going to do it again?

4. Result and Discussion

4.1 The Effectiveness of a Task-based
EFL Writing Instruction
To answer the RQ-1, an overall
description for the subjects academic
performance on the writing tasks in class
is not only presented in the procedures
mentioned above, but it is also
illustrated in the subjects active
engagement in the writing activities
during the writing stage. Excitedly, as

4.2 EFL Learners Writing Attitudes

To answer the RQ-2, Table 2
presents the mean values and standard
9

deviations for subjects writing attitudes,

which were explored on a 5-point
Likert-type scale. According to Table 2,
the mean values for the dimension of
writing attitude (WA) ranged from 3.54
to 4.54. The composite mean value for
EFL learners attitudes toward English
instruction in writing was 4.15, which
was higher than the middle point 3.00.
Overall, this composite mean value
indicated that the majority of subjects
had fairly positive attitudes toward the
task-based EFL writing instruction.

Among the 10 WA statements, five

items (01, 03, 06, 09, and 10) were over
the composite mean value (M = 4.15).
That indicated that most subjects
showed rather positive attitudes toward
the effects of writing activities. Of the
10 items for the writing attitudes, the
highest mean value was 4.54 (Item 1).
That indicated that most subjects
considered reading a familiar story to be
a very interesting task for their English
learning (M for Item 10 = 4.41) as well
as the reading material were well suited
for their English proficiency level.

Table 2. EFL College Students Writing Attitudes

Survey Items
1. Reading interesting texts enhances my motivation
in the learning of English.
02. Expressing myself through English writing activities
does not scare me at all.
3. Reading interesting texts enhances my motivation
in the learning of writing.
4. I hope that my English teacher will design more
writing activities for me to improve writing skills.
05. The reading material chosen by the teacher is
suitable for my English proficiency level.
06. The task-based writing class enhances my learning
efficiency.
07. Group discussion activities help me to think and
write.
08. I dont think I can enlarge my knowledge about
vocabulary through learning to write in English.
09. Learning to write in English is very important.
10. The learning tasks designed by the teacher are
suitable for my English proficiency level.

SD

Rank

4.54

0.50

3.54

1.10

10

4.35

0.79

4.05

0.72

4.08

0.72

4.25

0.56

4.08

0.92

3.92
4.41

0.71
0.72

9
2

4.27

0.72

Note. The composite mean value was 4.15.

learners to express what they have

learned. The writing process is a
valuable learning experience for most
language learners, especially for lowEPL college students. On the one hand,
low-EPL college students can develop
their L2 literacy when they are more

5. Conclusion and Limitation

5.1 Conclusion
In learning a language, writing is an
essential language skill. Writing
provides a good way for language
10

willing to get engaged in writing

activities. Also, when they learn to share
their ideas and real life experiences
through group discussion in class, it is
much more likely for them to work
together and complete a writing task
with the help from their group members
and the teacher.

differences between a group of high EPL

and a group of low EPL, the result of
this study might not be general enough
to describe the effects of a task-based
EFL writing instruction on all the other
college students in Taiwan. However, it
is implied that EFL learners of low EPL
are in need of active teacher
involvement, along with a well
organized class schedule and a clear
pedagogical rationale, to become
productive language learners and that
higher education institutions should
provide the 21st century-readied teacher
for the 21st century students (Zita, Silye,
& Wiwczaroski, 2009).

This study found that most college

students supported the necessity of the
learning of writing skills. They agreed
that they preferred to write together.
Partly because they are lacking in
confidence. Partly because they lack
sufficient opportunities to write in
English. They first approach writing in
fear and trembling. Then they feel more
comfortable during the period of the
writing stage, accompanied by peers and
the teacher.

References
[1] Al-Khatib, M. (2005). English in the
workplace: An analysis of the
communication needs of tourism and
banking personnel. Asian EFL
Journal, 17(2). Retrieved January 30,
2009, from http://www.asian-efljournal.com/site

Specifically, along with class time

spent playing some Q&A games,
discussing problems with writing drafts,
looking for mistakes in peers work, and
creating an in-class writing workshops,
the subjects communicated their own
views, integrated each others ideas, and,
most important of all, collaboratively
achieved their goalwriting a 120-word
draft.

[2]Afzali, K., & Fakharzadeh, M.

(2009). A needs analysis survey: The
case of tourism letter writing in Iran.
English for Specific Purposes World,
8(1). Retrieved March 6, 2009, from
http://www.esp-world.info/

Interestingly, some of the subjects

said, When I am reading others
writing, I strongly feel it is my first time
to talk and act as if I were an English
teacher. I want to be professional when I
make comments. For these college
students, it was indeed a good
experience of social learning as well
as language learning in the classroom.

[3]Almog, T., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R.

(1999). Teachers are peer learners:
Professional development in an
advanced
computer
learning
environment. In A. M. ODonnel &
A.
King
(Eds.),
Cognitive
perspectives on peer learning,
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Press, Ch 12,
285-313.

5.2 Limitation

[4] Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A

process genre approach to teaching
writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153160.

Given that the subjects were in the

same class and that 59 out of them were
of low EPL, the researcher had the
difficulty conducting this study by
comparing
the
similarities
and

[5]Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987).

11

The psychology of written composition.

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

[14]Fraser, Carol A. (1999). Lexical

processing strategy use and
vocabulary
learning
through
Reading. SSLA, 21, 225-241.

[6]Brandl, Klaus. (2002). Integrating

Internet-based reading materials into
the foreign language curriculum:
From teacher-to student-centered
approaches. Language Learning &
Technology, 6, 87-107.

[15]Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and

foreign language learning. Oxford,
England: Pergamon Press for the
Council of Europe.
[16]Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and
second language writing.. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

[7]Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching

by principles: An interactive approach
to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). New
York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

[17]Ning, Z. (2008). The effective

teaching of the genre of hotel
brochure. English for Specific
Purposes World, 7(3). Retrieved
March
10,
2009,
from
http://www.esp-world.info/

[8]Chickering, Arthur W., and Zelda F.

Gamson. (March, 1987). Seven
principles for good practice in
undergraduate education. AAHE: 3-7.
[9]Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (2000).
Networked multimedia environments
for second language acquisition. In M.
Warschauer, & R. Kern (Eds.),
Network-based language teaching:
Concepts and practice (pp. 151-170).
New York: Cambridge University Press.

[18]Omaggio-Hadley,
A.
2001.
Teaching Language in Context (3rd
ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
[19]Rada, R. (1998). Efficiency and
effectiveness in computer-supported
peer-peer learning. Computers and
Education, 30, 137-146.

[10]Crystal, D. (1997). English as a

global
language.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

[20]Raimes, Ann. (1991). Out of the

woods: Emerging traditions in the
teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly,
25, 407-30.

[11]Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback

marking:
Developing
peer
assessment. Innovations in Education
and Training International, 32, 175187.

[21]Stoller, F. L. (1997). Project work. A

means to promote language content.
Forum, 35, 1-10.

[12]Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1980).

The dynamics of composing: Making
plans and juggling constraints. In L.
W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.),
Cognitive Processes in Writing, Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 31-50.

[22]Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment

between students in colleges and
universities. Review of Educational
Research, 68, 249-276.
[23]Zeisere, Pamela A. (1999). Teaching
process and product: Crafting and
responding to student writing
assignments. PS: Political Science
and Politics, 32, 593-595.

[13]-----(1981). A cognitive process theory

of writing. College Composition and
Communication, 32, 365-387.

12

[24] Zita, J., Silye, M., & Wiwczaroski,

T. B. (2009). L2 skills preparation
for scholarship students. English for

Specific Purposes World, 8(2).

Retrieved March 10, 2009, from
http://www.esp-world.info/

13

Appendix A

Appendix B

:

1

10
12
345

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

( )
1. 1.
2.
2. ( )
1. 34 ()
2. 57 ()
3. 89 ()

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5