The Effect of A Proposed Strategy Based Writing Model On EFL Learners Writing Skills

International Journal of English Language Teaching
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015

___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)
THE EFFECT OF A PROPOSED STRATEGY-BASED WRITING MODEL ON EFL

LEARNERS' WRITING SKILLS
Hussein El-ghamry Mohammad Hussein
Associate Prof. of TEFL, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Ismailia Faculty of
Education, Egypt
ABSTRACT: This study investigated the effect of a proposed strategy-based writing model
on Saudi EFL students' writing skills. Out of three classes from Al-kuds School, two male
third-year intermediate classes were randomly assigned into the control group (N=32) or
experimental group (N=33). Class (B), serving as a control group, were taught the course-
book "Say It in English" in the traditional method, while Class (C), serving as an
experimental group, were taught the same course-book, supplemented with the strategy-
based writing model which included six types of strategies: cognitive, meta-cognitive,
compensational, social, affective and multiple strategies. Both groups were pre-post tested
using a writing test prepared by the researcher. Two hypotheses were formulated and tested.
Results obtained from T-test revealed that the strategy-based writing model was effective in
enhancing the participants' writing skills. In addition, compared to the traditional
instruction, the strategy-based writing model was more effective in improving the
participants' writing skills. These results adduce the importance of implementing the
strategy-based writing model in EFL classrooms as it enabled the participants to conceive
writing as a recursive process which entails flexible and purposeful movement through the
three stages of writing.
KEYWORDS: Strategy-Based Writing Model, Writing Strategies, Strategy Instruction,
Writing Skills, Approaches to Writing Instruction.
Introduction
With the advent of the 21th century, the world has become a global community in which
English has dominated as an international language. As a result many EFL learners around
the world seek to improve their writing skills in order to satisfy their needs and cope with
future careers. EFL writing has become a basic requirement for participation and interaction
with the global community in which English is the prevalent language. Thus, learners who
are proficient in EFL writing will be able to express themselves efficiently and have more
privilege when applying for future jobs compared to other peers. Therefore, writing is no
longer seen as an option for EFL learners.
Like the other language skills (listening, speaking and reading) writing is one of the
cornerstones on which learning English as a foreign language is built. In addition ,"It
provides a useful tool for exploring, organizing and refining ideas"(Lane et. al., 2008:236).It
is also one of the major vehicles by which learners can demonstrate their knowledge,
communicate with others and express themselves. Moreover, writing is beneficial
psychologically and physiologically if learners are encouraged to write freely about their
feelings and personal experiences.
98
ISSN 2055-0820(Print), ISSN 2055-0839(Online)
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Accordingly, an increasing interest has been paid to teaching writing to EFL learners
(Harmer, 1998: 79; Shih, 2005:10; Al-Hazmi, 2006:37; Tangpermpoon, 2008:1 Bae, 2011:1).
In fact, there are many reasons for this. In the first place, while some EFL learners acquire
language in a purely oral/aural way, most of them benefit greatly from seeing the language
written down. The visual demonstration of language construction is invaluable for both
learners' understanding of how it all fits together and as an aid to committing the new
language to memory. Learners find it useful to write sentences using new language shortly
after they have studied it. Second, the actual process of writing enables EFL writers to learn
as they go along. The mental activity learners have to exert to construct their compositions is
a part of the ongoing learning experience. Third, writing is appropriate for learners who
usually spend some time to think things so as to produce language in a slower way. "It can
also be a quiet reflective activity instead of the rush and bother of interpersonal face-to-face
communication"(Harmer, 1998: 79). Lastly, writing is one of the basic language skills
(speaking, listening and reading), which are crucial for successful language acquisition.
Developing EFL learners' ability to express their ideas through the written language has
become a learning objective of its own. That is why EFL teachers and educators acknowledge
the importance of enhancing learners' writing skills.
However, learning to write in the foreign language is one of the most difficult tasks which
EFL learners encounter and one that few of them are said to fully master. This may be
attributed to the fact that writing in a foreign language is a complex, challenging and difficult
process which involves "cognitive (linguistic competence of composing), meta-cognitive
(awareness of purpose, audience and style), social (being communicative and interactive with
peers and the target reader) and affective (being expressive of feelings as well as ideas)
factors (Xiao-xia, 2007:31). In addition, Writing is a productive skill in which learners need
to use all the means they have such as syntactic, lexical, rhetorical and discoursal knowledge
to perform certain writing tasks. Thus, to write coherently, fluently and appropriately in
English is seen by Nunan (1999:271) and Tangpermpoon (2008: 1) as the most difficult skill
to acquire. It takes considerable time and effort to become a skillful EFL writer. That's why
writing instruction is assuming an increasing role in Teaching English as a Foreign Language
(TEFL).
Good instruction is the most powerful means for fostering EFL learners' writing skills and
diminishing their writing problems as it enables teachers to provide proper scaffolding which
helps learners' perform their writing tasks successfully. Strategy-based writing instruction is a
recent approach which has proved to be effective in enhancing EFL learners' writing skills
(Oxford, 1990:1;Hsiao and Oxford;2002;372;
Chien,2008:44;Dujsik,2008:6;McMullen,2009:419; Al-Samadani, 2010:53; Rogers,
2010:3;Abdullah et. al.,2011:1; Dül ,2011:82).
Context of the Problem

In Saudi Arabia, English is the only foreign language used as a means of communication in
business, trade, travel, diplomacy and as a medium for many subjects at the tertiary level such
as Science, Medicine, Computers and Engineering. In addition, proficiency in English is one
of the prerequisites for acceptance into Colleges of Medicine and Dentistry. English
proficiency is even more important for post graduate studies; it is a key factor in most majors.
In addition, English is taught in public schools and in many private schools and universities.
Moreover, it is taught as a core subject in public intermediate and secondary grades, all
99
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
private school grades and all Saudi universities as either an elective subject or a major field of
study
Affected by the changes occurring in the field of English language teaching in the last
decades, EFL courses of the intermediate stage, in Saudi Arabia, have witnessed important
changes. New English courses have been designed and implemented at the intermediate stage
since 2005. However, pupils, teachers and supervisors have complained that the English
language course-book offered to third-grade intermediate students is inadequate for them in
terms of content, gradation, recycling and supplementary materials (Al-Yousef, 2007:103). In
addition, third grade intermediate students exhibited poor test performance in the final term
exams. This led The Higher Committee of Education Policy- (2007: 13) - to consider the
student passing if he or she gets 15 marks out of 50 in the final term exam (Appendix One).
Moreover, what EFL teachers do to help learners develop their writing skills is still behind
the level that can contribute to actual development. For example, they adopt traditional
approaches to writing instruction. These approaches - as concluded by (Al-Hazmi, 2006:36;
Quintero, 2008:8; Qian, 2010:13) - are deficient in two important aspects. First, teachers look
upon students' writing as a product, assuming that they know how to write and using what
students produce as a test of their ability. Second, teachers focus on form, i. e., syntax,
grammar, mechanics and organization rather than on content which is mainly seen as a key
vehicle for the correct expression of grammatical, lexical and organizational patterns. Thus,
they still focus on the final product and its linguistic features. This may be due to the fact that
both teachers and learners are trapped in the examination preparation cycles; teachers find
themselves teaching to prepare students to the final exam rather than helping them to develop
their language skills. Learners see learning English not as a chance to acquire language, but
as an avenue for passing the grade level they study. So, they tend to memorize language
vocabulary and structures as well as some passages of written English so as to pass the final
exam. Therefore, the in-class writing activities are devoid of meaningful contexts which
learners might be confronted with in the real world. So, writing instruction "can be described
as guided composition at lower levels and free composition at higher levels, with a mixture of
both at the intermediate levels"(Asiri, 2003: 3).
In addition, being a supervisor of the eighth-level students in Teaching Practice for twelve
years, the researcher noticed the following:
1- The context of teaching English is one of learning rather than acquisition, albeit the
English language course-book prescribed to third-year intermediate students emphasizes
the importance of the four language skills listening, speaking ,reading and writing
(Fakahani et al., 2005:3).
2- There is no purposeful and systematic preparation for writing tasks.
3- Writing instruction is traditional, product-oriented; great attention is paid to the writing
product and the linguistic features of students' compositions.
4- EFL teachers suffer from the problem of overcorrection; they correct the same errors
many times.
5- Students lack the ability to adopt strategic writing practices.
The researcher's observations agree with Al-Hojaylan's conclusion that Saudi Arabian
students lack the skills of writing composition (2003: 34). They also confirm the conclusions
of Al-Hazmi (2006:36), Qointero (2008:8) and Qian (2010:13). Accordingly, since
strategy-based writing instruction has proved to be effective in improving EFL/ESL students'
100
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
writing performance (Zimmerman and Bandura, 1994:846; Brown, 2001: 101 ; Luke,2006:6 ;
Chien,2008: 44;McMullen,2009:419; Lv and Chen ,2010: 136; Al- Samadani,2010: ;
Rogers, 2010:3Abdullah et. al.,2011:1; Dül,2011:82;Mahnam and Nejadansari ,2012:154 ),
this study sought to investigate the effect of a proposed strategy-based writing model on
third-year intermediate students' writing skills.
Statement of the Problem:

Although the EFL course of the third grade intermediate students in Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia " Say It in English" was newly developed in 2005, EFL teachers, pupils and
supervisors complained of the inadequacy of its content, gradation, recycling and
supplementary materials (Al-Yousef:2007: 103). In addition, the third grade intermediate
pupils exhibited poor test performance in the final term exams. This led The Higher
Committee of Education Policy to consider the pupil passing if he or she gets 15 marks out of
50 in the final term exam (The Higher Committee of Education Policy, 2007: 13). This, as
concluded by Al-Hazmi (2006:36), Quintero (2008:8) and Qian (2010:13), was attributed to
the lack of appropriate writing instruction which over-emphasizes writing as a product.
Furthermore, pupils do not receive effective peer or teacher scaffolding which they need to
perform their writing tasks successfully. This de-motivated students to write in English,
especially as the only incentive for them to write is the mandatory final exam. Also, as stated
by Chamot (2005:113) and Dujsik (2008: 41), relatively little research has been conducted on
the training of writing strategies with second/foreign language learners. In addition, Tsai
(2004:3), McMullen (2009:418) and Rogers (2010:3) agree that while many studies around
the world have investigated the use of language learning strategies, relatively little has been
written on the effect of learning strategies on productive skills, writing in particular. Case in
point, to the researcher's knowledge, there are only four documented large-scale strategy
studies which feature Saudi students.
The first study, conducted by Alwahibee (2000: 3), examined the relationship between
language learning strategies and the English language oral proficiency of Saudi university
ESL students. The strategy inventory of language learning (SILL) was used to find out what
kinds of language learning strategies (LLS) Saudi students use when learning English as a
second language. Using Oxford's (1989) scale of average use of language learning strategies
(LLS), the study came to the conclusion that successful Saudi learners used LLS in the
following order: metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies, compensational strategies,
social strategies, memory strategies, and, finally, affective strategies. On the other hand,
unsuccessful learners used strategies in the following order: compensational strategies,
cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, memory strategies, social strategies and finally
affective strategies.
The second study was undertaken by Al-Samadani (2009:3-4) in which he explored one
hundred and forty Saudi students' use of reading strategies and their effect on their reading
comprehension .The study was conducted in four major universities and colleges in Saudi
Arabia: King Abdul-Aziz University, King Faisal University, Teachers' College in Jeddah,
and Teachers' College in Al-Ahsa. It employed both quantitative and qualitative methods to
obtain information about Saudi students' perceived use of reading strategies as well as their
comprehension level. Results showed that EFL students in Saudi Arabia showed significantly
more perceived use of planning strategies than attending strategies and evaluating strategies.
They also perceived the environment as the most important factor affecting their reading
101
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
comprehension. Results showed no significant relationship between Saudi EFL students '
comprehension level and their use of reading strategies. Rather, Saudi students perceived
other factors such as prior knowledge (appropriate schemata), enthusiasm for reading, time
on task, purpose for reading, and vocabulary as having much effective contribution to their
final comprehension. Gender differences favoring female learners were evident in almost all
analyses conducted in the study. Significant differences were found favoring female students
in overall strategy use, comprehension level, and the use of evaluating strategies.
McMullen (2009: 418) investigated the use of language learning strategies (LLSs) by Saudi
EFL students inside the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study also sought to determine if
gender and academic major had any effect on that use. Data was collected during the
academic year 2007-2008 from Yanbu University College (YUC), Prince Sultan University
(PSU) PSU, and Jubail University College (JUC) using Rebecca Oxford's Strategy Inventory
for Language Learning (SILL) and a self-report questionnaire. The study comprised 165
students enrolled in similar Freshman English composition courses and totaled 71 male
students and 94 female students. Results of ANOVA tests showed that female students used
slightly more LLSs than male students, and that Computer Science students used slightly
more LLSs than Management Information Systems students. In response to these findings, a
program for direct strategy instruction was piloted with an English writing class at one of the
sample universities.
Al-Samadani's (2010:53) study investigated whether Saudi EFL students' writing competence
was related to their Arabic writing proficiency. It also examined the possible relationship
between Saudi students' first language (Arabic) and second language (English) writing
competence and their self-regulatory abilities. The study sample included 35 college-level
students majoring in English at Umm Al-Qura University. The participants wrote English and
Arabic argumentative essays on the same topic during two separate sessions. In addition, they
filled out the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (Schraw and Dennison, 1994) to provide
information about their self-regulation abilities. The writing tasks were scored by a group of
EFL university teachers using the ESL Composition Profile (Jacobs et al., 1981). The
collected data were used to compare and contrast the participants' writing competence in
Arabic and English. The data were also used to detect the correlation between students' self-
regulation abilities (their knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition) and their
overall writing competence in both languages. Data analysis revealed a strong correlation
between participants' L1 (Arabic) writing proficiency and their L2 (English) writing
competence. The study also showed that Saudi students who scored high in L1/L2 writing
had high self-regulation abilities.
Accordingly, the present study attempted to improve the writing skills of third-year
intermediate students' writing skills through a proposed strategy-based writing model.
Specifically, it sought to address the following questions:
1- What is the effect of the proposed strategy-based writing model on third-year
intermediate students' writing skills?
2- Which is more effective, the traditional method or the strategy-based writing model,
in enhancing students' writing skills?
102
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Purpose of the Study:

The primary purpose of this study was to investigate how the proposed strategy-based writing
model influenced the writing skills of third-year intermediate students. A secondary purpose
was to adapt the writing activities of the course-book “Say It in English” to suit the target
model.
Significance of the Study

The present study is hoped to contribute to the field of EFL writing as it relates to strategy-
based writing instruction both theoretically and practically. At a theoretical level, it may add
some needed information to the body of literature relative to strategy-based writing
instruction and procedural facilitation. At a practical level, it will provide EFL educators and
teachers with a strategy-based writing model which may help them make informed decisions
in selecting writing strategies that can enhance EFL students' writing performance and
training students adopt these strategies effectively.
Specifically, it is hoped that the results of this study might achieve the following:
1. Provide EFL Saudi educators and teachers with a strategy-based writing model which
may enrich their insights about strategy-based writing instruction so that they can make
their instructional decisions based on sound judgments rather than intuitions.
2. Lead to further research on the effect of strategy-based instruction on the other skills of
the English language (listening, speaking and reading,.
3. Provide useful information for other developing EFL studies that have a situation
similar to the Saudi one.
4- Help Saudi intermediate students adopt some successful writing strategies that can
enhance their writing performance and decrease their writing problems.
Hypotheses:
]To examine the effect of the strategy-based writing model on the participants' writing skills,
three hypotheses were formulated and tested.
1- There are no significant differences between the pre-test mean scores of the
control group and the experimental group in the writing test.
2- There are significant differences at 0.05 level between the pre-and-post-test mean
scores of the experimental group in the writing test, in favor of the post test.
3- There are significant differences at 0.05 level between the post-test mean scores
of the control group and the experimental group in writing test, in favor of the
experimental group.
Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is three-fold:
1- to propose a strategy-based writing model which help improve EFL writing
instruction.
2-to develop definite procedures for adopting the strategy-based writing model in
writing instruction.
103
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
3-to determine, through experimentation, whether this strategy-base writing model

indeed does improve EFL learners' writing performance.
Limitations of the Study:

This study was limited to:
1- third-year intermediate students in Bisha, K.S.A.Third-year intermediate students were
chosen as they are in a transitional grade between the intermediate stage and the
secondary stage. If the strategy-based writing instruction proves to be effective in
enhancing the participants' writing skills, it will be beneficial to adopt it in teaching
writing at the secondary stage.
2- six types of strategies: cognitive , meta-cognitive , compensational , social ,affective
and multiple strategies.
3- five writing categories: content, organization, vocabulary, grammar and mechanics,
each of which includes three writing skills (Appendix Eight).
4- the academic year 2011-2012.
5- the Pupil's Book "Say it in English" of the first and the second terms (from unit 1 to
16).
Definition of Terms:
Some terms were repeatedly used in this study. The definition of these is presented below.
Strategy-Based Writing Model (SBWM)

This term is used in this study to mean a learner-centered model for EFL writing instruction,
which focuses on explicit inclusion of writing strategies in the writing classes. According to
this model the teacher, as a guide or facilitator, enables students to use various writing
strategies to perform writing tasks successfully.
EFL (English as a Foreign Language)

This term is used in this study to mean English learned in a country where it is not the
primary language (for example, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria … etc.).
ESL (English as a Second Language)

English as a Second Language is usually characterized by the extent to which learners are
surrounded by the target language. That is, if the target language, including a third or fourth,
is not the native language or mother tongue, it is called a second language (Gass and Selinker,
2008:6).This term is used in this study to mean the study of English by nonnative speakers in
an English speaking environment.
Learning Strategies
While Oxford (1990:8) defines learning strategies as "specific actions taken by the learner to
make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more
104
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
transferable to new situations", Chamot (2005: 112) sees them as are procedures that
facilitate a learning task. These strategies are most often conscious and goal-driven,
especially at the beginning stages of tackling an unfamiliar language task. The definition of
Oxford (1990:8) was adopted in the present study.
Graphic Organizers
This term is used in this study to mean visual representations of ideas, which are useful for
organizing thoughts and ideas.
Writing Strategies
Manchon (2001:47) defines writing strategies as those actions and procedures employed by
learners to (1) control the management of writing goals, (2) compensate for the limited
capacity of human beings' cognitive resources (limited writing abilities) and (3) overcome the
writing difficulties they face. This definition was adopted in this study.
Cognitive Writing Strategies

This term refers to the (1) intentional, carefully planned techniques which learners use to
manage their writing performance, (2) actions and procedures by which they process their
composition and (3) basic supporting writing mechanics which help them perform their
writing tasks.
Meta-cognitive Writing Strategies:

This term refers to a set of writing tactics through which learners become aware of their
cognitive processes before writing, during writing and after writing. They are mental
activities which help direct learners' writing performance such as planning for writing,
monitoring, regulating, managing and reflecting on their writing performance.
Writing Performance
This term indicates the act or process of performing writing tasks. It describes what students
actually do regarding writing tasks, in terms of content, organization, vocabulary, grammar
and mechanics.
Scaffolding:
This term refers to the temporary help offered by the teacher or peers to enable learners to
perform the writing tasks and activities which are beyond their abilities if they are not given
that help.
Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD):

This term is used to refer to the domain of knowledge or skill where learners are yet unable to
perform their writing tasks independently, but can achieve the desired performance when
given relevant scaffolding from the teacher or peers.
105
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This section consists of two parts. Part one, "Learning Strategies", sheds light on the
definition of learning strategies, learning strategies and language teaching
methods/approaches, strategy use and EFL/ESL writing, factors affecting learners' use of
language learning strategies, strategy instruction and strategies classifications. In addition, it
provides some implications for EFL teachers. Part two, "Writing", deals with the nature of
EFL writing, major approaches to writing instruction, elements of writing instruction, stages
of writing, the proposed strategy-based writing model , the role of grammar in the writing
process, writing assessment , error correction and feedback, scaffolding in writing instruction
and reflection.
Part One: Learning Strategies

Learning strategies can typically be conceptualized as survival strategies that are often
associated with skills, tactics, plans, and movement to achieve a learning goal (Oxford, 1990:
8).Just as the term "strategy" is associated with special plans and tactics to beat an enemy in a
war, learners also struggle to overcome learning problems or cope with a challenge in
language learning. Thus, learners equipped with the right strategies are in a more
advantageous position to tackle challenges in language learning. The literature in language
learning research provides a number of definitions of "learning strategies".
Definitions of Learning Strategies

Learning strategies are important as they make student learning more effective and long-
lasting. Generally, strategies can be used at all levels of proficiency. Besides, they are closely
related with solving learning problems. While Lee (2010: 137) defines language learning
strategies as the means used by learners to acquire, store or recall information and promote
autonomous learning, O'Malley and Chamot (1990:1) see them as "the special thoughts or
behaviors that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn, or retain new information".
As far as writing is concerned, Baker and Boonkit (2004:301) look upon learning strategies
as "particular techniques or methods used by writers to improve the success of their writing."
The definition of Oxford (1990: 8) included cognitive, emotional, and social aspects of
language learning strategies that enhance learners' language learning proficiency and self-
confidence. What is of most concern to language teaching practitioners is that learning
strategies are not inherent abilities that belong to only gifted learner. So, they can actually be
taught to learners (Williams and Burden, 1997: 148; Rogers, 2010:3). According to Oxford
(1990: 9), language learning strategies have some features which are shown in Table (1).
106
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Table (1): Oxford's Features of Language Learning Strategies

Language Learning Strategies
1- Contribute to the main goal, communicative competence.
2- Allow learners to become more self-directed.
3- Expand the role of the teacher.
4- Are problem oriented.
5- Are specific actions taken by the learner?
6- Involve many aspects of the learner, not just the cognitive.
7- Support learning directly and indirectly.
8- Are not always observable.
9- Are often conscious.
10-Can be taught.
11-Are flexible.
12-are influenced by a variety of factors
Language Learning Strategies and Language Teaching Methods/Approaches

Language learning strategy theory fits easily with contemporaneous language learning and
teaching theories and works alongside various teaching methods and approaches. For
example, memory and cognitive strategies are involved in the development of vocabulary and
grammar knowledge which the grammar translation method aims to develop. Memory and
cognitive strategies are also involved in providing the patterning of mechanical responses
which is seen as one of the main linguistic assumptions of the audio-lingual approach. Also,
learning from errors, which inter-language theory develops reckons mostly on cognitive and
meta-cognitive strategies. Moreover, compensational and social strategies can be easily
integrated into the communicative competence theory and the communicative approach. In
addition, affective strategies are included in methods like suggestopedia. According to
Griffiths(2004: 10-11), the fact that learning strategy theory can operates so easily alongside
other theories, methods and approaches means that it has the potential to be a valuable
component of contemporary eclectic syllabuses.
Strategy Use and EFL/ESL Writing

Recent research on the effects of writing strategies on writing performance shows positive
relationships between strategy use and EFL/ESL writing performance (Thomas,1993:iii ;
Chien, 2008: 44; Al-Samadani,2010:55; Abdullah et. al ,2011:1 ; Dul,2011:82; Jiangkui and
Yuanxing ,2011:6). Learners' use of writing strategies can influence how they plan, compose
and evaluate their writing pieces.Thomas (1993: iii ) investigated the effect of cognitive
strategy instruction in writing curriculum ,which was based on the principles of instructional
scaffolding, on the knowledge and skills in expository text structures and meta-cognitive
knowledge of the writing process and writing strategies in a group of learning disabled
learners ( N=12). Learners were taught writing process strategies and writing expository text
structures through reciprocal dialogue, explicit instruction and procedural facilitation. Results
indicated significant improvements in the participants' writings of descriptive report and
compare/contrast papers. The improvement in writing was accompanied by increased meta-
cognitive knowledge of the two text structures, particularly in their ability to articulate how
107
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
the text should be organized. There was also increased awareness and knowledge of the
writing process.
Chien (2008: 44) explored writing strategy use in Chinese EFL student writers in relation to
their achievement in L2 (English) writing. This research took a cognitive approach to the
process of writing in a second language as a skilled performance in production. A total of 40
Chinese EFL writers in Taiwan partook in this study. The strategies used by high-and low-
achievers in writing revealed through the concurrent think-aloud protocols and immediate
retrospective interviews with the students were investigated, analyzed and compared. Results
showed that in comparison with low achieving students, high achieving students focused
more on clearly formulating their position statement in planning, generating texts, and
revising and editing such as making meaning changes, and fixing grammatical and spelling
errors during reviewing.
Abdullah et. al. (2011:1) conducted a study as a qualitative research to analyze the written
product as well as writing strategies of four ESL Malay undergraduate engineering students
of a local private university used while completing a writing task. Think-aloud protocols,
written essays, post-session interviews and audiotapes were used to examine the writing
processes and strategies of two groups of students, two students in each group of good and
weak learners. The think-aloud and interview protocols were transcribed verbatim for
analysis. Analyses of the findings revealed that the two groups of students shared common
writing strategies mainly cognitive strategies to generate ideas for their essays. Meta-
cognitive and social strategies were also used for generating ideas and selecting correct words
or expressions. The strategies were used in combination and in a recursive manner to attain
certain goals in writing. The difference in the strategy use between the two groups of good
and weak students lies in the amount of strategies being used, reason for the use and how the
students regulated the strategies to solve problems concerning the writing task.
Dul (2011:82) examined the effect of meta-cognitive strategies on achievement and retention
in developing writing. The study sample included 77 freshman students enrolled in English
Language Teaching Department at Selçuk University. A pretest-posttest design was adopted
to find out the differences between the experimental and the control group. In data collection,
students were given writing assessment tests as pretest, posttest and retention test. Results
showed that meta-cognitive strategies were found effective on total writing achievement in
general, and on content, organization, vocabulary, and mechanics of writing in particular
Thus, meta-cognitive strategies proved to have positive effects on students' achievement and
writing performance.
Jiangkui and Yuanxing (2011:6) examined a model of self-regulated EFL writing that
involved the components of motivational beliefs, motivational self-regulation, strategy use
and performance in EFL writing. The participants were 617 second-year college English
majors in Mainland China. Data were analyzed using path analysis via Amos 5.0. Results
indicated that the whole model accounted for 33% of the variance in the participants' EFL
writing performance. These results emphasized the importance of motivational regulation,
especially motivational awareness, motivational regulatory strategy use and mastery and
outcome goals in self-regulated EFL writing.
108
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Accordingly, since the writing process is not linear and managing such process requires a
higher level ability than mere recognition of or adhering to specific stages and processes,
EFL learners have to go through certain stages when performing a writing task and have to
develop strategies for generating ideas, planning the writing process, organizing, drafting,
revising, and considering the audience, purpose and genre. In addition, adopting proper
writing strategies can lower students' writing anxiety (Schweiker-Marra and Marra, 2000:99)
Therefore, EFL learners should be encouraged to use all types of writing strategies properly.
Factors Affecting Learners' Use of Language Learning Strategies

Generally, learners' use of strategies may be affected by various factors including age,
gender, motivation, strategy awareness, learning stage, academic major, cultural differences,
beliefs about language learning, nationality and language proficiency (Lee and
Oxford,2008:7; McMullen, 2009: 418; Anugkakul,2011:163; Ghavamnia et. al., 2011:1156).
What is of most concern to language teachers is that learning strategies are not inherent
abilities that belong to only gifted learners. Learning strategies can actually be learned. In
addition, learning strategies are sensitive to the learning context and to the learner's internal
processing preferences. If learners perceive, for example, that a task like vocabulary learning
requires correct matching of a new word to its definition within a specified period of time (as
in an exam), they will likely decide to use a memorization strategy. Their choice of which
memorization strategy to use depends on their understanding of their own learning processes
and on which strategies have been successful in the past. A different task, such as being able
to discuss the theme of a short story will require strategies different from memorization -such
as making inferences about the author's intended meaning and applying the learners' prior
knowledge about the topic. A particular learning strategy can help learners in a certain
context to achieve the learning goal that they deem important, whereas other learning
strategies may not be useful for that learning goal.
Ehrman and Oxford (1989:1) and Oxford and Nyikos (1989: 291) discovered distinct gender
differences in strategy use. In their study at the Foreign Service Institute, they found that
career choice had a major effect on reported language learning strategy use; a finding which
they suggest may be the result of underlying motivation. But, Ehrman and Oxford's
(1990:311) did not find any evidence of differing language learning strategy use between the
sexes. It was concluded that, although men and women did not demonstrate differences in
language learning strategy use, women tended to use more language learning strategies than
men. Results also showed that psychological type appears to have a strong influence on the
way learners use language learning strategies.
The effects of motivation on language learning strategy use were highlighted when Oxford
and Nyikos (1989:291) surveyed 1,200 students studying various languages in a Midwestern
American University in order to identify the kinds of language learning strategies students
reported using. Results revealed that the degree of expressed motivation was found to be the
most influential of the variables affecting strategy choice examined.
Sasaki (2000: 270) studied the different writing processes between expert and novice EFL
writers. She found that experts wrote longer and more complex texts and spent more time in
pre-writing so as to make a detailed outline whereas novice writers wrote relatively short
texts, needed more time to generate ideas, and had a less thorough outline. In addition,
experts did not stop and think while writing as frequently as novices did and used different
109
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
strategies from novices. Also, while experts made a thorough outline before writing and
adjusted it while writing, novices struggled with time constraints because they had to stop to
translate their native language to English. Finally, the study revealed that the experts'
strategies such as global planning and adjustment of the planning cannot be developed over a
short time period.
Investigating writing strategies of successful and unsuccessful writers, Baroudy (2008:60)
came to the conclusion that most successful writers followed process writing characteristics
either consciously or unconsciously. According to him, writers went through pre-writing,
multi-drafting, revising, and editing as they were aware of the cyclical nature of the writing
process. They kept in mind the readers of their writing and put aside grammatical accuracy
and local mechanical concerns until they produced meaningful texts. They stuck to a goal or
main ideas, considered their target readers all the time, and spent more time planning. They
free wrote their ideas and were not obsessed with certain structures. They also strived to
utilize feedback on their writing and revised their writing as much as possible. Thus, it can be
concluded that skilled writers do not think about minor errors until they fully generate their
ideas whereas unskilled writers constantly are concerned with those errors before writing.
Rahimi et al. (2008: 31) investigated the use of language learning strategies by post-
secondary level Persian EFL learners. Particular attention was paid to the variables affecting
learners' choice of strategies, and the relationship, if any, between these variables and
learners' patterns of strategy use. Data were gathered from 196 low-,mid-and-high
proficiency learners using the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (Oxford, 1990), and
two questionnaires of attitude and motivation (adapted from Laine, 1988) and learning style
(Soloman and Felder, 2001). Results of the study pointed to proficiency level and motivation
as major predictors of the use of language learning strategies among the participants. Gender,
on the other hand, was not found to have any effect while years of language study appeared to
negatively predict strategy use. Results also revealed that there were significant relationships
between language learning strategies and language proficiency.
Lee and Oxford (2008:7) examined the effect of Korean students' strategy awareness,
English-learning self-image, and importance of English on language learning strategy use.
The study sample comprised students from middle school, high school, and university
(N=1,110), who had certain characteristics such as valuing English as important (Importance
of English), evaluating their own proficiency as high (English-learning self-image) and being
already aware of many language learning strategies. Also, strategy awareness and strategy
use were related to the Korean cultural context. Results showed that the main effects of (a)
strategy awareness, (b) education level, (c) English-learning self-image, and (d) importance
of English on strategy use were very significant. Gender and major did not have significant
main effects alone. However, gender showed significant interaction effects with other
variables. Strategy awareness had a significant impact on strategy use; the more those
students were aware of learning strategies, the more they reported using strategies. Education
level also showed a significant influence on strategy use. Specifically, university students
used strategies most frequently, followed by middle school students and high school students.
Another significant main impact was found for self-image, that is, students' self-rating of
their English proficiency. A fourth significant main effect appeared for importance of English
(the perceived importance of English). Five interaction effects were significant. Without a
significant main effect, gender played an important role in all the interaction effects: (a)
110
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
gender with education level, (b) gender with major, (c) gender with self-image, (d) gender
with importance of English, and (e) gender with self-image and importance of English.
Anugkakul (2011:163) compared language learning strategies (LLSs) employed by Chinese
and Thai students and looked for the frequency of the LLSs they used. The relationship
between the use of LLSs and variables (gender, nationality, and levels of English language
proficiency) was also examined. The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) by
Oxford (1990:14-15) was administered to 72 Chinese and Thai students at Suan Sunandha
Rajabhat University in Thailand. Data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics, T-
Test, and Chi-Square Test. Results revealed that Chinese students used overall LLSs
significantly more frequently than Thai students. The specific strategies most frequently used
were asking for clarification, making positive statements, and using resources for receiving
and sending messages. Moreover, it was found that gender and nationality had a significant
effect on the students' use of overall LLSs, whereas levels of language proficiency had no
significant effect on the strategy use.
Ghavamnia et. al. (2011:1156) examined the relationship between strategy use and three
other variables (motivation, proficiency, and learners' beliefs). The participants of this study
were 80 students from the Department of English at the University of Isfahan, who were
homogenized in terms of age, gender, and major and were required to fill out three
questionnaires and complete a TOEFL test. Two instruments were used for data collection.
The first was the Strategy-Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) developed by R. Oxford
(1990:9) to identify the general strategies ESL/EFL learners use. The second was the Beliefs
about Language Learning Inventory (BALLI) developed by Horwitz (1988). The study also
adopted Schmidt and Watanabe's (2001) model of language learning motivation. Finally, the
Coefficient-Correlation was calculated to identify the relationship between the
aforementioned variables in relation to strategy use. Results indicated that Persian students
use a number of language learning strategies, but they show distinct preferences for particular
types of strategies. Results also reveal a positive relationship between strategy use and
motivation, proficiency and language learning beliefs.
Strategy Instruction
Language learning strategies are teachable and learners can benefit from coaching in learning
strategies to improve their language skills (Oxford, 1990:9; Nunan, 1997: 133). In line with
this belief, many researchers have attempted to demonstrate the pedagogical applications of
findings from studies into language learning strategies. For example, Nunan (1997: 133)
examined the effects of strategy training on four key aspects of the learning process, namely
student motivation, students' knowledge of strategies, the perceived utility of strategies, and
the actual deployment of strategies by students. The study took the form of an experiment in
which sixty first-year undergraduate students at the University of Hong Kong were randomly
assigned to control and experimental groups. Both groups took part in the same language
program. In addition, the participants of the experimental group were systematically trained
in fifteen learning strategies. Results of the study indicated significant differences in three of
the four areas investigated. The experimental group significantly outperformed the control
group on motivation, knowledge, and perceived utility. There was no significant difference in
the area of deployment. Analysis of results on individual strategies revealed that strategy
training was neither uniform nor consistent across all strategies.
111
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Importance of Strategy Instruction

Oxford (1990:8) defines learning strategies as "specific actions taken by the learner to make
learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more
transferable to new situations" Thus, like football players who use tactics in order to win a
game, language learners use learning strategies to acquire the target language skills more
successfully. Learning strategies improve the learners' strategic behavior, knowledge and
motivation. Specifically, as stated by Lane et. al., (2008:236), they address three main goals:
First, learners grasp how to carry out specific composing processes (e.g. planning, drafting,
etc.). Second, learners develop the knowledge and self-regulatory procedures (e.g., goal
setting, self-monitoring, self-instruction and self-reinforcement) necessary for adopting
writing strategies and regulating their performance while writing. Finally, learners '
motivation is enhanced. In this way, the purpose of encouraging learners to use language
learning strategies is to make their learning more effective and long-lasting.
In addition, learning strategies can suit any proficiency level; they can be used at all levels of
proficiency. Besides, they are closely related with problem solving efforts (Oxford, 1990: 11;
Williams and Burden, 1997: 149). Thus, learners equipped with the right problem solving
skills are in a more advantageous position to tackle the challenges they faces while learning.
Writing is a difficult and time consuming activity for many EFL learners as it is a complex
process which requires various cognitive and meta-cognitive activities at the same time. So, if
learners are provided with solutions, their immediate writing problems are solved. But if they
are taught the writing strategies to work out solutions for themselves, they are empowered to
manage their own writing processes. Consequently, learners who can select and use
appropriate writing strategies are able to overcome the difficulties they face while writing and
perform their writing tasks successfully.
Research results have confirmed that writing strategies can be taught and once learners' meta-
cognitive knowledge about how to adopt suitable writing strategies is developed, they will
become better writers (O'Malley and Chamot,1990: 151;Oxford, 1996:180; Hsiao and
Oxford,2002:369;Shih,2005:18;Luke,2006:2;Chien,2008:44; Kummin and
Rahman,2010:145; Dul,2011:82).Accordingly, strategy instruction was the main part of
writing instruction in this study. Six types of writing strategies were integrated into the
proposed model, adopted and taught to the participants: cognitive strategies, meta-cognitive
strategies, affective strategies, social strategies, compensational strategies and multiple
strategies. These strategies provided ample opportunities for the participants to go through
the writing stages (prewriting, writing and post-writing), equipped with various tools which
empowered them to generate and organize ideas and plan before writing, write their first
drafts, monitor and control their writing behaviors while writing and revise and edit their
compositions after writing. In addition, affective strategies helped them persist and overcome
writing problems over the three stages of writing.
Separate versus Integrated Strategy Instruction

One of the controversial issues on strategy instruction is whether instruction should focus
only on learning strategy instruction or should be integrated with language skills to be taught.
Corroborator of separate strategy instruction state that strategies are generalizable to various
contexts and that learners grasp the target strategies better if they focus all their attention on
developing strategic processing skills rather than attempt to learn language skills at the same
time. Supporters of integrated strategy instruction, on the other hand, think that learning the
112
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
target strategies in context is more effective than learning them as separate skills in isolation
as the immediate applicability of these skills may not be evident to the learners and that
adopting strategies in authentic language situations facilitates the transfer of strategies to
similar situations in other classes. In this study, strategy instruction was integrated into
writing instruction. The participants were taught to use various strategies in authentic writing
situations. The teacher provided models of how to adopt specific strategies at each stage of
writing (prewriting, writing and post writing).
Direct versus Indirect or Embedded Strategy Instruction

An unresolved issue in strategy instruction is whether it should be direct or embedded.
O'Mally and Chamot (1990:153) identified two approaches to strategy instruction, namely the
direct (explicit) approach and the indirect (embedded or implicit) approach.
The Direct (Explicit) Approach

This approach is also called the informed strategy approach as learners are informed of the
value as well as the purpose of strategy instruction. The aim of this approach is to enhance
the learners' awareness of how to improve their learning by adopting appropriate strategies.
Thus, learners are made aware of the fact that they are being taught specific strategies and
when and how to use these strategies. This approach is favored by many EFL/ESL teachers,
educators and researchers as it enables the learners to transfer the strategies they are taught to
new learning situations ( Eilers and Pinkley,2006:14 and Klapwijk, 2008:23).
The Embedded (Implicit) Approach

According to this approach, learners are not explicitly informed that strategy instruction is
occurring. They are guided in the use of specific strategies that are embedded in the writing
task. Few researchers seem to favor this approach (Klapwijk, 2008:24).
In this study, strategy instruction was delivered explicitly to the participants who had an
opportunity to apply the writing strategies in real communicative writing tasks. This explicit
method of instruction was adopted for two reasons: (1) it is appropriate and effective for all
students, clever, average and weak students and (2) it is suitable for intermediate EFL
students. What's more, the researcher and the EFL teacher used to guide the participants to
use strategies until their use became an automatic part of each one's repertoire.
Stages of Strategy Instruction in the Proposed Model

In this study, strategy instruction was an integral part of the proposed model and
complemented the writing instruction in the target writing tasks. It included six stages: (1)
activating background knowledge (2) general strategy discussion (description), (3) teacher
modeling, (4) student guided strategy use (5) analysis of strategy use and (6) independent
strategy practice.
Activating Background Knowledge

At this stage, the teacher first encouraged the participants to identify what they knew about
the target strategies and what gaps in prior knowledge should be addressed.
113
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
General Strategy Discussion

The target writing strategies were defined and discussed. The aim of strategy discussion was
to enhance the participants' awareness of the importance of writing strategies and to ensure
that the participants were connecting their progress in writing to their use of those strategies.
Another aim was to enhance transfer of training to other new writing tasks. Next, the teacher
asked the participants to tell why learning and using strategies is important. Examples of
what the teacher elicited from the participants are: (1) strategies help improve their writing
skills, (2) strategies help them process their writing actively, (3) strategies help them monitor
their writing performance as they write and (4) strategies help them connect the generated
ideas into an effective composition.
Teacher Modeling
A third important process of strategy instruction was the regular teacher modeling of expert
writer behavior. In doing so, the teacher used to think aloud how to apply specific strategies
at the three stages of writing (pre-writing, writing and post-writing). Here is an excerpt from
unit six, lesson two (SB, p.52), illustrating how teacher's modeling occurs.
Okay, the topic of the composition is "The Five Senses". Um, well, what is the main idea? I
know the main idea includes the topic statement (What the five senses are.), but why they are
important "The Five Senses"? We have five senses, each with an important function. Okay, I
should fill in the following graphic organizer to generate and organize my ideas.
The Five Senses
Hearing Smelling Touching Tasting

Sight
Body Information
Eyes Ears Nose Skin Tongue
In the above excerpt, the teacher can be observed using pre-writing strategies such as
generating and organizing ideas.
Student Guided Strategy Use

Once the participants knew what the target strategies had entailed, they were given time for
guided practice of those strategies. The role of the teacher was to provide scaffolding and
feedback when the participants failed to apply the target strategies successfully and reinforce
correct applications. Also, the teacher encouraged the participants to apply writing strategies
and think aloud from the very beginning. However, the researcher informed the teacher that
he should bear in mind that familiarity with this process would take time as writing and
thinking aloud causes a very high cognitive and meta-cognitive load for EFL writers. That's
114
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
why the application of experiment was extended to include the two terms of the academic
year 2011-2012.
Analysis and Evaluation of Strategy Use

After the participants had applied the strategies, they immediately analyzed their use of the
target strategies through full class discussion; the participants were asked to check the level
of their strategy use so that they would well understand what they had learned about new
strategies and what needed to be reviewed or modified. Self-evaluation activities including
self-questioning or debriefing discussions after strategy use in addition to reflecting on their
use of strategies using the "Strategy Use Reflection Checklist" (Appendix Four) were used.
Self-questioning included questions like: What did I do? , When did I do it? , What strategies
did I use? , How far were the suggested strategies successful? and What other strategies could
be successful?
Independent Strategy Use

This stage aimed to help the participants practice, consolidate, evaluate, automate and
internalize the strategies they had been taught. The participants were provided with ample
opportunities to practice writing strategies throughout the writing classes. Specifically, they
were inspired and empowered by means of teacher and peer scaffolding to apply the
strategies they thought to be most effective, to transfer newly acquired strategies to new
contexts and to devise their own individual combinations and interpretations of those
strategies.
Language of Strategy Instruction

This issue is particular to teaching learning strategies to language learners. Chamot
(2005:122) states that, in first language contexts, strategies are taught through a language
medium in which learners are proficient, but in second or foreign language contexts, this is
not necessarily so. Beginning and intermediate level learners, in particular, do not have the
foreign language proficiency to understand explanations of why and how to use learning
strategies. Yet, postponing learning strategy instruction until advanced level courses deprives
those learners of tools that could enhance their language learning and augment their
motivation for further study. It is probably not possible to avoid using the first language
during strategy instruction for beginning to intermediate level learners. Suggestions have
been made to initially teach the learning strategies in the learners' native language, assuming
that it is the same for all students and that the teacher knows the language; alternatively,
teachers have been urged to give the strategy a target language name, explain how to use it in
simple language, and model the strategy repeatedly. In this study, strategy instruction was
mainly in Arabic at the beginning of the experiment as the participants' level was very low as
revealed by the pre-test (Table 11). Gradually, a combination of the native and the target
languages was adopted for strategy instruction.
Strategies Classifications
Review of literature about language learning strategies offers a number of classifications
which comprise slight similar points, with many differences in general. However, these
classifications can provide different points of view and reflect the complicated system of
language learning strategies. Examples of these classifications are provided by Oxford,
115
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
(1990:14-15), Wenden (1991:303-36), Riazi (1997:122), Sasaki (2000:259) and Baker and
Boonkit (2004:301).
Oxford (1990:14-15) provided a Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) which has
been the most commonly used questionnaire in experimental studies. Oxford's classification
assumes that some strategies are concerned with the language directly, whereas others
provide support indirectly. So, she divided strategies into direct strategies (those which
directly involve the target language such as reviewing and practicing) and indirect strategies
(those which provide indirect support for language learning such as planning, co-operating
and seeking opportunities).On this basis, she divided each category into three groups. Direct
strategies included memory strategies (which relate to how learners remember language),
cognitive strategies (which relate to how learners think about their learning), and
compensational strategies (which enable learners to make up for limited knowledge), while
indirect strategies involved meta-cognitive strategies (relating to how students manage their
own learning) , affective strategies (relating to students' feelings and emotions), and social
strategies(which involve learning by interaction with others). Oxford's Language Learning
Strategy Classification is shown in Table (2).
Table (2): Oxford's Language Learning Strategy Classification.
Direct Strategies
1-Memory -Creating mental linkages
strategies -Applying images and sounds
-Reviewing well
-Employing actions
2-Cognitive - Practicing
strategies - Reviewing and sending messages
- Analyzing and reasoning
-creating structure for input and output
3-Compensational - Guessing intelligently
Strategies - Overcoming limitations in speaking and writing
Indirect Strategies
1-Metacognitive - Centering your learning
strategies - Arranging and planning your learning
-Evaluating your learning
- Lowering your anxiety
2-Affective - Encouraging yourself
strategies -Taking your emotional temperature
- Asking questions
- Cooperating with others
3-Social strategies -Empathizing with others
O'Malley and Chamot (1990: 44), on the other hand, classified learning strategies into three
categories: cognitive, meta-cognitive and social/affective. Cognitive strategies are specified
as learning steps that learners take to transform new material. They operate directly on
incoming information, manipulating it in ways that enhance learning. Sixteen cognitive
116
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
strategies are included in this classification as shown in table (4).Meta-cognitive strategies

involve consciously directing learners' efforts into the learning task. They are higher order
executive strategies that may entail planning for, monitoring or evaluating the success of a
learning activity; in other words, they are strategies about learning rather than learning
strategies themselves. They are divided into nine types. Social/affective strategies involve
interaction with another person or taking control of one's own feelings on language learning.
They represent a broad grouping that involves either interaction with another person or
ideational control over affect. Table (3) shows O'Malley and Chamot's Language Learning
Strategy Classification.
Table (3): O'Malley's and Chamot's Language Learning Strategy Classification.
Strategies Examples
Cognitive Repetition: imitating other people's speech, silently or aloud;
Strategies Resourcing: making use of language materials such as dictionaries;
Directed physical response; ‘relating new information to physical actions, as with
directives;
Translation: ‘using the first language as a basis for understanding and/or producing
the L2.
Grouping: organizing learning on the basis of ‘common attributes';
Note-taking: writing down the gist of texts;
Deduction: conscious application of L2 rules;
Recombination: putting together smaller meaningful elements into new wholes;
Imagery: turning information into a visual form to aid remembering it- "Pretend
you are doing something indicated in the sentences to make up about the new
word";
Auditory representation: keeping a sound or sound sequence in the mind – "When
you are trying to learn how to say something, speak it in your mind first";
Key word: using key-word memory techniques, such as identifying an L2 word
with an L1 word that sounds similar;
Contextualization: placing a word or phrase in a meaningful language sequence.
Elaboration: relating new information to other concepts in memory
Transfer: helping language learning through previous knowledge —“If they're
talking about something I have already learnt (in Spanish), all I have to do is
remember the information and try to put it into English”;
Inferencing: guessing meanings by using available information – "I think of the
whole meaning of the sentence, and then I can get the meaning of the new word";
Question for clarification: getting a teacher to explain, help and so on.
Meta-cognitive Advance organizers: planning the learning activity in advance at a general level -
Strategies "You review before you go into class";
Directed attention: deciding in advance to concentrate on general aspects of a
learning task;
Selective attention: deciding to pay attention to specific parts of the language input
or the situation that will help learning;
Self-management: trying to arrange the appropriate conditions for learning — “I
sit in the front of the class so I can see the teacher”;
Advance preparation: ‘planning for and rehearsing linguistic components
necessary to carry out an upcoming language task'
Self-monitoring: checking one's performance as one speaks — "Sometimes I cut
short a word because I realize I've said it wrong";
Delayed production: deliberately postponing speaking so that one may learn by
listening — “I talk when I have to, but I keep it short and hope I'll be understood”;
117
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Self-evaluation: checking how well one is doing against one's own standards;
Self-reinforcement: giving oneself rewards for success.
Social/Affective Cooperation: working with fellow-students on a language task.
Strategies
Wenden (1991:303-36) investigated the cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies used by eight
ESL learners as they write their compositions using computers. She asked the learners to
introspect as they wrote. Cognitive strategies included classification (self-question ,
hypothesizing , defining terms , comparing) , retrieval (rereading aloud or silently what has
been written, self-questioning, writing till the idea would come , summarizing what had been
written , thinking in one's native language) , resourcing ( asking researcher, referring to
dictionary) , deferral , avoidance and verification. Meta-cognitive strategies involved
planning, evaluation and monitoring. Wenden's classification of cognitive and metacognitive
strategies in writing is shown in Table (4).
Table (4): Wenden's Classification of Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies in Writing
Meta-cognitive Cognitive Strategies

Strategies
Planning Clarification Self-question
Evaluation Hypothesizing
Monitoring Defining terms
Comparing
Retrieval Rereading aloud or silently what had been
written
Writing in a lead-in word or expression
Rereading the assigned question
Self-questioning
Writing till the idea would come
Summarizing what had just been written (in
terms of content or of rhetoric)
Thinking in one's native language
Resourcing Ask researcher
Refer to dictionary
Deferral
Avoidance
Verification
Riazi (1997:122) examined the compositions of four Iranian doctoral students of education,
focusing on the learners' conceptualizations of their writing tasks, their strategies for
composing and their personal perceptions of their own learning. He summarized their
composing strategies following distinctions made in previous studies of second language
learning in academic settings between cognitive, meta-cognitive, social and search strategies.
The following table (5) shows Riazi's classification of composing strategies.
118
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Table (5): Riazi's Classification of Composing Strategies.
Composing Strategies Constituents Phase of Composing Process

Cognitive Strategies -Note-taking Reading and writing
Interacting with the material -Elaboration Reading and writing
to be used in writing by -Use of mother tongue Reading and writing
manipulating them mentally -Knowledge and skill Reading and writing
and physically transfer from L1.
-Inferencing Reading
-Drafting(revising and Writing
editing)
Meta-Cognitive Strategies
Executive processes used to -Assigning goals Task representation and
plan, monitor and evaluate a -Planning ( making and reading.
writing task. changing outlines) Writing
-Rationalizing appropriate Reading and writing
formats. Reading and writing/Task
-Monitoring and evaluation representation
Social Strategies
Interacting with other -Appealing for Task representation
persons to assist in clarifications Writing
performing the task or to -Getting feedback from
gain affective control. professor or peers.
Search Strategies -Searching and using
Searching and using libraries (books, journals, Reading and writing
supporting sources Eric, microfiche).
-Using guidelines
-Using others' writing as
models.
Sasaki (2000:259) investigated the writing processes of Japanese EFL learners, using
multiple data sources including their written texts, videotaped pausing behaviors while
writing, stimulated recall protocols, and analytic scores given to the written texts.
Methodologically, he adopted a research scheme that has been successfully used for building
models of Japanese L1writing. Three paired groups of Japanese EFL writers (experts vs.
novices, more-vs. less-skilled student writers, and novices before and after 6 months of
instruction) were compared in terms of writing fluency, quality/complexity of their written
texts, their pausing behaviors while writing, and their strategy use. Results revealed that (a)
before starting to write, the experts spent a longer time planning a detailed overall
organization, whereas the novices spent a shorter time, making a less global plan; (b) once
the experts had made their global plan, they did not stop or think as frequently as the novices;
(c) L2 proficiency appeared to explain part of the difference in strategy use between the
experts and novices; and (d) after 6 months of instruction, novices had begun to use some of
the expert writers' strategies. It was also revealed that the experts' global planning was a
manifestation of writing expertise that cannot be acquired over a short period of time. The
following table (6) shows Sasaki's classification of composing strategies.
119
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Table (6): Sasaki's Classification of Composing Strategies
Strategies Definition
Planning
1.Global planning Detailed planning of overall organization
2.Thematic planning Less detailed planning of overall organization
3.Local planning Planning what to write next
4.Organizing Organizing the generated ideas
5.Conclusion planning Planning of the conclusion
Retrieving
1.Plan retrieving Retrieving the already constructed plan
2. Information retrieving Retrieving appropriate information from
long-term memory
Generating idea Generating an idea without any stimulus

1.Naturally generated Generating an idea related to the previous
2.Description generated description
Verbalizing
1.Verbalizing a proposition Verbalizing the content the writer intends to write
2.Rhetorical refining Refining the rhetorical aspect(s) of an expression
3.Mechanical refining Refining the mechanical or (L1/L2) grammatical
aspect(s) of
4.Sense of readers an expression
Adjusting expression(s) to the readers
Translating Translating the generated idea into L2
Rereading Rereading the already produced sentence
Evaluating
1.L2 proficiency evaluation Evaluating one's own L2 proficiency
2.Local text evaluation Evaluating part of the generated text
3.General text evaluation Evaluating the generated text in general
Others
1.Resting Resting
2.Questioning Asking the researcher a question
3.Impossible to categorize Impossible to categorize
It is clear from the above-mentioned review that these classifications have been conducted in
English as second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) contexts. Regardless of how they are classified,
the exact number of strategies available and how these strategies should be classified still
remain open for discussion. A comparative analysis of various kinds of strategy classifications
reviewed so far supported the view that O'Malley and Chamot's (1990) classification of
strategies into cognitive, meta-cognitive and socio/affective strategies, Oxford's six-subset
strategy taxonomy, Sasaki's classification and Riazi's classification are more comprehensive
and consistent with learners' use of strategies than Weden's cognitive and meta-cognitive
strategies. Also, based on the psychological and sociological differences that exist between
adult and young language learners, it is not logical to apply results of strategy studies with
adults and adolescents to young EFL/ESL language learners. Sasaki's classification may be
beneficial for adult learners as it provides a detailed description of the strategies EFL writers
120
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
may use in their writing process. However, it may be confusing for young learners as it is too
detailed. For example, "planning" includes five strategies (Global planning, thematic planning,
local planning, organizing and conclusion planning) which may be embarrassing for young
learners.
In addition, almost all the categories about writing strategies are used to categorize the writers'
writing processes. No one except Wenden (1991) and Riazi (1997) has classified writing
strategies from a theoretical stance. Also, the taxonomies of Wenden and Riazi do not include
rhetorical or communicative strategies. Moreover, while Oxford (1990) , O'Malley and Chamot
(1990) , Weden(1991) and Riazi (1997) put planning and global planning together as
individual strategies, Sasaki (2000) subdivided planning into planning overall content and idea
or global planning, thematic planning and local planning .
Based on the previous strategy classifications, six main writing strategies were classified and
taught to the participants in the present study (cognitive strategies, meta-cognitive strategies,
compensational strategies, social strategies, affective strategies and multiple strategies). While
cognitive strategies helped the participants generate ideas, analyze model texts and use the
generated ideas while writing and revise and edit their drafts at the post writing stage, meta-
cognitive strategies enabled them to plan for their writing to monitor, regulate and their writing
performance while writing and self-evaluate their drafts and reflect on their writing
performance at the post-writing stage. Compensational strategies empowered the participants
to overcome their writing problems they faced due to their limited writing abilities by referring
to various resources such as dictionaries, grammar books, model texts...etc. or asking the
teacher and/or peers for clarification. Social strategies facilitated the participants' cooperation
with their peers and/or teacher so as to negotiate ideas, give and receive feedback or to share
their writing. Affective strategies encouraged them to manage their feelings, emotions and
attitudes before writing (alleviating prewriting anxiety/blank sheet apprehension) while writing
(enhancing their persistence and relaxation) and after writing (rewarding themselves for
performing the writing task). In addition, since writing strategies might not be occurring at
distinct times and in the same order, the orchestration of multiple strategies was important to
empower the participants while writing. Accordingly, an additional category including two or
more types of writing strategies was recognized and labeled as multiple strategies. For
example, when the participants were taught that an effective writing strategy involves
considering their audience and purpose (e.g. to explain, to persuade …etc.) in writing
(cognitive), they could monitor their strategy use by stopping and thinking about whether they
are able to keep track of their aim (metacognitive). Table (7) shows the classification of the
writing strategies used in the present study.
Table (7): Classification of the Writing Strategies Used in the Present Study.
Strategies Examples
Cognitive Strategies -Generating ideas (brainstorming, listing, clustering…etc.).
-Note-taking (writing down the general ideas).
-Resourcing (making use of language materials such as dictionaries)
-Drafting
-Rhetorical refining
-Mechanical refining
-Clarification (self-questioning, defining terms, comparing ...etc.).
-Reading aloud or silently the written composition.
121
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
-Using others' writing as models.

-Adjusting expression(s) to the readers
Meta-Cognitive -Grouping (organizing ideas using graphic organizers, webs… etc.)
Strategies -Assigning goals
-Planning ( making and changing outlines)
-Rationalizing appropriate writing formats.
-Self-monitoring (checking one's performance as one writes).
-Self-management (trying to arrange the appropriate conditions for
writing).
-Self-evaluation
-Evaluating the generated text in general
Compensational -Overcoming limitations in writing
Strategies -Restructuring (the search for an alternative syntactic plan once the writer
anticipates or realizes that the original one is not going to be satisfactory
for a variety of linguistic, ideational or textual reasons).
-Using circumlocutions or synonyms
-Adjusting or approximating the message
Affective Strategies - Lowering writing anxiety
-Self-encouragement
-Self-reinforcement: giving oneself rewards for success.
Social Strategies -Appealing for clarifications
-Negotiating and discussing ideas
-Giving and getting feedback from teacher or peers.
-Sharing writing with peers.
Multiple Strategies -Using two or more strategies.
Implications for EFL Teachers

The strategy-based writing model provides many implications for EFL teachers:
1- EFL teachers should stop teaching writing by simply focusing on the writing product
rather than the writing process.
2- Teacher and peer scaffolding should be integrated into EFL writing instruction.
3- EFL teachers should empower learners by creating learner-centered environment in
which they are actively and safely engaged in the writing process.
4- EFL learners should have a clear idea of why they write, what they write about and
how they write.
5- EFL teachers should train learners to use the six types of writing strategies (cognitive,
meta-cognitive, social, compensational, affective and multiple strategies) as they
write.
6- EFL teachers should provide good models of strategic approaches.
7- EFL teachers should consistently provide direct strategy instruction, modeling and
guided practice.
122
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
8- EFL teachers should encourage all types of correction (self- correction, peer-
correction and teacher-correction).
9- EFL teachers should provide ample opportunities for learners to reflect on their
writing performance as well as on the writing activities.
10- EFL teachers should be supportive and encouraging to learners and attend to their
voices from different venues to monitor, regulate and evaluate the teaching strategies
they use. This helps learners to get rid of their writing anxiety/apprehension.
11- An integrated writing approach should be adopted as it enhances the learners'
awareness that writing is not a one-step product of getting instant perfection, but a
recursive and social process of meaning exploration and reformulation.
12- EFL teachers should enhance learners' motivation so as to enable them to attain better
Part Two: Writing

Writing has always been considered an important skill in teaching and learning English as a
Foreign Language (EFL). Firstly, it inspires logical thinking, pushes students to focus their
attention and sort out their ideas, and develops their ability to summarize, analyze and
criticize. Secondly, writing enhances learning by thinking in, and reflecting on the target
language (Luchini, 2010:73).However, writing has never been an easy task for EFL learners
who find it difficult to craft a text as the writing process calls for a wide range of writing
strategies (cognitive, meta-cognitive, affective, social, compensational and multiple
strategies) of which they are mostly unaware. In addition they should "utilize all the means
they have, such as lexical, syntactic, discoursal and rhetorical knowledge, to achieve certain
writing objectives." (Yan, 2010:29).
The Nature of EFL Writing

Learning to write in the foreign language is one of the most difficult tasks which EFL
learners encounter and one that few of them are said to fully perfect. It is an intricate process
which causes problems to EFL learners as it entails using a set of mental processes rather
than only using the formal structures of the language itself. "It requires not only lexical and
syntactic knowledge of vocabulary and grammar but also the ability to generate and organize
ideas and thoughts in a way that can be clearly and coherently communicated to a potential
reader (Quintero, 2008:8). Raimes (1983:6) concurs with Quintero in that "the process of
moving from concepts, thoughts and ideas to written text is complex. A written text
represents the product of a series of complicated mental operations". She provides a diagram
which illustrates what writers deal with as they produce their writing pieces (figure 1).
123
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Figure (1):Raimes' Factors Included in Producing a Piece of Writing
Syntax Content
Sentence structure, relevance, clarity,
Sentence boundaries, originality, logic, etc.
Stylistic choices, ..etc. The Writer's Process
Grammar getting ideas, getting
Rules for verbs,

Clear, fluent started, writing drafts,
revising and effective Audience
communication
Agreement, articles, of ideas The reader/ Pronouns, ..etc.
Purpose
The reason for writing Organization Mechanics

Handwriting paragraphs, topic and
support, cohesion and unity. Word choice

. Vocabulary, idioms,tone
. Spelling punctuation,..etc
Major Approaches to Writing Instruction

There are various approaches to writing instruction. For the purpose of this study, four
approaches are tackled: the product approach, the process approach, the genre approach and
the integrated approach.
The Product Approach

The product-oriented approach "began from the early 20th century into the 1960s with its
emphasis on paragraph models, grammar and usage rules, vocabulary development, and then
focused largely on the logical construction and arrangement of discourse forms" Hung
(2008:1). It is also called 'the text-based approach', the controlled-to-free approach and the
guided composition approach. According to this traditional approach, learners are given a
model text to emulate. The model text is presented and analyzed before starting writing.
Then, learners are asked to write their compositions following the model text. Thus, in this
approach, writing plays a key role in developing learners' writing in terms of grammatical and
syntactical forms. It includes four stages (Badger and White, 2000:153; Hung (2008:1)
Hassan and Akhan, 2010:78; Seifoori et al. .2012: 108; Khan, 2015:97):
Stage One: Familiarization

Learners study model texts and highlight the features of the genre they include. For example,
if studying a formal letter, learners' attention may be drawn to the importance of paragraphing
and the language used to make formal requests. If they read a story, the focus may be on the
124
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
techniques used to make the story interesting. In addition, learners focus on where and how
the writer employs techniques.
Stage Two: Controlled Writing

This stage involves controlled practice of the highlighted text features, usually in isolation.
So, if studying a formal letter, learners may be asked to practise the language used to make
formal requests, for example, practicing the "I would be grateful if you …….." structure.
Stage Three: Organizing Ideas.

This is the most important stage where ideas are organized. Proponents of the product
approach believe that the organization of ideas is more important than the ideas themselves
and as important as the control of linguistic features.
Stage Four: The End Product

This is the end product of the writing process. Learners choose from the choice of
comparable writing tasks. To show that they can be competent users of the language, learners
individually use the skills, structures and vocabulary they have been taught to compose the
product.
Advantages of the Product Approach

This approach is widely adopted by EFL teachers as it has the following advantages
(Tangpermpoon, 2008:3; Alzaanin, 2014:19; Setyono, 2014:478; Khan, 2015:97):
1- It helps learners write their compositions systematically by using sample models of
written texts (descriptive, narrative and persuasive).
2- It enables learners to use vocabulary and structures appropriately.
3- It enhances students' awareness of semantic and syntactic forms (contexts).
4- It shapes learners' writing competence in terms of language use.
5- It increases self- confidence among novice EFL writers
However, the hours spent by both the teacher and learners in identifying and correcting
grammar errors in their compositions may not be the most efficient use of valuable language
teaching and learning time, although learners may expect that it is the most important part of
their writing instruction. Nonetheless, exercises such as sentence combination and models
analysis are effective in improving writing quality. In addition, peer editing, and revision of
drafts are most useful when explicit criteria for evaluation are considered. Lastly, clearly
defined writing tasks with specific objectives result in the most significant gains in students
writing:
Disadvantages of the Product approach

The following are some disadvantages associated with adopting the product approach:
1-It looks upon writing as a grammar exercise; little attention is paid to the writing purpose
and the writing process as it focuses on grammar, vocabulary and writing mechanics.
125
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
2- Learners ' motivation in this approach is low as they are forced to write their compositions
accurately using strict models.
The Process Approach

During the 1980s, there was a shift from the product approach to the process approach in
EFL/ESL writing instruction (Yi, 2010: 31). While the product approach focuses on the
writing product, the process approach concentrates on the way writers actually perform their
writing tasks from beginning to end. Accuracy of spelling, punctuation and grammar is no
longer the central concern and the writing process is considered writer-oriented and self-
discovery. This approach is based on the premise that, while writing, learners hardly follow a
fixed, linear sequence of writing stages as they have to move forth and back in order to find
new ideas and improve their writing. Thus, this approach sees writing as a dynamic process
in which writers attempt to reformulate their ideas and convey a specific meaning through
their writing pieces.
According to this approach, teachers can encourage students to explore their thoughts and
develop their writing by adopting a five-step writing process model (Tangpermpoon, 2008:4;
Setyono,2014:478; Dikli et al. ,2015:57):
1- Prewriting
The teacher assigns a writing task and helps learners generate ideas by applying a number of
strategies such as brainstorming, clustering, listing and oral discussions using visual-oral
contexts. Students should be told that they do not have to focus on correctness nor
appropriateness at this stage.
2- First Drafting
Students use the ideas they generated at the prewriting stage to write their first drafts.
3- Feedback
At this stage, learners get feedback from their teacher and peers and move on to another
modified draft.
4- Second drafting
Learners modify their first drafts by adding, revising and rearranging ideas, based the
remarks of the teacher and peers.
5- Proofreading
This is the final stage where learners pay more attention to the proper use of grammar,
vocabulary, layout in addition to writing mechanics. This enables them to find out new ideas
and language forms.
The abovementioned stages are recursive in nature. Furthermore, this approach encourages
learners to interact with each other during the writing process. It also emphasizes that the
writing process should be meaningful; learners should understand the steps involved in the
writing process.
126
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Advantages of the Process Approach

1- It emphasizes the importance of the skills involved in writing.
2- It recognizes that what learners bring to the writing classroom contributes to the
development of their writing ability.
3- It provides a flexible five-step model which allows learners to move forth and back to
come up with new ideas.
4- It helps learners develop their writing skills step by step where the teacher provides
scaffolding and constructive feedback.
Disadvantages of the Process Approach

1- It often regards all types of writing as being produced by the same set of processes.
2- It pays insufficient attention to the kind of texts writers produce and why such texts are
produced.
3- It provides poor linguistic input to students who have no clear understanding about the
characteristics of accurate writing.
4- It takes learners a long time to finish their compositions following the five steps.
5- Students may be demotivated as they spend a long time to perform their writing task.
The Genre Approach

In some ways, the genre approach can be regarded as an extension of the product approach.
Like product approaches, genre approaches regard writing as predominantly linguistic but,
unlike product approaches, they emphasize that writing varies with the social context in
which it is produced (Silva, 1990:16; Badger and White, 2000:155; Wang (2013:
2128;Alzaanin, 2014:20).Thus, learners benefit from studying genres used in various socio-
cultural contexts for different purposes. This approach involves three stages:
Modeling the Target Genre

At this stage, learners are exposed to examples of the genre they have to produce.
Constructing a Text
At this stage, both learners and the teacher collaborate to compose a text.
Independent Text Construction

The teacher encourages learners to create their texts independently.
Advantages of the Genre Approach

Like the other approaches, the genre approach is widely used in EFL classrooms as it has
the following benefits:
127
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
1-It acknowledges that writing takes place in a social context.

2-It enables learners to acquire the writing skills consciously through imitation and analysis
of each writing genre.
3-It also increases learners' awareness of writing aspects such as arrangement, organization,
genre and form.
4-Since this approach emphasizes genre construction, it helps learners' to perform writing
tasks appropriately in their real life outside the classroom.
Disadvantages of the Genre Approach

The drawbacks of the genre approach are as follows:
1-It underestimates the skills learners need to produce a text.
2-It seems to ignore the writing abilities which learners possess in other areas.
3-It does not enable learners to have enough language or vocabulary to communicate their
message to specific audience.
The Integrated Approach

Each of the aforementioned writing approaches has its merits and demerits. The strengths and
weaknesses of each approach show that the three approaches complement each other. So,
effective writing instruction can involve flexible incorporation of the insights of the product,
process, and genre approaches (Dyer, 1996:316, Alzaanin, 2014:21).This flexible
incorporation of existing writing approaches may infuse writing instruction with renewed
vigor since this integration allows learners to look at writing beyond form and accuracy. It
also enables them to find meaning and purpose in interactive writing activities with peer and
teacher scaffolding. Moreover, it still takes the quality of the writing product into account and
does not overlook accuracy or form in the least. "This integration is eclectic, and the teacher
should make sensible choice on which phase of writing to mainly focus on in the light of
learners' specific needs in the real classroom" (Yi, 2010:29). Thus, writing involves
knowledge about language (as in product and genre approaches), knowledge of the context in
which writing occurs and especially the purpose of writing (as in genre approaches), and
skills in using language flexibly (as in process approaches). In addition, writing development
occurs by drawing out the learners' potential (as in process approaches) and by providing
input to which the learners respond (as in product and genre approaches).
What is increasingly obvious from the previous discussion is that no single approach is
sufficient in itself to account for how writing is developed and employed. Based on the fact
that an integrated approach to writing instruction can better satisfy EFL writers' needs and
that strategy-based instruction plays a vital role in enhancing the learners' writing skills, the
present study adopted the integrated approach to EFL writing instruction where six types of
strategies (cognitive, meta-cognitive, compensational, affective, social and multiple
strategies) were integrated into a model proposed to enhance the participants' writing skills.
The integrated approach enabled the participants to transfer the skills they had gained from
each approach naturally from one mode to another and thus to produce their writing tasks
efficiently. For example, to integrate each approach in the writing class, the teacher followed
128
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
these steps. He started teaching writing with one approach and then adapted it by combining
the strengths of other approaches in the writing classroom. He also trained the participants on
using the rhetorical patterns or the so-called ‘rhetorical organizations' in the product-based
approach in so as to teach them how to write according to model texts; he provided the
participants with some examples of the text types they had to write to enhance their
understanding of the aim and framework of a particular writing type. Furthermore, at the
beginning of writing classes, the teacher used to describe clearly the genres the participants
had to learn in order to help them generate ideas about each genre. In addition, he avoided
spending too much time on one piece of writing as this might decrease the participants'
motivation and impede them from learning other types of writing. He also used
brainstorming, mind-mapping, webbing techniques to help the participants generate and
organize ideas and come up with appropriate language use or specific vocabulary for what
they wanted to convey in their writing pieces. Moreover, the participants were taught how to
develop a sense of audience by taking turns giving and getting feedback and comments on
their drafts. Collaborative work was encouraged so as to alliviate the participants' writing
apprehension and enhance their writing skills through collaboration with their peers and
teacher and asking for clarifications. Also, various error correction techniques (self, peer and
teacher correction) were used.
Elements of Writing Instruction

Steve and Perin (2007:4-5) identify eleven elements of current writing instruction which
proved to be effective for developing the learners' ability to write well and to use writing as a
tool for learning.
1- Writing Strategies: learners should be taught strategies for planning, revising, and
editing their compositions
2- Summarization: This involves explicitly and systematically teaching learners how to
summarize texts.
3- Collaborative Writing: It is incumbent upon the teacher to create instructional
arrangement and a learning environment in which learners work together to plan, draft,
revise, and edit their compositions.
4- Specific Product Goals: Learners should be trained to set reachable goals for the writing
they are to compose.
5- Word Processing: Learners should be encouraged to use computers and word processors
as instructional supports for writing assignments.
6- Sentence Combining: Learners should be taught to construct more complex,
sophisticated sentences.
7- Prewriting: Learners should be engaged in prewriting activities designed to help them
generate or organize ideas for their compositions.
8- Inquiry Activities: Learners should be encouraged to analyze immediate, concrete data
to enable them to develop ideas and content for a particular writing task.
129
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
9- Process Writing Approach: This involves a number of writing instructional activities in

a workshop environment which stresses extended writing opportunities, writing for
authentic audiences, personalized instruction, and cycles of writing.
10- Study of Models: Learners should be provided with opportunities to read, analyze, and
emulate models of good writing.
11- Writing for Content Learning: Learners should use writing as a tool for learning content
material.
In this study, the aforementioned writing elements were considered and some of them
(writing strategies, collaborative writing, specific product goals, sentence combining,
prewriting, inquiry activities and studying models) were integrated into the strategy-based
writing model.
Stages of Writing
Writing is a complex, recursive process which involves a series of logical stages which
enable writers to organize their thoughts so as to perform their writing tasks successfully.
Despite the fact that EFL writing teachers and researchers have agreed that writers go through
several stages while writing, they have not reached an agreement on labeling these stages. In
addition, even though the writing stages are overlapping in the writing process, they can be
dealt with separately to facilitate description. Nevertheless, labeling of each stage does not
indicate that the writing process is a linear series of categories. Thus, since dividing the
writing process into several stages and labeling each stage may lead learners to
misunderstand that the stages are linear, teachers should inform them that the stages are
interactive, organic and cyclical.
Generally, there are some process writing models which visualize the writing process and
show the recursive and complex nature of writing. For example, White and Arndt (1991: 11)
depict the writing process as a recursive process involving six stages. Figure (2) shows White
and Arndt's writing process model.
130
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Drafting
Reviewing Focusing
Structuring
Generating ideas Evaluation
Figure (2): White and Arndt's Writing Process Model

Elucidating the benefits of generating ideas, focusing, and structuring activities presented in
White and Arndt's writing process model (Figure 2), Tribble (1996:107) states that
generating ideas triggers learners' creativity and helps them figure out their interests in the
target writing topics. Focusing activities enable learners to decide what is more important and
less important for their writing; learners can identify the priorities of content. Structuring
activities help learners decide how to organize their writing in order to convey meaning
effectively. Traditional writing instruction emphasizes only the drafting and reviewing stages.
However, generating, focusing, and structuring stages should be considered important stages
of the writing process because each stage facilitates the other stages and helps learners move
from the first draft to the final draft. Similarly, Harmer (1998: 326) highlights the recursive
nature of writing as follows:
Figure (3): Harmer's Writing Process Model.
In Figure (3), Harmer compares the writing process to a "wheel". According to Harmer's
model, writers move not only around the circumference of the wheel but also across the
spokes. This means that they revisit a certain stage as well as move from a planning stage to
the final draft stage.
131
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
The identification of writing stages depends on the adopted writing approach (the product
approach, the process approach, the genre approach or the integrated approach). For instance,
Cohen ( 1990: 105) and Dul (2011:88) view writing basically as a process including four
main stages (i.e. planning, drafting, revising, and editing), where each stage has its own rules,
activities, and behaviors to be displayed. According to them, teachers are expected to focus
on the process rather than the final product. Certainly, accuracy is not neglected when
developing writing but it is not the only sought target either. That is, various operations and
strategies applied during the completion of a writing task become key processes and
elements. On the other hand, Tompkins (1990:87) proposes a five-stage writing process: pre-
writing, drafting, revising, editing, and sharing. The following is an in-depth look at each of
these stages.
Pre-writing
Prewriting is the first stage of the writing process where learners explore, generate and
organize their ideas about the target writing topic. This stage is important as it lays the
foundation of good writing and minimize learners ' writing anxiety (Schweiker-Marra and
Marra, 2000:99; Hedge, 2005:22 and Shih, 2005:11). It aims at stimulating learners'
creativity and enabling them to think about what to write and how to approach the target
topic. So, as indicated by Hedge (2005:22), EFL teachers should remind learners of two
important things: the purpose of their writing and its audience. This enhances learners'
awareness of both why and for whom they are writing. It also helps them to bear in mind the
text content as well as the text readers as they delineate the general outline/plan of their
writing. In addition, it is important to motivate learners and provide scaffolding at this stage
as many EFL learners apprehend the blank page.
Kroll (2001:224) states that because "there isn't one composing process , the goal of the
teacher should be to expose learners to variety of strategies for getting started with a writing
task and to encourage each learner to try to discover which strategies work best". These
strategies are conscious thoughts, actions, or behaviors which writers use when they plan
before writing. The purpose of such strategies is for the writers to feel that they own several
techniques to begin an assigned writing task and that they do not have to begin writing at the
same beginning and work through an evolving draft sequentially until they reach their final
draft. Therefore, they decrease the learners' writing apprehension and enhance their self-
confidence. These strategies should be varied so as to suit the learners' various learning
preferences. Listed below are some of the well-known strategies that can be adopted at the
prewriting stage with the purpose of helping learners generate and organize their ideas which
are the heart of the planning process. They include brainstorming, listing, clustering, free
writing, resourcing, elaboration, grouping, planning and goal setting (Brown, 2001:348). If
well-planned, these strategies are easy to practice in the classroom without consuming much
time. According to Kroll (2001:223), these first four activities are similar, but depending on
learners' preferences, one of them can achieve better effects than the others for each
individual leaner. While providing ample opportunities for practicing all the techniques, EFL
teachers should encourage learners to choose the most effective ones for them.
Brainstorming
It is a group activity in which all learners share their ideas about the target topic. Learners are
asked to focus on a particular subject or topic and freely jot down any and all ideas which
come to their minds without limiting or expurgating information; they are told that if an idea
132
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
comes to mind, they should write it down. They are also informed that ideas may be single
words, phrases, ideas, details, examples, descriptions, feelings, people, situations... etc. The
main aim is to get as many ideas down on paper as they can.
Listing
Listing is beneficial for the learners who are constrained by excessive concern for expressing
their thoughts in grammatically correct sentences. Unlike brainstorming (a group activity),
listing is an individual activity. As a first step in approaching the writing topic at hand, each
learner is encouraged to produce a long list of all the ideas (main and supporting ideas) that
came to his or her mind as he or she thought about the target topic.
Clustering
It is a strategy which encourages learners to pertain many ideas quickly. It begins with a key
word or central idea written in the center of a page ( or the board) around which the learners
(or the teacher, using the learners' generated ideas) jot down all of the free associations
triggered by the topic, using words or short phrases. Unlike listing, the generated ideas are
written on the page or the board in a way which shows the connection between them. By
sharing their clustered ideas with their peers, learners are exposed to various ways of tackling
the target topic, which leads to more generation of ideas about the topic at hand.
Free-writing
Free writing, known also as speed writing, quick writing, or ink writing, allows learners to
write quickly without stopping within limited time. In the ESL/EFL classrooms, for example,
the teacher may ask learners to start free-writing by giving an opening sentence. Fulwiler
(1996:2-3) suggests some guidelines for implementing free-writing in the classroom:(1) the
teacher may ask learners to write without stopping for five or ten minutes, (2) he/she informs
learners that, while writing, they do not need to worry about punctuation, spelling, or
organization and (3) when learners finish their free-writing, the teacher asks them to share it
with their peers and talk about only the main content of the writing as a good follow-up
activity.
Elaboration
Elaboration is defined as a strategy of relating new information to prior knowledge. It is an
essential pre-writing strategy as it activates the learners' background knowledge and helps
them apply it to the writing task at hand. Various techniques can be used to achieve both
these objectives .One of these techniques is creating a K-W-L (know, want to know, learned)
chart. This technique helps the teacher to activate the learners' prior knowledge and
empowers them in the planning process. It was used in this study as it suited the participants'
proficiency level. In the 'K' step, the participants' were asked to write down everything they
know about the writing topic. In the 'W' step, they were encouraged to write questions - based
on their prior knowledge- about what they still needed to know about the topic and /or the
genre before they started writing. This step enabled the participants to create clear writing
objectives. Finally, in the 'L' step, the participants wrote what they learned from their
resources on the topic. In this step, they answered the questions they wrote in the 'W' step and
also revised any of their prior knowledge that turned out to be mistaken or incomplete. Using
this technique, the participants could activate their prior knowledge, elaborated on that
133
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
knowledge by asking appropriate questions which guided their research and related the new
information they found out in their research to their previous knowledge. The second
technique was discussion about the target topic using visual /aural contexts. The teacher used
to create a visual /aural context about the target writing topic around which he guided
discussion in the class. Through discussion, the teacher activated the participants' prior
knowledge and enabled them to generate ideas about the topic. Then, the participants were
encouraged to organize their ideas using graphic organizers or webs (Appendix Two).
Resourcing
Resourcing is an important strategy in the writing classes since learners are highly dependent
on reference material. It is perhaps one of the most useful resources for learners at the pre-
writing stage. A good model of the writing topic is to be analyzed and used as a model for
writing about the target topic. Such readings can facilitate writing, especially in ESL/EFL
situations as they provide models of good English writing and boost learners' genre
awareness. They are more beneficial for ESL/EFL learners who have limited language
abilities as they enable them to study language (lexical, syntactical structures, spelling,
punctuation …etc.). Brown(2001:347) confirms this when he states that by reading relevant
types of writing, learners can acquire insights about both how to write and what to write.
Thus, reading model texts about the topic can help learners generate ideas, have a good
example of the rhetoric and linguistic features of texts similar to the target topic. However,
EFL teachers should inform learners that these model texts should be used for facilitating
writing not for copying or emulating them.
In this study, the teacher and the participants went through sample texts in details while the
teacher was modeling how to analyze such texts and find out the rhetorical and lexico-
grammatical features through various exercises. Then, he provided them with prompts to
analyze models of writing by asking questions which guided them to attend to the various
aspects of the writing model including its ability to achieve its intended purpose, the
interaction between the writer and the reader and certain stylistic or linguistic features that are
characteristic of a particular genre of writing. Also, he offered more samples during the
following classes to broaden the participants s' horizon for expatiating such model texts. An
example of model text analysis is illustrated below:
I. Identifying the Elements of a Paragraph.

A. Read the paragraph. How does the writer try to improve his English?
Ways to Improve my English
Although I face some difficulties when I use English for communication purposes, I try some
ways to improve my English. I revise my revisions or worksheets regularly. This helps me to
keep the knowledge fresh in my mind. I like playing football on Thursdays. I also read widely
- newspapers, short stories, books, etc. I usually take down notes during lessons and check
the dictionary for unfamiliar words. I play word games and puzzles. In addition, I try to speak
proper English. Moreover, I watch English channels. I study with a friend who is good in the
English language. Thus, I have achieved some improvement in my English.
134
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
B. Answer the questions about the paragraph above. Give reasons for your answers.
1. Circle the topic sentence. Does the topic sentence help you understand what the paragraph
will be about?
2. How many supporting sentences does the paragraph have? Underline them.
3. Do the supporting sentences relate to the topic sentence?
4. Circle the concluding sentence. Does the topic concluding sentence make the paragraph
feel finished?
5. Is the first sentence indented?
II. Analyzing the paragraph for unity

1. Underline the topic sentence. Is it the first or the second sentence?
2. Write the controlling idea from the topic sentence in your own words.
……………………………………………………………………
3. One sentence in the paragraph is irrelevant. Draw a line through it.
4. Why the sentence is irrelevant? Write your explanation below.
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
III. Reordering for Coherence

A.Read the sentences from a narrative paragraph. Some of the sentences are out of order.
Number the sentences from 1-10 to show logical order.
…….a. At the beginning, he suffered a lot.
…….b. My neighbor is a kind man called Awad.
…….c. He was a soldier in the army.
…….d. He can go to the mosque and come back independently.
…….e. But, he persisted and tried to cope with that problem.
…….f. So, he fought in the Gulf war and lost his sight
…….g. Now, he lives happily; he can manage his own affairs independently.
…….h. He was active, strong and patriot.
…….i. In addition, he goes to the grocery to buy some goods for his family.
……. j. Moreover, he visits his neighbors and spends his time happily.
135
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Grouping
Grouping is a strategy which can be used to activate background knowledge brainstorming. It
includes generating, ordering, classifying and labeling ideas, based on common
characteristics. An example of grouping is the creation or use of graphic organizers which
are visual tools depicting the mental connections which writers make when tackling a major
idea or concept within a writing task. Graphic organizers include concept maps, semantic
webs or maps, concept diagrams, or advance diagrams. Hyerle (1996:23) divided visual tools
into three categories addressing three main purposes: brainstorming webs, task-specific
organizers, and thinking process maps. Brainstorming webs include mind mapping, webbing,
and clustering. Task-specific organizers include life cycles (used in Science), text structures
(used in reading), and decision trees (used in Mathematics). Thinking process maps include
concept maps, diagrams for systems thinking, and thinking maps. Graphic organizers can
help reduce the cognitive load and enable the working memory to process and retain new
learning materials.
Moreover, graphic organizers have the advantage that they can be used by learners with
different levels of proficiency. They may be especially useful for novice or less skilled
learners. That's why various types of graphic organizers were used in this study (Appendix
Two). Generally, three steps were followed for using graphic organizers. First, the teacher
activated the participants' background knowledge about the target topic (For example, David
Copperfield, Unit 11, Lesson 3) and informed them of the lesson objectives. Second, the
participants brainstormed for a few minutes, writing down the ideas related to the topic (They
were allowed to refer to the passage about David Copperfield, p.25, SB). Third, based on the
brainstorming outcomes, they used the following graphic organizer to organize the generated
ideas before they start writing their first draft:
Title
Problem
Characters
Event (1)
Event (1)
Event (1)
Solution
136
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
In one of the writing classes (Unit 9, Lesson 3), the participants followed the three steps to
organize their ideas about an invention of their own:
Name of the Invention
What does it look like? Why does it do?
How can it help people? How do you use it?
4.a.8. Planning
Planning
Planning means constructing a representation of knowledge that can be used in writing. It
includes the act of generating and setting goals for writing. This involves prewriting or
rehearsing activities, like discussing topic, making notes about the topic, generating ideas,
organizing ideas and translating ideas into sentences. The mnemonic PLAN can be adopted to
help learners use self-instruction to plan and produce their compositions. This strategy
provides a series of steps learners can follow easily. It can be used in conjunction with
graphic organizers and/or webbing. The PLAN strategy focuses on four key steps associated
with planning and producing writing:
1. Preview the audience, goals, and words to use.

One of the important things learners should do is to consider the audience who will read their
compositions and why they will be reading them. Since the only authentic reason for
developing a written document is to communicate, learners also consider the specific
communication goals they hope to accomplish. Example writing goals may include:(To
inform … ,To persuade or convince … , To entertain … ,To express an idea, emotion, or
attitude … , To get permission … , To evoke some kind of action … , To invite … etc.).
Another effective strategy is to preview the words to be used while writing. Here, learners
brainstorm a list of as many key words about the writing topic as they can.
137
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
2. List main ideas and details on a think-sheet.

Learners are usually encouraged to generate of ideas, organize the generated ideas, actually
express the ideas in writing and edit their compositions, all at the same time. While secondary
or university students can perform these four processes simultaneously, intermediate students
usually cannot. Thus, intermediate students produce compositions which are improperly
organized and full of lexical, mechanical, and syntactical errors. To enable them to perform
their writing tasks effectively, these processes are divided into distinct stages of writing. In
short, most writing goals can be achieved more successfully if students, before actually
starting writing spend some time for identifying the key ideas they plan to express in their
writing and then organizing these ideas using graphic organizers, webbing which can serve as
effective tools for facilitating this planning process.
3. Assign numbers to indicate order.

Once learners have completed the process of listing main ideas and details on a think-sheet,
the next step is to identify the order in which each of the main ideas will be tackled while
writing. The first main idea learners initially listed on the think-sheet may not ultimately be
the most logical main idea to begin highlighting when writing their first draft. Thus, learners
now consider the order in which the listed ideas will be expressed. When the order of main
ideas has been identified, learners then repeat this process for each group of supporting
details for each main idea. Once learners have specified the order for expressing all of the
ideas on the think-sheet, the process of actually composing the written draft can begin.
4. Note ideas in sentences by following your plan

The last step of the basic writing strategy (PLAN) is to produce the written draft. Learners
should introduce the topic sentence at the beginning of the composition. The subsequent
details focus on the main idea noted on the think-sheet. Learners follow the order indicated
on the think-sheet when discussing each main idea. Thus, the first main idea dealt with in the
document is the one learners indicated on the think-sheet with a ‘1' in the upper right-hand
corner of the main idea box. As the main idea is discussed, learners follow the order for
expressing each detail as indicated on the think-sheet. Once learners have completed the
discussion of the first main idea and its supporting points, they begin a new paragraph to
discuss the next main idea on their think-sheet.
Goal Setting
In EFL writing, goal setting means attaining a specific standard of proficiency on a writing
task. In learner-centered EFL writing classes, it is an important part of the writing instruction
since learners are active participants in the decision-making process. It help learners take
control of their own writing performance by establishing aims they themselves see as relevant
to making progress in the writing process. In addition, it has a positive effect on learners'
motivation (Nunan, 1999:233). When learners perceive progress towards their goal while
writing, they become more motivated. While writing, learners set a group of goals on various
levels, which are continuously refined and developed in the light of new insights. Generally,
there are two kinds of writing goals: (1) process goals (how to manage the writing process)
and (2) content goals (what to include in the composition).
138
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
While some goals are directly taken from memory (previously existing goals), others are
developed during writing. This goes on through the whole writing process. In this study, to
enhance the participants' autonomy, they were encouraged to set their own writing goals and
practice writing with clear goals in mind. This helped to draw their attention to the writing
features they would like to improve and spurred them to make a conscious effort to produce
those features. Haynes (2011: 84) specifies some conditions that help learners attain their
goals. These include having strategies available to achieve them, having adequate ability, an
adequate level of difficulty of reaching these goals, a meaningful purpose for doing them,
useful feedback and finally some kind of reward for attainment of the goals.
Each of the above-mentioned strategies (cognitive such as brainstorming, clustering,
elaborating and listing, meta-cognitive like planning and goal setting and compensational
strategies such as resourcing) are not used separately; two or more strategies may be adopted
simultaneously together with other types of strategies (affective , social …etc.).This depends
on the learners' preferences. So, the participants in this study were taught how to choose and
practise all the strategies at the beginning of the experiment (the first seven weeks) but later
they were asked to use those that clearly serve them best.
Drafting
Moving from planning to actual writing is not an easy task for EFL learners. Nevertheless,
learners need to transform their plans into primary text at some point. So, at this stage,
learners should be encouraged to focus on getting ideas on paper without worrying about
grammatical and mechanical errors. In this respect, as indicated by Fulwiler (1996:4), EFL
teachers and learners should not expect error-free early drafts. Therefore, they should focus
on more global aspects of writing (topic, organization, and evidence) while ignoring minor
errors (spelling, punctuation, and wordiness) because minor errors can be dealt with in
following drafts. Supporting Fulwiler' view, Hedge (2005:23) emphasizes the importance of
focusing on content at the drafting stage: "Good writers tend to concentrate on getting the
content right first and leave details like correcting spelling, punctuation and grammar until
later".
Accordingly, many EFL/ESL teachers and researchers attempted to help learners move from
idea generating to drafting. For example, White (1996: 55) suggests the following activities
to help learners' transition from idea generating to drafting: (1) Associate the theme with
something else,(2) Define it,(3) Apply the idea,(4) Describe it,(5) Compare it with something
else,(6) Argue for or against the subject and (7) Narrate the development or history of it.
Thus, to lead learners to writing the first draft the following activities should come first:
generating ideas, organizing ideas, developing a theme, evolving a plan, taking audience into
account, and getting started (Tribble,1996: 113; Nasir et al.:2013:27). This means that
drafting is not done in one step in process writing. Instead, learners may need to write several
drafts until they get the final draft. This "drafting" section is mostly concerned with the first
draft, which requires learners to transform the planning to actual writing. Expressing ideas
about a topic on paper is important in the first draft stage whereas refining content,
organization, and polishing what learners have written are more important concerns in
subsequent drafts. The subsequent drafts are directly imfluenced by teachers and peers'
feedback as well as self-correction. Therefore, revising and editing are deeply connected with
subsequent drafts, and will be highlighted in the following section.
139
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Revising
Highlighting the importance of the revision stage, Tompkins (1990:83) states that "Revision
is not just polishing writing; it is meeting the needs of readers through adding, substituting,
deleting, and rearranging material." So, teachers should inform learners that revision does not
mean correcting minor grammar errors but focusing on content and organization of the whole
writing. Accordingly, learners attempt to improve their drafts by looking at them from a
different point of view. Brown (2001:355) urges teachers to equip learners with specific
directions for revision "through self-correction, peer-correction, and instructor initiated
comments". He further provides some guidelines for giving feedback on learners' first drafts.
Teachers should not focus on minor grammatical errors but major content related errors
within learners' drafts and should comment on the general thesis and structural organization.
Moreover, teachers can point out wrong word choices and expressions and provide
suggestions for better word choices and expressions. Thus, to provide constructive feedback
on learners' first drafts, teachers should respond to the first drafts focusing on the overall
meaning of the writing rather than spelling, punctuation, mechanical or grammatical errors.
Most significantly, teachers should try not to rewrite learners' wrong sentences. Instead, they
should ask learners what a particular sentence means or give suggestions for helping them
express what they mean in a correct way. Tribble (1996:116) provides a few questions to
improve learners' writing at the revision stage as follows:
- Is it correctly organized on the page?
- Is the information presented in a clear, logical order?
- Have you put in all the information your reader needs?
- Have you put in unnecessary information?
Moreover, learners can reread their first drafts, get feedback from peers and adapt them
accordingly. Some revision questions, such as "what parts does not make sense? , What parts
should be modified or deleted? , or what details can be added?" can help learners to
understand what they should focus on as they give feedback on peers' writing as well as
theirs. Such revision questions enable learners to focus on the content of writing and improve
coherence as well as the organization of the writing piece (Dikli et al., 2015:61).
Editing
Editing is defined by Tompkins (1990:88) as "putting the piece of writing into its final form".
At the editing stage, learners proofread their writing pieces or peer's writing carefully to
correct mechanics and grammatical errors. At the previous stage (revising), they did not
focus on grammar errors nor mechanics errors but content. However, at this stage, learners
are encouraged to polish their writing by correcting errors of grammar, punctuation and
spelling. According to Tribble (1996:116), editing checklists can help learners focus on
specific points in the editing stage, and these checklists might vary depending on learners'
ability levels and needs. In terms of the levels, different grammatical aspects can be focused
on each time. Thus, learners should get distance from their compositions and read them
checking grammatical and mechanical errors. In addition to grammar books and dictionaries,
learners can benefit from the teacher and peers as resources of feedback at this stage. As to
the issue of providing feedback in this stage, Brown (2001: 356) advises teachers to highlight
140
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
grammatical mechanical errors but not to correct them themselves and suggest further word
choices and transitional words to improve clarity and coherence of writing. Providing a mini-
grammar lesson at the editing stage can be a realistic option to satisfy the need for focusing
on accuracy of writing. This option depends on whether grammar errors are numerous and
common or few and individual.
5-The Proposed Strategy-Based Writing Model

For the purpose of this study, the strategy-based writing model included three main stages of
writing which were based on the integrated approach. These are prewriting, writing and post-
writing (revising, editing). Also, to help the participants follow the suggested procedure of
the strategy-based writing model, a three-step writing sheet was designed (Appendix Five).
5.a. The Prewriting Stage

It is generally defined by idea generation, shaping, refining and organization. During
this start-up stage, the teacher creates a writing task which learners may meet in real life. The
aim is to draw their attention, activate their prior knowledge about the target topic and
prepare them for the forthcoming writing task.
Aims
This stage aims at enabling learners to:
1- activate their prior knowledge about the writing topic.
2- generate and organize ideas.
3- consider their assignment, audience, purpose, and tone.
4- be engaged in the writing task.
5- set goals and plan for their writing.
6- use visual and sensory images such as graphic organizers and webs to organize
the main ideas and the supporting or related ideas.
7- collect information from reading various resources, taking notes ..etc.
8- enhance their motivation to write the topic.
9- alleviate their pre-writing anxiety/apprehension.
The writer's knowledge base or existing knowledge of the writing topic plays an important
role in the writing process. However, learners do not activate their prior knowledge
spontaneously while writing, even if they do possess prior knowledge about the topic. So, it
is important to brisk their prior knowledge about the writing topic so as to enhance their
ability to generate and organize appropriate ideas about it before they actually start writing.
The activation of prior knowledge is a strategy done as a part of warming-up activities. So,
the teacher can create visual/aural contexts to stimulate learners ' prior knowledge about the
writing topic. Once learners are engaged, they start generating ideas about the target writing
topic. Then, ideas are organized and the active process of writing becomes ready to begin.
This ensures better learner engagement from the beginning of the writing class. Through
141
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
discussions about the topic, the teacher can identify the existing writing abilities of the
learners. This helps him or her to provide the proper scaffolding which learners need to start
the writing task. Thus, discussions about the target writing topic enhance learners'
awareness of the knowledge they already have about the topic.
Procedures
1- Teacher activates learners' prior knowledge through warming-up activities using
visual/aural contexts.
2- Learners respond to the teacher's questions and are engaged in discussions about the
writing topic.
3- Teacher declares the objectives by eliciting learners' predictions about the writing
topic.
4- Teacher discusses the importance of the topic with the learners.
5- Teacher presents the paragraph format/ features.
6- Teacher models important strategies.
7- Teacher tells learners that the anxiety some of them may feel before they start
writing English compositions is temporary.
8- Teacher tells learners that persistence is important for successful EFL writing.
Activities
- Background knowledge discussions.
- Picture talk.
- Taking notes
- Brainstorming
- Listing
- Clustering
- Free-writing
- Elaboration
- Resourcing
- Grouping
- Planning
- Model text analysis.
- Using graphic organizers and webs.
142
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
- Think-aloud activities.
5.b. The Writing Stage

The aim of this stage is to enhance the learners' ability use the ideas they generated at the
prewriting stage to write their first drafts by adopting appropriate writing strategies
(cognitive, meta-cognitive, social, compensational, affective and multiple strategies).
Aims
This stage aims at enabling learners to:
1. use the generated ideas at the pre-writing stage to compose their first drafts.
2. use effective cognitive, meta-cognitive ,social , compensational, affective and multiple
strategies as they write.
3. elaborate on the main ideas ; explain them more fully.
4. self-monitor and self-regulate their writing performance.
5. use available resources like dictionaries, illustrations, reading books … etc.
6. persist as they write the writing difficulties.
At this stage, learners practise writing with a clear aim in mind. They use the ideas they
generated and organized using graphic organizers or webs to write their first drafts. While
writing, learners need to select suitable vocabulary, expressions and structures. Teacher and
peer scaffolding is important at this stage as it enables them to overcome the difficulties they
encounter as they write and perform their writing task successfully. The teacher can guide
learners as they try to use the writing strategies they deem suitable for their writing purposes.
In addition, learners may discuss and share their drafts with their peers or even ask for
clarifications.
Thus, the role of the teacher is to facilitate learners' writing about the target topic through
modeling, scaffolding, discussions and teacher-student conferences. He or she should give
models demonstrating how to adopt effective writing strategies while writing. Then, he or she
should scaffold students as they try to use these strategies to construct their drafts.
Furthermore, the teacher encourages constructive discussions which are based on mutual
respect and negotiation of multiple points of views about the topic.
Procedures
1- Teacher asks learners to use the ideas they generated and organized using graphic
organizers or webs to write their first draft.
2-Teacher advices learners not to give up writing despite the writing difficulties or lack of
motivation.
3-Teacher tells learners that their errors are accepted as a part of the learning process and
that they are means for improving their writing performance.
143
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
4-Teacher tells learners that they should focus on more global aspects of writing (topic,
organization, and evidence) and ignore minor errors (spelling, punctuation, and
wordiness) at this stage.
5-Students write their first draft.
6-Teacher monitors and provides scaffolding.
Activities
- Collaborative writing activities
- Resourcing activities.
- Sentence combining.
- Considering rhetorical features.
- Using cohesive devices.
- Resourcing.
- Teacher-student conference.
- Self-monitoring and self-regulation activities.
- Sharing writing with a partner.
- Enrichment activities.
-Reflection
5.c. The Post-Writing Stage

At this stage, learners should decide how to improve their writing by looking at their drafts
from a different point of view. In addition, the teacher provides ample opportunities for
learners to give and get constructive feedback on their writing pieces. He/ She also
encourages self and peer correction to enhance student-student interaction and collaboration.
Learners are encouraged to self-correct their writing pieces using the self-evaluation checklist
(Appendix Three) and teacher/peers feedback. They are also allowed to provide multiple
perspectives as they give feedback. In addition, they are spurred to add, substitute, rearrange
or delete inappropriate parts of their compositions, based on the given feedback.
Moreover, learners reflect on their use of the suggested strategies by the end of this stage
using the strategy-use reflection checklist (Appendix Four). Thus, teacher and peers
feedback, as scaffolding activities, are important at this stage. Reflection activities also
ensure better improvement in the performance of both learners and teacher.
Aims
This stage aims to enable learners to:
1. improve their drafts through revision and teacher/peers feedback.
144
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
2. self-evaluate their drafts using the self-evaluation checklist.

3. give and get feedback from teacher and peers about their drafts.
4. apply feedback information by adding, substituting, rearranging or deleting inadequate
parts of their drafts.
5. reflect on their writing performance.
6. evaluate the writing activity.
Procedures
1. Teacher asks learners to revise their drafts individually and/or in pairs/groups.
2. Learners read their drafts individually, to their peers or even to the whole class.
3.Teacher guides peers feedback about the given drafts.
4. Learners play the role of the teacher in commenting and providing feedback.
5. Teacher provides feedback to learners.
6. Learners add, substitute, rearrange or delete improper sentences or parts of their
compositions, based on the given feedback.
7. Teacher allocates some time for free questions.
8. Students reflect on their writing performance using the strategy use checklist.
9. Teacher assigns homework.
10. Teacher ends the class with lesson closure.
Activities
- Revision exercises.
- Self and peer evaluation
- Self and peer correction.
- Discussion activities.
- Feedback sessions.
- Edition activities.
- Think-pair-share activities
- Follow-up activities.
- Summarizing activities.
- Teacher correction activities.
145
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
- Drawing conclusions.
- Reflection activities.
The framework of the strategy-based writing model is illustrated in figure (4).
6. The Role of Grammar in the Writing Process

According to Frodesen (2001:233) and Nasir et al. (2013:29) grammar plays a vital role in the
writing process as it helps EFL writers develop the rich linguistic resources needed to express
their ideas accurately and correct their writing errors. When writing instruction is meaning-
focused only, learners fail to develop many linguistic features necessary for producing
effective writing. So, focus-on form should be an integral part of writing instruction.
However, this does not mean that all kinds of grammar instruction should be used in teaching
writing. Nor does it mean that learners will automatically manage to transform the input
received through explicit grammar instruction into productive output.
146
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
To ensure better transfer from input to output, EFL teachers can consider some variables
related to the learners (their age, level, interest and educational background), situational and
linguistic aspects relevant to their learners in addition to the EFL context. Awareness of these
variables can help teachers pinpoint how and when to incorporate grammar into writing
instruction. Generally, considering the importance of grammar instruction in the EFL
classrooms, teachers can add a mini-grammar lesson at the editing stage or after the final
draft. In addition,-as indicated by Bae (2011:34) "teachers should stress the importance of
students' self-correction of their errors after receiving feedback on their first draft. Having
students keep portfolios or publishing students' final products can be a helpful way for
students to feel more motivated to correct their grammatical and mechanical errors of the
final product."
In this study, grammar was an integral part of the strategy-based writing model. Three
techniques were used for incorporating grammar into writing instruction: (1) inductive
grammar lessons, (2) model text analysis and (3) the test-teach-test. On the one hand, the
participants were inductively taught some grammatical items which were thought to influence
their writing such as sentence structure (Appendix Six). Model text analysis was also adopted
to show the participants how various grammatical features are used in authentic texts
(Appendix Seven). Analysis of model texts was beneficial to the participants as it was based
on implicit knowledge of grammar rather explicit rule-based knowledge. It made them more
familiar with the ways in which various genres of written English differ structurally from oral
English forms/structures. Moreover, it helped the participants who are already familiar with
prescriptive grammar rules but who still have problems understanding and using grammatical
oppositions such as the present continuous and the past continuous verb forms and definite
and indefinite articles. In addition, the test-teach-test was used as a diagnostic-remedial
technique. According to this technique, the teacher set communicative tasks for the
participants which aimed to find out how well they could use a particular grammatical item.
Then, the he monitored and evaluated the participants' writing to see whether they had used
the target grammatical item correctly. He was also keen to note if the participants attempted
to avoid the target structure. If the participants had no problem with the structure, the teacher
could then go on to another writing task. If they faced problems or avoided it altogether then
the teacher could revise the target structure. Thus, the first step was the "test" where the
teacher found out what the participants could and could not already do with a specific
structure; "teach" was the second step where the he revised or taught the target structure,
based on the participants' weaknesses and the last step was "test" where the teacher assigned
practice activities to see if the participants could use the target structure better.
7. Writing Assessment
Within the past few decades, writing assessment was a constant concern to the extent that
new publications on written composition had some references to the issues related to writing
assessment. Due to the ascending importance of writing in the current modern society which
values written communication as an index of educational growth, pronouncing judgment on a
piece of writing text has found a significant place (Ghanbari et al, 2012:84).However,
assessing the writing performance of EFL learners is increasingly difficult as writing is a
complex, recursive process which should be seen as a process (a means of learning) as well
as a certain end product (a means of communication). So, the current emphasis in writing
instruction focuses on the process of creating writing as well as the end product. Accordingly,
"attention has shifted from the finished product to the whole process with its various stages of
147
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
planning, drafting, revising, and editing."(AL-Serhani, 2007:2). Thus, based on the premise
that writing assessment should be adapted in such a way that it faithfully reflects writing
instruction, the teacher's role in the writing assessment process has changed from the error-
hunter to that of learning facilitator and scaffolding provider.
7. a. Formative versus Summative Writing Assessment

Formative assessment is often referred to as assessment for writing learning, and is primarily
used to improve writing by giving learners information on their progress in writing while still
learning. Formative assessment can be given either by one-way communication from the
teacher to the learner, or peers. Summative writing assessment, on the other hand, has
traditionally been used to sum up end results of writing achievement. The major difference
between the two types, according to Gipps (1994: 125), is their purpose and effect. Formative
assessment aims to promote and improve learners' writing performance and enhance their
empowerment and self-regulation. Formative writing assessment includes all the activities
providing feedback which encourages learners to revise, adapt or delete parts of their
compositions. Self-assessment practices are also considered an essential component of
formative assessment.
In this study, both types of assessment (formative and summative writing assessment) were
used. While the pre-and-post writing test was administered as a summative assessment
technique, self-assessment, peer and teacher feedback were used as formative assessment
techniques.
7. b. Self-Assessment
Self-assessment is seen as a strategy which helps learners develop insights into strengths and
weaknesses in their compositions. It also enables them to understand how it is possible to
learn more effectively through assuming responsibility for their own learning; it is an
empowering tool allowing learners to be involved in what can be seen as the centre of power,
that is writing assessment. Thus, self-assessment is a precondition for enhancing the learners'
autonomy. Learners need to be able to appraise their writing performance accurately for
themselves so that they can understand what parts of their compositions need to be adapted,
revised, deleted and/ or replaced.
In this study, the participants were encouraged to self-assess their compositions, using the
self-evaluation checklist (Appendix Three). In addition, during the administration of the pre-
and-post writing test, a rating rubric was used to control and evaluate the quality of their
7.c. Rating Rubrics

The quality of writing assessment is to a great extent dependent upon the criteria used when
assessing a piece of writing. In writing assessment, rubrics are used for attaining a
standardized, accurate, and applicable evaluative feedback to the learners.
7.c.1. Definition of a Rubric

A rubric is defined by Zimmaro (2004:1) as a "systematic scoring guideline to evaluate
students' performance (papers, speeches, problem solutions, portfolios, cases) through the use
of a detailed description of performance standards".
148
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
7.c.2. Importance of Rubrics

Rubrics are often necessary when teachers want to measure learners' writing performance in a
more objective and meaningful way. They are used in assessing writing performance
implicitly or explicitly considering the theoretical basis upon which the writing test was
designed; that is, they incarnate the test designer's notion of the skills or abilities to be
measured by the test. Specifically, the reasons why writing rubrics are important can include
the following:
-Rubrics help teachers to attain consistent scores across all learners on writing exams/tests.
-Rubrics help overcome the problem of differences fluxes in the raters' scores in relation to
the same writing piece.
-Rubrics inform learners of the expected writing performance and improve their performance
accordingly.
-Rubrics promote the learners ability to self-assess their writing performance.
-Rubrics enhance learners' motivation to reach the given standards.
-Rubrics can provide both a grade (summative) and detailed feedback to improve future
writing performance (formative).
In spite of the abovementioned benefits of rubrics, as concluded by Kohn (2006:14), rubrics
are not innocent tools used to improve the quality of writing. For this reason the development
of rubrics and the descriptors for each scale level are of critical importance for the validity of
writing assessment. This led Weigle (2002:85) to state that the issue of construct validity in
writing must be tackled in at least three ways: First, the task must elicit the type of writing
that to be tested. Second, the scoring criteria must take into account those components of
writing that are included in the definition of the construct and third, raters must actually
adhere to those criteria when scoring writing samples. When it comes to the second point, the
issue of scoring presents itself in a challenging way. Therefore, the main problem with
writing assessment is that objective scoring as implemented in multiple-choice tests is
impossible.
7.c. 3. Types of Rubrics

Rubrics can be holistic or analytic, general or task specific.
7.c.4. Holistic versus Analytic Rubrics

Holistic rubrics provide a single score based on an overall impression of the learners' writing
performance. They have the advantages of quick scoring and providing a general overview of
writing performance. However, they do not provide detailed information, which makes it
difficult for teachers to provide one accurate or consistent score. Analytic rubrics, on the
other hand, provide specific feedback along several writing dimensions. They have the
advantage of providing more detailed feedback to both teachers and learners and more
consistent scoring across learners and teachers. However, they are time consuming.
149
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
7.c.5 General versus Task Specific Rubrics

General rubrics include criteria that are general across writing tasks. The advantage of such
rubrics is that the same rubric can be used across different writing tasks. But, the feedback
they provide may not be specific enough. Task specific rubrics ,on the other hand, include
criteria which can be applied to a specific task. The advantage of those rubrics is that they
provide more reliable assessment of learners' writing performance. Nevertheless, it is difficult
to construct task specific rubrics for all writing tasks.
7. c.6. Developing Rating Rubrics

Undoubtedly, rating rubrics and the way they are conceptualized, designed and developed
affect the outcome of writing assessment. The following are the steps to be followed to
develop rating rubrics (Weigle, 2002: 122-125; Zimmaro, 2004:3 ;Ghanbari et al, 2012:88).
1. Defining the Writing Product

The writing product learners are expected to produce should be clearly identified.
2. Identifying the Type of Rating Scale to be Used.

At this stage, the type of rating scale is to be pinpointed. The common types of analytic,
holistic, general or task specific rubrics are options among which teachers can select
according to the goals of writing assessment and the skills to be measured.
3. Pinpointing the Purpose of the Rubric

The appropriateness of the rubric format and the formulation of the definitions or descriptors
are affected by the context and purposes of the writing test.
4. Identifying the Person Who Will Use the Rating Scale

Since the rubric format and the descriptors formulation are affected the persons who are
going to use them, the persons who will use rubric should be decided. These may include
teachers, learners, stakeholders or parents.
5. Deciding the Most Important Writing Skills.

To specify the rating criteria to use as a basis for assessment, the most important writing
skills should be decided. Thus, the rating criteria used reflect the rubric developer's concerns.
6. Identifying the Format of Descriptors and the Scoring Levels.
The expected range of writing skills and also what the test results will be used for determine
the format of the descriptors. The rubric designer should decide how band levels should be
distinguished from each other as well as the types of descriptors to be used.
7-Deciding the Way to Report the Rubric Scores

The purpose and use of the rubric scores determine the manner in which the scores will be
reported. Also, they affect the decisions about whether different categories on the rubric scale
should be weighted.
150
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
The above six steps were considered on developing the rating rubric used in this study. The
main reason for developing and using a rubric was that the EFL teacher was in need of a
more analytic and standardized form for evaluating the participants' compositions (Appendix
Eight). The rating rubric helped to reduce the problems that he might have faced in assessing
participants' writing. Another reason was that it was used as a diagnostic tool which enabled
the teacher to get access to a more detailed and objective profile of the participants' strengths
and weakness in writing especially at the beginning of the experiment. In addition, with the
help of this rubric, the teacher could have a more accurate view of how the participants'
writing developed. The rubric was used together with the pre-and-post writing test for
assessing the participants' writing skills.
8. Error Correction and Feedback

8.a. Error Correction
Error correction has been influenced by the writing approaches adopted for writing
instruction in the EFL/ESL classrooms. Until the 1970s, EFL classes were dominated by the
product writing approach. So, error correction and grammar instruction were major concerns
in EFL/ESL writing classes. This dispensable attention to errors deprived learners from
generating ideas and consequently, made writing instruction a grammar and/or vocabulary
lesson. With the advent the process writing approach, the emphasis moved to the writing
processes rather than the writing product which focused on language accuracy. However,
soon after the process approach was adopted in the EFL/ESL writing classes, it was deemed
as not appropriate for improving accuracy of students' writing although it emphasized
accuracy in the final products.
In EFL contexts, learners struggle to express their intended message in writing because of
difficulties in language control as well as problems in generating and organizing ideas. While
writing, they may produce many drafts or even a final draft committing various errors which
may significantly interfere in the comprehensibility of the written text. However, regardless
of the writing approach adopted by EFL teachers and the drafts written by their students, the
produced compositions are likely to exhibit difficulties in language use. So, teachers always
attempt to help students overcome such difficulties in future writing tasks. Accordingly,
teachers should be careful so as not be swayed by the existence of language problems into
turning writing classes into grammar classes. Rather, writing errors should be treated at a
proper stage of the writing process and this stage is best considered in the final part of the
editing phase which aims to get rid of language errors and stylistic inefficiencies.
In addition to deciding which errors to correct and when to correct, the teacher should decide
who will correct and how to correct errors. For example ,to draw learners' attention to their
errors, the teacher "can choose (1) to point out specific errors by using a mark on the margin,
an arrow or other symbol;(2) to correct (or model) specific errors by writing in the correct
form; (3) to label specific errors according to the feature they violate ,e.g. subject-verb
agreement, using either the complete term or a symbol system; (4) to indicate the presence of
errors but not the precise location, e.g., noting that there are problems with word form or (5)
to ignore specific errors"(Kroll,2001:230).
151
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
8.b. Feedback
Although providing feedback on students' writing is a complex and time-consuming process,
it is an essential part of writing instruction. Therefore, teachers should consider when and
how to provide feedback on learners' writing, taking into account the specific goals of writing
as well as the general goals of the prescribed course. In addition, teachers should decide when
to give feedback, which form of feedback should be given, who should offer the feedback
and how to help learners utilize the feedback to improve their performance. Moreover,
various types of feedback should be tried to decide which ones are appropriate for learners'
level, age and feelings. Although written forms of feedback are seen as the major way of
responding to students' writing, teachers should use oral feedback as an important additional
way of responding to students' writing.
Kroll (2001:371) suggests individual conferences and the use of tape cassettes as two main
types of oral feedback. In individual conferences, teachers can ask learners about their
intended meaning directly. The role of teachers in such conferences is to listen and guide.
While teachers listen to learners' talk about the problems they are facing while writing,
teachers can understand better how to tackle these problems. To make conferencing most
effective, teachers should prepare questions to encourage learners to talk about their writing
at the conference. Tompkins (1990: 372) provides sample questions which can be used for
helping learners at each stage of the writing process. Before learners begin to write, teachers
can ask about the writing topic and organization. They can also ask learners about their target
audiences. When conferencing takes place at the writing stage, teachers can ask about how
the writing is going and if learners have any problems. At the post-writing stage ( revising or
editing stage), teachers can ask about the feedback learners have gotten from their peers or
want to get from the peers, and how learners are going to use the feedback to revise or edit
their writing. Furthermore, teachers and learners can talk about the whole writing process.
For example, they may discuss how they performed the writing process or whether they had
any problems at a certain stage.
The question is which type of feedback is more effective for improving EFL learners' writing
skills. Morra and Asis (2009: 77-8) investigated the effects of two types of teachers'
feedback, taped and written feedback and absence of feedback. Results showed that
regardless of the means of providing feedback, the number of content and grammatical errors
decrease. In terms of preference for the types of the teacher's comments, almost all the
participants chose taped feedback as the most effective. They said that taped feedback made
them feel like they were actually talking with their teacher, which helped them understand the
teacher's comments better.
In short, regardless of the types of feedback, providing constructive feedback contributes to
developing the qualities of students' writing. This emphasizes the importance of self-
correction and reinforces the research that verifies the improvement of writing after rereading
and rewriting learners' own writing. How to correct students' errors is also complex. Ferris
(2002: 63-5) suggests five options for providing feedback on learners' writing. Option one is
choosing between direct and indirect feedback. Direct feedback is for teachers to correct
errors by providing forms while indirect feedback is for teachers to indicate errors by
circling, underlining, or marking. She claims that using indirect feedback is more effective
mostly since it requires learners to correct their errors by referring to teachers' comments.
152
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
However, direct feedback should be considered in certain circumstances, depending on the

learners' proficiency level, error types, or the lesson objectives. For example, when learners
are at the beginning level and do not have the ability to interpret teachers' indirect feedback
or they are unable to self-correct. Also, when errors are too difficult to treat (a sentence that
has so many errors that the teacher cannot understand what it means) or when the teacher
wants to draw learners' attention to certain grammatical points, he/she should consider
cautiously giving direct feedback. Next, the teacher should decide whether he/she simply
marks the locations of errors or identifies the types of errors. In fact, locating errors requires
more responsibility for learners to figure out the types of errors and correct forms. On the
other hand, there are no significant benefits for identifying students' error types over simply
locating the errors. The identification of errors is important when these errors are related to
the writing class objectives and have been previously mentioned in other classes. Then, if the
teacher chooses to identify the types of errors, he/she should consider how to categorize the
error types.
The teacher can use either many small categories or some large categories. For example,
he/she can mark "verb error" or divide the verb errors into the specific types such as "verb
form", "verb tense", or "subject-verb agreement." In addition, the teacher has to choose
among the use of error codes, symbols or verbal comments. Using error codes or symbols
saves time; instead of writing "verb tense" to indicate students' error type, the teacher can
simply write the error code "vt" Ferris (2002 :66-7) presents how the same errors can be
marked in different ways. Table (8) shows Ferris' different marking strategies.
Table (8): Ferris' Different Marking Strategies
Original text portion: I never needed to worry about my parents because they knew
everything and could go anywhere they want.
Correction Options wanted
1-Direct correction: …... could go anywhere they want.
2-Error location: ……. could go anywhere they want.
vt
3- Error code : ……… could go anywhere they want.
4- Error symbol : …… could go anywhere they want
tense
5-Verbal cue: …. could go anywhere they want.
6-Sample and comment: As you revise, be sure to check
your verbs to see if they need to be in past or present tense. I have underlined some
examples of verb tense errors throughout your paper so that you can see what I
mean.
153
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
The meaning of the codes and symbols should be given in advance. Without knowing what
"vt", "A" or "tense" mean, learners will not know how to interpret those written figures. It is
important for the teacher to use the error codes or symbols consistently to save time and
effort. Moreover, he/she should decide where to place the marks. Most times, marking
specific errors directly might be the best way. However, for advanced learners, the
combination of locating errors and giving verbal summary might be the most appropriate
way. A problem which faces the teacher is related to how to treat learners' writing containing
so many errors that he/she cannot understand the intended message. One way to respond to
such writing is by underlining the sentence and putting a question mark or asking learners to
rewrite the sentence again. If the teacher can understand what learners mean, he/she can offer
some suggestions to help them rewrite the sentence. Another technique is to hold one-to-one
writing conferences and having learners verbally explain their intended message.
Peer review also plays a vital part in writing instruction. Min (2006:118) examined the effect
of trained peer review on EFL college students' revision types and quality. Results showed
that extensive peer review training significantly contributed to an increase in the number of
comments on peers' writing and in the quality of texts. Through consistent peer review
training, learners could view their text from their readers' perspectives. In addition,
inexperienced writers encountered mismatches between what they actually mean and what
their readers understand. Furthermore, learners had written multiple drafts before they
submitted the final drafts, and peers' feedback was crucial to every stage of the writing
process.
However, one of the problems in EFL writing classrooms is that learners do not know how to
review peers' writing and how to implement peers' feedback to improve their writing.
Therefore, learners should be explicitly taught to revise and edit their compositions as well as
their peers. For reviewing a draft in the EFL writing classrooms, as indicated by Tong (2007:
53), learners can focus on three aspects of writing: word choice, sentence coherence, and
paragraph organization. In case of penury of grammatical errors in learners' writing, some
writings still contain inappropriate words. This may be attributed to paucity of learners'
vocabulary which leads them to over-use some common words. Thus, they need to increase
their vocabulary and try to use diverse words. To achieve that goal, highlight pens and a
thesaurus can be used; with highlight pens, learners mark verbs, nouns, and transitions to
check over-used and/or inappropriate words. The thesaurus can help them find appropriate
substitutes for superfluous and redundant words. Using monolingual dictionaries can also
help learners distinguish minute connotations of confusing synonyms. Also, learners should
be provided with guidelines to improve sentence coherence in their writing. As learners read
their or peers' writing aloud, they can check sentence coherence and combine separate
sentences into one compound or complex sentence using linking words such as, transitions,
conjunctions, participles or sequencing expressions.
In this study, the teacher-learner conference was an effective means of scaffolding and
providing feedback. It used to be held at the three stages of writing where the teacher asked
questions which guided the participants' performance (Appendix Nine). Overall evaluations
of participants' writing such as what they liked best in their writing or how they could
improve their writing the following time were discussed. In addition, as suggested by Kroll
(2001: 374), the teacher taught the participants how to give and get feedback because they did
not have native speakers' intuition. So, they were provided with a response sheet including
some specific questions such as: what is the main purpose of this composition? , What have
154
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
you found particularly effective in the composition? and Do you think the writer has achieved
what he set out to do?. In this way, the participants could use the feedback as a main input for
improving their compositions and ameliorating their analytical skills.
In addition, both types of feedback (oral and written) were used. The teacher also adopted a
combination of the three error correction techniques (self, peer and teacher correction).
During the writing stages, the teacher used to move around the class and provide feedback
when necessary so as to help the participants perform their writing tasks successfully. The
participants benefited a lot from the teacher's feedback as they were guided in such a way that
they eventually corrected themselves rather than given the correct version. Peer correction
was also encouraged. For example, when a participant still couldn't get an error right because
he didn't know how to, with a gesture, the teacher held his attention and got another
participant to help out. Generally, peer correction had the advantage of: (1) involving all the
participants in the correction process; (2) making the writing process more collaborative and
interactive; (3) reducing the participants' dependence on the teacher; (4) enhancing their
sense of ownership in the writing process; (5) sensitizing the participants to problems in their
own writing (6) giving the cleverer participants something to do and (7) encouraging the
participants to listen to each other and (8) avoiding the problem of overcorrection.
If neither self-correction nor peer correction was effective, the teacher assumed that either the
participant hadn't understood what he was getting at or didn't know what the correct version
should be. If it is an important item and the other participants didn't know it either, the
teacher used to stop and teach it to the whole class. If not, and the meaning of the item was
clear, the teacher simply corrected the target errors. According to Kroll (2001:227),"without
training, it is possible that students will either ignore feedback or fail to use it constructively."
So, the teacher showed explicitly the participants how to revise and edit. Also, to maximize
the insights of prior feedback on future writing tasks, the participants were trained to use
feedback in ways that enhance their writing.
To avoid the de-motivating effect of overcorrection, the teacher used two techniques for
written feedback and error correction. One technique was for the teacher to tell the
participants that for a particular piece of writing they were only going to correct errors of
spelling or punctuation or grammar….etc. This had two advantages: (1) it enabled the
participants to concentrate on that particular aspect and (2) it cut down the correction effort.
The second technique was that the teacher agreed with the participants on a list of written
symbols (Appendix Ten). When the teacher or peers came across an error, they underlined it
discreetly and write the symbol in the margin. This made correction look less damaging and
encouraged the participants to exert more effort to self-correct their errors.
9. Scaffolding in Writing Instruction

The concept of scaffolding is based on Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
which is defined as the gap between the actual development level of learners, as pinpointed
through an independent learning task, and the level of potential development, as determined
by a learning task under teacher guidance and interaction and collaboration with clever peers.
It also refers to the domain of knowledge or skill where learners are yet unable to perform
their writing tasks independently, but can achieve the desired performance when given
relevant scaffolding from the teacher or peers. Thus, scaffolding should be integrated into
writing instruction since writing is a complex process which requires various cognitive and
meta-cognitive activities at the same time, which are strongly interactive (Rijlaarsdam and
155
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Bergh ,2005 : 8; Seifoori et al. ,2012: 107;Fahim and Mirzaii ,2014:8). So, teachers need to
assess, and then exploit the learners' Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) by providing
them with a temporary support to perform their writing tasks successfully. Recent studies
concluded that by the teachers and peers' scaffolding enabled learners to move from the
zone of current development to the zone of proximal development (Baradaran and Sarfarazi
,2011: 2265; Riazi and Rezaii ,2011:61; Veerappan , 2011:937 ; Woo et al, 2011:43).. When
teachers and peers provide scaffolding properly, learners were encouraged to develop their
own creativity, motivation, and resourcefulness. When learners managed to gather knowledge
and enhance their skills on their own, scaffolding was dismantled.
9.a. Teacher Scaffolding

Teacher scaffolding can be seen as an instructional technique whereby the teacher models the
desired writing strategy and then gradually shifts responsibility to the learners. This type of
interaction with the teacher is consistent with Vygotsky's (1978) belief that learning is a
social process and not an individual one, and it occurs when learners interact with their
teacher and peers in the writing classes.
Accordingly, teacher scaffolding was one of the main components of the strategy-based
model as it enabled the participants to perform beyond the limits of their abilities. It provided
temporary support which empowered the participants to bridge the gap between what they
knew and could do and the intended writing purpose. Teacher scaffolding was provided at the
three stages of the writing process. At the prewriting stage, the teacher used to model how to
generate ideas and organize them using graphic organizers, webbing and thinking maps and
spurred the participants to perform the same tasks. He also modeled how to analyze sample
texts related to the target writing topic. At the writing stage, the teacher used to intervene and
provide scaffolding with vocabulary and syntactical structures in addition to other
information needed by the participants to perform the writing tasks which were too difficult
to perform independently. At the post-writing stage, the teacher modeled how to revise and
edit a writing piece. In addition, he demonstrated how to reflect on writing performance.
Teacher-student conference was also used as a scaffolding technique at the three stages of
writing where the teacher asked questions which guided the participants' performance
(Appendix Nine). Thus, scaffolding enabled the participants to overcome the writing
difficulties, perform their writing tasks and achieve their writing purposes.
9.b. Peer Scaffolding

Peer scaffolding was another main component of the strategy-based writing model as it
enhanced student-student interaction and collaboration. It fostered both "playful talk"
(imagination) and "controlled talk" (process and planning), which improved the participants'
abilities to perform the assigned writing task. In addition, from a collaborative perspective,
peer scaffolding in the ZPD did not operate in a scaffolding hierarchy of expertise; instead,
the participants negotiated or weaved their various social textual strands together dialogically
within their drafts. In addition, peer scaffolding was provided at the three stages of the
writing process. At the prewriting stage, the teacher encouraged the participants to
collaborate as they were generating and organizing ideas using graphic organizers, webbing
and thinking maps. At the writing stage, the participants used to share their writing and ask
their peers' help, when needed. At the post-writing stage, the participants used to give and get
feedback on their final drafts.
156
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Accordingly, peer scaffolding was important as it enabled the participants to overcome the
writing problems which might have hindered them from performing their writing tasks
successfully. By providing the participants with ample opportunities for the process to work,
along with the appropriate scaffolding from the teacher and peers, they were empowered to
create new ideas, new words and new sentences as they plan, write their first draft, revise and
create their final drafts.
10. Reflection
EFL learners need to subject their writing performance to critical thinking with the purpose of
identifying strengths and weaknesses and adapting their writing practices accordingly.
Through reflection learners can rethink ideas and improve their writing through other
additions or deletions. Al-Hazmi, 2006:45) found that reflection has positive effects on Saudi
EFL learners' writing skills. Therefore, the participants in this study adopted "reflection on
action" at the post-writing stage to evaluate their writing performance, using the self-
evaluation checklist” (Appendix Three).
Method and Procedures of the Study

This section deals with the design of the study, participants, instruments and procedures. In
addition, it describes the writing materials which were adapted to suit the strategy-based
writing model.
Design
The design of the study is quasi-experimental design consisting of two groups: a control
group (N=32) and an experimental group (N=33). At the beginning of the second week of the
first term of the academic year 2011-2012, the pre-test (The Writing Test) was administered
to the two groups. Then, the experimental group was taught the course-book "Say It in
English" using the strategy-based writing model, while the control group was taught the same
course-book in the traditional way. The duration of the experiment was twenty eight weeks,
four forty-five minute periods a week. At the end of the experiment, both groups were post-
tested using the same writing test.
Participants
Out of three classes from Al-kuds intermediate school, two male third-year intermediate
classes (Class B and Class C) were randomly assigned into the control group (N=32) or
experimental group (N=33). Class (B), serving as a control group, was taught the course-
book "Say It in English" in the traditional method, while Class (C) , serving as an
experimental group, was taught the same course-book, supplemented with the strategy-based
writing model which included six types of strategies: cognitive, meta-cognitive,
compensational, social, affective and multiple strategies.
Instruments
To collect data, a writing test was designed and administered (Appendix Eight). The test
included five writing categories, each of which comprised three writing skills:
157
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
1. Content
Content is one of the categories for evaluating writing. It includes knowledge of the subject,
statement of the main idea and development of supporting details through personal
experiences, facts or opinion.
2. Organization
Organization includes logical sequence of ideas, effective organization of the introduction,
structure (body) and conclusion of the composition and using effective cohesive devices.
3. Vocabulary
Vocabulary indicates appropriate or correct word choice, spelling and precision.
4. Grammar
Grammar indicates processing grammatically correct sentence constructions, subject-verb
agreement and word order/function, tense, articles, pronouns, and prepositions.
5. Mechanics
Mechanics includes appropriate paragraphing, punctuation and capitalization.
The choice of these skills was based on a review of The Teacher's Book and Student's Book
of third-year intermediate (terms one and two). Each category was given a score from 1 to 6
on the scoring rubric (Appendix Eight).
Test Validity
Two methods were used for determining the test validity, namely, face validity and intrinsic
validity.
a) Face Validity
The test and the rating rubric were submitted to a jury of three college staff members and
three EFL teachers to state how far they measure the target writing skills and make the
necessary modifications (Appendix Eleven). Based on the jury members' remarks, items of
questionable validity were revised or deleted. In addition, other new items were added.
b) Intrinsic Validity
Another criterion was used to determine the test validity. It was calculated through the square
root of the test reliability coefficient (El-Said, 1979:553). The test reliability coefficient was
0.803. The intrinsic validity is 0.896. Thus, the test was valid.
Test Reliability
The inter-rater method was used to determine the test reliability. The researcher and an
English language teacher of ten-year teaching experience administered the test to two third-
year classes (N=55) at Prince Sultan Intermediate School on the first week of the second term
of the academic year 2010/2011. To ensure more rating accuracy, each rater scored the test
sheets independently, using the same rating rubric (Appendix Eight). Pearson Product
158
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Moment Correlation was calculated between the scores of the two raters (Brown, 1996:1).
Table (9) shows the correlation coefficients between the ratings of the two inter-raters.
Table (9): The Correlation Coefficients between the Ratings of the Two Inter-Raters
Dimension Content Organization Vocabulary Grammar Mechanics Total
Correlation 0.752** 0.761** 0.880** 0.861** 0.762** 0.803**

Coefficients
**Significant at 0.01
Procedures
Before the experiment, the writing test and the rating rubric were designed. Then, the test
validity and reliability were identified. After reviewing the course-book “Say It in English”
prescribed for third-year intermediate students for the two terms and the Teacher's Book, the
objectives of teaching writing and the writing topics were formulated. Next, the Teacher's
Manual was designed to provide step-by-step procedures for teaching writing using the
strategy-based writing model. It included how to help learners apply the suggested six types
of strategies at the three stages of writing (Appendix Twelve).The Teacher' Manual was
submitted to the same jury members of the writing test for face validity (Appendix Eleven).
Based on the jury members' remarks, some teaching procedures were adapted. Then,
researcher met the language teacher who taught the study groups five times at Al-kuds
intermediate school on the first week of the first term of the academic year 2011/2012. The
researcher informed him of the purpose of the study, importance of implementing strategy-
based writing model in writing instruction and how to use the Teacher's Manual for teaching
the writing classes.
The experiment began on the second week of the first term of the academic year 2011-
2012.At the beginning, out of three classes, the participants were randomly assigned to the
control group (Class B, N=32) or the experimental group (Class C, N=33). Then, they were
introduced to the purposes of the study. The writing test was administered to both groups as a
pre-test. Afterwards, the control group was taught the course-book "Say It in English" in the
traditional method while the experimental group was taught the same course-book
supplemented with the strategy-based writing model which included six types of strategies:
cognitive, meta-cognitive, compensational, social, affective and multiple strategies.
The experiment was supposed to last for one term, but the researcher and the EFL teacher
found it difficult to train the participants to use the suggested writing strategies in one term.
So, they decided to expand it to include the two terms; it lasted for twenty-eight weeks, four
forty-five minute periods a week. The researcher visited the teacher ten times during the
experiment, six of which were in-class visits (Appendix Fourteen).The aim of these visits
was to make sure that the strategy-based writing model was effectively adopted and that the
teacher did not face any problems. Therefore, the first three visits were in-class. To secure
objective data collection during the six in-class visits, an observation checklist (Appendix
Thirteen) was designed and submitted to the same jury of specialists of the writing test
(Appendix Eleven).The checklist was designed to observe the teacher in strategy-based
writing classes. After each in-class visit, feedback was given to the teacher using the
checklist. At the end of the experiment, both groups were post-tested using the same writing
159
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
test. Finally, based on the statistical analysis of collected data, results were discussed and
recommendations were made
Material
1. a. Goals
The adapted course-book aims at:
- developing the participants' writing skills in terms of five categories (content,
organization, vocabulary, grammar and mechanics),
1. b. Content
The course-book of the two terms includes sixteen units, eight units each term. Each unit is
made up of four lessons. Lesson four is a revision of the unit itself. The topics of the units
are: Learning Tools, Making Plans, Going to places, Revision, Save Our Planets, The Senses,
Friendship, Revision, Inventions, Cultures, Stories, Revision, Healthy Eating, On the Phone,
People Said and Revision. The course-book included twelve writing topics distributed over
twelve units. Table (10) shows the schedule of applying the proposed strategy-based writing
model. It exhibits each week's writing activity as well as the writing topics.
Table (10): The Schedule Applying the Strategy-based Writing Instruction
Writing Topics Writing Activities

Weeks
2-3 Writing a paragraph A. Number the writing activities in the order you use
about improving more
language skills. B. Complete the web. Then, use the information to write
a paragraph about ways to improve your English.
C. Review your paragraph for mistakes and then give it
to your partner to proofread.
D. Rewrite your paragraph in your notebooks,
correcting all mistakes ( SB, p.7).
4-5 Writing a paragraph A. Choose an event you'd like to plan e.g. graduation
about planning an event party ( SB, p.16).sports day- bazaar, etc…
B. complete the graphic organizer with the necessary
information.
C. Use the information to write a note to your friend,
who is absent, telling him about your plan. Make a
suggestion about what he can do.
6-7 Writing a postcard. A. Look at the parts of a postcard ( SB, p.26)..
B. Which postcard is written correctly? Why?
C. Imagine you are a visitor in your hometown. Send a
postcard to your friend in Egypt, telling him about it.
8-9 Writing about an A. Write the parts of the planet in the first part of the
environmental problem. graphic organizer. Then, follow your teacher's directions
( SB, p.45).
160
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
10-11 Writing about a special A. Think of a person who has lost one of his senses.
person. Answer the questions to write a short paragraph about
him/her( SB, p.55).
12-13 Writing a paragraph A. What is your best friend like? (SB, p.65).
about a close friend. B. Look at the web. Answer the questions about your
best friend.
C. Write a paragraph about your best friend, using your
answers.
14-15 Writing a paragraph A.Have you ever had a fight with a friend? (SB,
about a p.71).Using the graphic organizer, write a paragraph
misunderstanding with a about a situation when you had a misunderstanding
friend. with a friend.
16-17 Writing a paragraph A.Are you an inventor? (SB, p.7).Think of a useful
about an invention. object you can invent for home or school. Name the
object, describe it and give instructions for using it.
Complete the web.
18-19 Writing a friendly letter. A.Read the friendly letter on p 17(SB).
B.A friend is planning to visit your country. Write a
letter telling him about the customs related to the
following points: suitable clothes, greeting people, table
manners and wearing abaya/thobe.
20-21 Writing a story. A.Read David Copperfield on page 25. Fillin the
graphic organizer with information from the story.
B. Now, think of a story or a real incident and write
information about it.
22-23 Writing an ending for a A. Read the story on page 39.
story. B. Write an ending for the story where Tyler decides
what to do. Do you think he should return the money?
What will happen to him at 13 Raven Way? Can you
make it exciting, funny or a little scary? Have fun,
finishing the story and be creative!
26-27 Writing about the Some people do not use the phone wisely. Think of
problems of the misuse some of the problems that are often connected with the
of the phone. misuse of the phone. Choose one, and then complete the
graphic organizer.
28 Writing a short story A. Choose a quote (SB, p.7). Write it, write who said it,
about a quote and Wrap- put it in reported speech.
up B. Write a short story about the quote.
2. The Teacher' Book

The Teacher's Book was designed to provide step-by-step procedures for teaching
writing using the strategy-based writing model. It includes how to activate students' prior
knowledge about each writing topic, the new vocabulary to be taught and the writing
strategies (cognitive, meta-cognitive, social, compensational, affective and multiple
strategies) which can be used at the pre-writing, writing and post-writing stages. It also sheds
161
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
light on the stages of the strategy-based writing model, importance of this type of instruction,
lesson-by-lesson notes and complete answer keys to the exercises in the Student's Book.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this section, results will be presented along with a discussion based on the statistical
analysis of the collected data.
To make sure that there were no significant differences between the experimental group and
the control group at the beginning of the experiment, Independent Samples T-test was used to
compare the mean scores of the two groups on the pre-test. Table (11) shows means, standard
deviations and t-values of the two groups.
Table (11) Means, Standard Deviations and T-Values of The experimental Group and
The Control Group on the Pre-Writing Test.
Dimension Group No. Mean S.D. T- df Sig.

Values
Content Control 32 2.7813 .90641
Experimental 33 3.0000 1.22474 0.154 63 N.S.
Organizatio Control 32 2.3750 1.23784

n Experimental 33 2.3939 1.41287 0.428 63 N.S.
Vocabulary Control 32 1.9688 1.12119

Experimental 33 2.0000 93541 0.283 63 N.S.
Grammar Control 32 3.1250 .97551

Experimental 33 1.26131 0.243 63 N.S.
3.1818
Mechanics Control 32 2.3750 .94186
Experimental 33 2.1818 1.15798 0.506 63 N.S.
Total Control 32 12.6250 2.56213
Experimental 33 12.7879 2.9660 0.389 63 N.S.
Results in table (11) show that there were no significant differences between the pre-test
mean scores of the control group and the experimental group at the beginning of the
experiment. This indicates that the two groups were homogeneous at the beginning of the
experiment. Results also reveal that the mean scores of the two groups were very low. This,
as concluded by Al-Mohanna (2010:72), may be attributed to the fact that the traditional
teaching methods were the main cause of students' low achievement. Another plausible
explanation is that students had come from the summer vacation in which they might not
have practiced EFL writing. A third interpretation is that students used to memorize two or
three paragraphs to write about one in the final exam. So, they do not acquire real writing
skills to use in new writing situations.
162
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
In response to the first research question: "What is the effect of the proposed strategy-based
writing model on third-year intermediate students' writing skills?", Paired Samples T-test was
used. Table (12) shows means, standard deviations and t-values of the experimental group in
the pre-and-posttest.
Table (12) Means, Standard Deviations and T-Values of the Experimental Group in the
Pre-and-Post Test.
Dimension Mean S.D. T- df Sig.

Values
Pre Post Pre Post
Content 3.3750 5.9697 1.21150 .72822 13.260 32 0.01
Organization 2.9375 5.3939 1.47970 1.81899 9.295 32 0.01
Vocabulary 2.8438 5.2727 1.32249 1.52628 14.959 32 0.01
Grammar 3.3438 6.1818 1.03517 1.15798 9.749 32 0.01
Mechanics 3.2188 5.6061 1.40814 1.47774 9.911 32 0.01
Total 15.7188 28.4242 3.36236 4.00804 21.873 32 0.01
Results in table (12) show that there were significant differences at 0.01 level between the
pre-and-posttest mean scores of the experimental group in the five dimensions of the writing
test as well as the test as a whole, in favor of the post-test. Thus, the first hypothesis stating
that "There are significant differences at 0.05 level between the pre-and-posttest mean score
of the experimental group, in favor of the post test," was verified. These results mean that the
strategy-based writing model led to significant improvement in the participants' writing skills.
This improvement may be due to the fact that the prewriting strategies made the participants
feel that they own several techniques to begin an assigned writing task and that they did not
have to begin writing at the same beginning and work through an evolving draft sequentially
until they reach their final draft. Therefore, they decreased the participants' writing
apprehension and enhanced their self-confidence at the beginning of the writing process. In
addition, at the prewriting stage, while cognitive strategies enabled the participants to
generate ideas, take notes and analyze model texts, meta-cognitive strategies enabled them to
organize their ideas, set goals, plan for the forthcoming writing, manage and evaluate their
prewriting performance. Compensational strategies, on the other hand, helped them overcome
prewriting difficulties, which may be attributed to their limited writing abilities, by referring
to various resources such as dictionaries, model texts…etc. or asking the teacher or peers for
clarification. Social strategies also facilitated the participants' cooperation with their peers so
as to generate and negotiate ideas. Moreover, affective strategies encouraged them to manage
their feelings, emotions and attitudes before writing (mitigating prewriting anxiety/blank
sheet apprehension). Since writing strategies might not be occurring at distinct times and in
the same order, the orchestration of various strategies empowered the participants to perform
well before writing. For instance, while the participants were generating ideas (cognitive),
163
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
they could monitor and manage their performance (meta-cognitive), reinforce their
performance and alleviate their writing anxiety (affective) and use useful resources about the
writing topic (compensational). In addition, they could cooperate and share the generated
ideas with their peers (social).
At the writing stage, whilst cognitive strategies helped the participants to use the generated
ideas as well as their syntactical and lexical knowledge to write their first drafts, meta-
cognitive strategies enabled them to monitor, self-regulate and manage their writing
performance. Compensational strategies, on the other hand, aided them to compensate for
their limited lexical and syntactical ability by referring to various resources such as
dictionaries, grammar books...etc. or ask the teacher or peers for information. Social
strategies facilitated their cooperation with their peers and teacher so as to give and get
proper scaffolding. Moreover, through affective strategies the participants managed their
feelings, emotions and attitudes while writing (alleviating writing anxiety by stopping and
relaxing for a while). Also, the participants might have orchestrated multiple strategies. For
example, while the participants were composing their first drafts (cognitive), they could
monitor and regulate their writing performance (meta-cognitive), reinforce their performance
and alleviate their writing anxiety (affective) and use useful resources about the writing topic
(compensational). In addition, they could give and receive proper scaffolding (social).
At the post-writing stage, cognitive strategies helped the participants use their syntactical
and lexical knowledge to revise the first draft, perform mechanical refining and adjust
expressions whereas meta-cognitive strategies enabled them to self-evaluate their drafts, self-
monitor, and self-regulate and reflect on their writing performance. Social strategies
facilitated the participants' cooperation with their teacher as well peers so as to give and get
feedback on their drafts and share writing. In addition, affective strategies empowered the
participants to self-reward themselves for success. Also, the participants might have
orchestrated multiple strategies. For example, while the participants were revising their drafts
(cognitive), they might have self-evaluated them and reflected on their writing performance
(meta-cognitive), reinforced and self-rewarded themselves for success (affective) and ask for
clarification (compensational). In addition, they could give and get from feedback teacher or
peers or appeal for clarifications (social).
Moreover, compensational strategies encouraged the participants to overcame the
difficulties they faced while revising their drafts by referring to various resources such as
dictionaries, grammar books…etc. to adjust or approximate the message or ask the teacher or
peers for scaffolding which encouraged them to perform beyond the limits of their writing
abilities. This confirms results of previous studies about the positive effects of scaffolding on
students' writing skills (Baradaran and Sarfarazi , 2011: 2265; Riazi and Rezaii,2011:55).
Accordingly, these results support the conclusions of Zimmerman and Bandura (1994:846),
Brown ( 2001: 101) , Luke (2006:6) ,Chien (2008: 44),McMullen (2009:419), Lv and Chen
(2010: 136) ,Al-Samadani (2010:53 ), Rogers (2010:3), Abdullah et. al.(2011:1) Dül
(2011:82), and Mahnam and Nejadansari (2012:154) about the positive effects of strategy
based writing instruction on students' writing performance.
To answer the second research question: "Which is more effective, the traditional method or
the strategy-based writing model, in enhancing students' writing skills?, results in table (13)
show that there were significant differences at 0.001 level between the post-test mean scores
of the control group and the experimental group in the writing test, in favor of the
164
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
experimental group. Table (13) shows means, standard deviations and t-values of the two
groups in the post test.
Table (13): Means, Standard Deviations and T-Values of the Two Groups in the Post
Test.
Dimension Group No. Mean S.D. T-Values df Sig.

Content Control 32 3.3750 1.21150
Experimental 33 5.9697 .72822 10.503 63 0.000
Organization Control 32 2.9375 1.47970
Experimental 33 5.3939 1.81899 5.962 63 0.000
Vocabulary Control 32 2.8438 1.32249
Experimental 33 5.2727 1.52628 6.848 63 0.000
Grammar Control 32 3.3438 1.03517
Experimental 33 6.1818 1.15798 10.406 63 0.000
Mechanics Control 32 3.2188 1.40814
Experimental 33 5.6061 1.47774 6.664 63 0.000
Total Control 32 15.7188 3.36236
Experimental 33 28.4242 4.00804 13.824 63 0.000
Results in table (13) reveal that there were significant differences at 0.01 level between the
post-test mean scores of the control group and the experimental group in the five dimensions
of the writing test as well as the test as a whole, in favor of the experimental group. This
means that the strategy-based writing model was more profitable to the participants than the
traditional method. These results verify the second hypothesis stating that "there are
significant differences at 0.05 level between the post-test mean scores of the control group
and the experimental group in the writing test, in favor of the experimental group".
These results may be attributed to the fact that, compared the control group, the participants
of the experimental group were trained and encouraged to use six types of strategies
(cognitive, meta-cognitive, compensational, social, affective and multiple strategies) at the
three stages of the writing process (prewriting, writing and post-writing stages). At the
prewriting stage, as concluded by Thomas (1993: iii) and Chien (2008: 44), cognitive
strategies helped the participants generate ideas, take notes and analyze model texts. In
addition, meta-cognitive strategies, as indicated by Abdullah et. al.(2011:1) , Dul (2011:82)
and Jiangkui and Yuanxing (2011:6), enabled the participants to organize their ideas ,
assigning goals, plan for writing, manage and evaluate their prewriting performance. In
addition, compensational strategies enabled them to overcome their prewriting problems
(such as their limited knowledge about the writing topic) by referring to various resources
such as dictionaries, model texts...etc. or ask the teacher or peers for clarification. Social
strategies also boosted the participants' cooperation with their peers and teacher so as to
generate and negotiate ideas and plan for writing (Abdullah et. al. 2011:1). Furthermore,
affective strategies empowered the participants to manage their feelings, emotions and
attitudes before writing (mitigating prewriting anxiety/blank sheet apprehension). The
participants' use of graphic organizers augmented their motivation and self-confidence
(Meyer, 1995: 3; Sharrock, 2008:2). Moreover, the orchestration of various strategies vested
them to perform well before writing. For instance, while the participants were generating
ideas (cognitive), they could monitor and manage their performance (meta-cognitive),
reinforce their performance and alleviate their prewriting anxiety (affective) and use useful
165
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
resources about the writing topic (compensational). In addition, they could cooperate and
share the generated ideas with peers (social).
At the writing stage, cognitive strategies enabled the participants use the generated ideas as
well as their syntactical and lexical knowledge to write their first draft. Meta-cognitive
strategies also helped them to monitor, self-regulate and manage their writing performance.
In addition, compensational strategies assisted the participants to overcome limitations in
writing by referring to various resources such as dictionaries, grammar books...etc. or ask the
teacher or peers for clarification. Social strategies facilitated the participants' cooperation
with their teacher and peers so as to give and get proper scaffolding which encouraged them
to perform beyond the limits of their writing abilities. Thus, teacher and peer scaffolding
helped them to bridge the gap between what they knew and could do and the intended writing
purpose. Through scaffolding, the teacher was able to intervene and provide clues, coaching,
guidance and feedback in addition to the information which the participants needed to
perform their writing tasks successfully. This supports results about the positive effects of
scaffolding on students' writing skills (Baradaran and Sarfarazi , 2011: 2265; Riazi and
Rezaii,2011:55). In addition, affective strategies helped the participants to manage their
feelings and emotions while writing; the participants were able to mitigate their writing
anxiety by stopping and relaxing for a while. Moreover, they enhanced their persistence by
encouraging themselves to go on writing despite the writing difficulties they stumbled while
writing. Also, the participants used to ordain multiple strategies which empowered them and
improved their performance. For example, while the participants were composing their first
draft (cognitive), they could monitor and regulate their performance (meta-cognitive),
reinforce their performance and alleviate their writing anxiety (affective) and use useful
resources related the writing topic (compensational). In addition, they could give and receive
proper scaffolding from teacher and peers (social).
At the post-writing stage, whilst cognitive strategies encouraged the participants to use their
syntactical and lexical knowledge to revise the first draft, perform mechanical refining and
adjust expressions, meta-cognitive strategies enabled them to self-evaluate their drafts and
reflect on their writing performance. In addition, compensational strategies boosted their
ability to overcome their writing problems by referring to various resources such as
dictionaries, grammar books…etc., or ask the teacher or peers for information. Social
strategies facilitated the participants' cooperation with their peers so as to give and get
feedback on their drafts and share writing. Affective strategies, on the other hand, enabled the
participants to self-reward themselves for success. Also, the participants used to adopt
multiple strategies simultaneously. For example, while the participants were revising their
drafts (cognitive), they might have self-evaluated them and reflected on their writing
performance (meta-cognitive), reinforced and rewarded themselves for success (affective)
and ask for clarification (compensational). In addition, they could give and get feedback or
appeal for clarifications (social)
An additional plausible interpretation is that the strategy-based writing model provided a
safe, unthreatening learning environment wherein the participants' errors were accepted and
considered a part of the learning process. The teacher established rapport with the
participants, which was based on mutual respect. He also used to respond properly to the
participants' needs and questions. In addition, the participants were encouraged to attend to
their peers as they provide feedback on their drafts and respect their points of views.
Furthermore, the participants felt safe as they were equipped with various types of writing
166
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
strategies which enabled them to process the writing pieces flexibly and effectively. This safe
atmosphere bolstered the participants' abilities to generate, organize their ideas, use the
generated ideas for writing their first drafts, monitor and manage their writing performance
and self-evaluate and self-correct their writing pieces. It also enhanced their persistence to
perform their writing tasks despite the difficulties they had encountered at the three stages of
the writing process.
Accordingly, the strategy-based writing model enabled the EFL teacher to initiate
unforgettable and fruitful writing experiences which provided ample opportunities for the
participants to create their writing pieces. These results are congruent with previous
conclusions about the positive effects of strategy-based writing instruction on EFL/ESL
learners' writing skills ( Zimmerman and Bandura , 1994:846; Brown , 2001: 101;,
Luke,2006:6;Chien ,2008: 44;McMullen ,2009:419; Lv and Chen ,2010: 136; ,Al-Samadani
,2010:53 ; Rogers ,2010:3;Abdullah et. al.,2011:1; Dül ,2011:82; and Mahnam and
Nejadansari ,2012:154).
CONCLUSION:
The present study investigated the effect of a proposed strategy-based writing model on EFL
third-year intermediate students' writing skills. Results are encouraging as far as the strategy-
based writing model is concerned. They revealed that the use of such model positively and
significantly enhanced the participants' writing skills. These results emphasize the importance
of incorporating the strategy-based writing model into the EFL courses at the intermediate
stage. The proposed model also provided EFL intermediate students with a safe,
unthreatening learning environment where the teacher and peers provide scaffolding for all
learners who were encouraged to collaborate, interact, self-monitor, self-regulate and self-
correct their writing performance at the three stages of writing. In this atmosphere, students
played an active role in the writing process and were responsible for choosing the writing
strategies which served them best.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of the study, the following recommendations are made:
1. Intermediate stage EFL teachers should be encouraged to adopt the strategy-based
writing model in their classrooms.
2. EFL teachers should be trained to use the strategy-based writing model in their
teaching at the intermediate stage.
3. The strategy-based writing model should be recommended as one of the teaching
methods to be used for teaching the prescribed course-book ‘Say It in English'.
4. Teacher and peer scaffolding should be integrated into EFL writing instruction.
5. The activities of the course-book "Say It in English" should be adapted to suit the
strategy-based writing model.
6. EFL teachers should train students to use the six types of writing strategies
(cognitive, meta-cognitive, social, compensational, affective and multiple strategies)
as they write.
7. EFL teachers should stop teaching writing by simply focusing on the writing product
rather than the writing process. Rather, an integrated writing approach should be
adopted as it enhances learners' awareness that writing is not a one-step product of
167
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
getting instant perfection, but a recursive and social process of meaning exploration
and reformulation.
8. EFL teachers should empower students by creating learner-centered environment in
which they are actively and safely engaged in the writing process.
9. EFL students should have a clear idea of why they write, what they write about and
how they write.
10. EFL teachers should consistently provide direct strategy instruction, modeling and
guided practice.
11. EFL teachers should encourage all types of correction (self- correction, peer-
correction and teacher- correction).
12. EFL teachers should provide ample opportunities for students to reflect on their
writing performance as well as the writing activities.
13. EFL teachers should be supportive and encouraging to students and attend to their
voices from different venues to monitor, regulate and evaluate the teaching strategies
they use. This helps students to get rid of their writing anxiety/apprehension.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Based on the results of the present study, the following suggestions for further research are
made:
- Further research can investigate the effect of other strategy-based models on EFL
learners' listening, speaking and reading skills.
- More experimentation is needed to examine the effect of the strategy-based writing
model on EFL learners' attitudes towards writing or the English language.
- It is possible to investigate the effect of the strategy-based writing model on the writing
skills of other subjects, bigger and/or different samples.
- Other studies are needed to direct due attention to the effect of strategy-based writing
model on EFL teachers' attitudes towards the teaching profession.
- Future studies may investigate the role of the strategy-based writing model in
alleviating the learners' writing apprehension.
REFERENCES
- Abdullah M. R.; Abu Bakar, Z.; Ali, R. M.; Yaacob, R. A.; Abdur-Rahman M.A.; Embong
,A. M. and Bin Amar, A. Z. (2011). Writing Strategies of Malysian ESL
Undergraduate Engineering Learners. International Journal of Engineering and
Technology (IJET-IJENS), 11 (2), April, 1-9.
-Al-Hazmi, S. (2006).Writing and Reflection: Perceptions of Arab EFL Learners. South
Asian Language Review, xvi (2), June, 36-50.
-AL-Hojailan, T. A. (2003).Teaching English in Saudi Arabia Riyadh: Aldar Alsawlatiah for
Publication and Distribution.
-AL-Mohanna, A. D. (2010). English Language Teaching in Saudi Arabian Context: How
Communicatively Oriented is it? Journal of King Saud University, 22 (1), 69-88.
-Al-Samadani , H. A. (2010) The Relationship between Saudi EFL Students' Writing
Competence, L1 Writing Proficiency, and Self-regulation. European Journal of Social
Sciences, 16 (1), 53-63.
168
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
-Al-Yousef, H.S. (2007).An Evaluation of the New third Grade Intermediate English Course-
book. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, College of Arts, King Saud University.
-Al-Wahibee , K M. (2000) The Relationship Between Language Learning Strategies and the
English Language Oral Proficiency of Saudi University-level ESL Students.
Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Kansas.
-Alzaanin ,E., I.(2014).Investigating the pedagogical practices of EFL writing teachers in
Palestinian universities: A cognitive-ecological perspective. Unpublished PhD
Dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington.
- Asiri, I.M. (2003). University EFL Teachers' Written Feedback on Compositions and
Students' Reactions. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Essex.
-Anugkakul, G. (2011). A Comparative Study in Language Learning Strategies of Chinese
and Thai Students: A Case Study of Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University. European
Journal of Social Science, 19 (2), 163-174.
-Badger, R. and White, G. (2000). A Process Genre Approach to Teaching Writing. ELT
Journal, 54 (2), April, 153-160.
-Bae J. (2011). Teaching Process Writing for Intermediate/Advanced Learners in South
Korea. Unpublished Master of Arts in TESOL, University of Wisconsin-River Falls.
-Baker,W. and Boonkit,K. (2004). Learning Strategies in Reading and Writing: EAP
Contexts. RELC Journal, 35 (3), December, 299-328
-Baroudy,I.(2008).Discovering Writing Behaviors: Successful and Unsuccessful Writers.
International Journal of English Studies, 8 (2), 43-63.
-Baradaran, A and Sarfarazi, B.( 2011). The Impact of Scaffolding on the Iranian EFL
Learners' English Academic Writing. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied
Sciences, 5(12), 2265-2273.
-Brown, A. (1996).The Effect of Rater variable in the development of an occupation-
specific Language Performance Test. Language Testing, 12(1), 1-15.
- Brown, H. D. (2001) Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy (2nd ed.)White Plains: Addison Wesley Longman.
- Chamot , A. U. (2005) Language Learning Strategy Instruction: Current Issues and
Research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112–130.
-Chien, S.C. (2008) A Cognitive Analysis of the Relationships between Chinese EFL Writers'
Strategy Use and Writing Achievement Performance. Cambridge Occasional Papers
in Linguistics, 3(4), 44-61.
-Cohen, A. (1990). Language Learning. New York: Harper Collins.
-Dikli, S.;Jernigan,J. and Bleyle,S. (2015). How Blending Product and Process approaches to
Teaching Writing Helps EFL Learners: Acase study. In R. Al-Mahrooqi,V. Thakur
and A. ,Roscoe(eds.). Methodologies for Effective Writing Instruction in EFL and
ESL Classrooms, (pp.53-76), USA: Information Science Reference.
-Dujsik, D. (2008). The Effects of Pre-writing Strategy Training Guided by Computer-based
Procedural Facilitation on ESL Students' Strategy Use, Writing Quantity, and Writing
Quality. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. College of Education, University of South
Florida
-Dul, O.(2011). Meta-cognitive strategies in developing EFL writing skills. Contemporary
Online Language Education Journal, 1(2), 82-100.
-Dyer, B. (1996). L1 and L2 Composition Theories: Hillocks' ‘environmental mode' and
task-based language teaching. ELT Journal, 50 (4), October, 312-317.
169
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
-Ehrman,M. and Oxford,R.(1989).Effects of Sex Differences, Career Choice and

Psychological Type on Adult Language Learning Strategies. The Modern Language
Journals, 73 (1), 1-13.
-Ehrman, M. and Oxford, R. (1990). Adult Language Learning Styles and Strategies in an
Intensive Training Setting, The Modern Language Journal, 74 (3), 311-327
-Eilers, L.H. and Pinkley, C.(2006).Metacognitive Strategies Help Students to
Comprehend All Text. Reading Improvement, 43, (1), Spring, 13-29
-El-Said, F.E. (1979).Statistical Psychology and Measuring the Human Mental Mind (3rd
ed.).Cairo: Dar El-Fekr El-Araby (in Arabic).
-Fahim , M. and Mirzaii , M. (2014). Improving EFL Argumentative Writing: A Dialogic
Critical Thinking Approach. International Journal of Research Studies in Language
Learning, 391), January, 3-20
-Fakahani, I.; AL-Azmh, S.; AL-Surogi, H. ;Zaidan,S.; AL-Rais,H. ;Magdli,H.(2005-
2006).Say it in English: Third Year Intermediate Teacher's Book. Riyiad. National
Offest Printing Press Ltd. Co.
-Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
-Frodesen, J.(2001). Grammar in Writing. In Mariane Celce-Murcia (ed.) Teaching English
as a Second or Foreign Language (3rd eds.) (pp.233-248). United States: Heinle and
Heinle.
-Fulwiler, T. (1996).The College Writer's Reference (3rd ed.) Upper Saddle River: Prentice
Hall.
-Gass, S. and Selinker, L. (2008). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course
(3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
-Ghanbari, B., Barati, H. and Moinzadeh, A. (2012,). Rating Scales Revisited: EFL Writing
Assessment Context of Iran under Scrutiny. Language Testing in Asia, 2 (1),
February, 83-100
-Gipps, C. V. (1994). Beyond Testing: Towards a Theory of Educational Assessment.
London: Routledge Falmer.
-Griffiths, C. (2004). Language Learning Strategies: Theory and Research. Occasional
Paper, 1, February, 1-25.
-Hassan, M. K. and Akhan, M. M.(2010). Approaches to Writing in EFL/ESL Context:
Balancing Product and Process in Writing Class at Tertiary Level. Journal of NELTA,
15, (1), December, 77-88.
-Harmer, J. (1998). How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of English
Language Teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education.
-Haynes, L. (2011). Goal-Setting in EFL: Is it really useful? Studies in Humanities and
Cultures. 15, 83-92
-Hedge T. (2005).Writing (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press
-Hsiao, T. Y. and Oxford, R. L. (2002). Comparing Theories of Language Learning
Strategies: A confirmatory factor analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 86 (iii),
368-383.
-Hung, F. S. (2008). An Integrated Approach to Teaching EFL Writing. Taiwan: Crane
Publishing Co., Ltd.
-Jiangkui, Z. and Yuanxing D. (2011). Self-regulation in Chinese College Students' EFL
writing. Studies in Literature and Language, 3(3), 6-13.
-Khan ,K.(2015). How Blending Product and Process approaches to Teaching Writing Helps
EFL Learners: Acase study. In R. Al-Mahrooqi,V. Thakur and A. ,Roscoe(eds.).
170
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Methodologies for Effective Writing Instruction in EFL and ESL Classrooms, (pp.94-
114), USA: Information Science Reference.
-Klapwijk, N. M. (2008). A Blended-learning Approach to Strategy Training for Improving
Second Language Reading Comprehension in South Africa. Unpublished PhD Thesis
in Hypermedia for Language Learning. Stellenbosch University.
-Kohn, A. (2006). The Trouble with Rubrics. English Journal, 95(4), March, 12-15.
-Kroll, B. (2001) Considerations for Teaching an ESL/EFL Writing Course In Mariane
Celce-Murcia (ed.) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (pp.219-
32).United States: Heinle and Heinle.
-Kummin, S. and Rahman, S. (2010). The Relationship between the Use of Meta-cognitive
Strategies and Achievement in English. Procedia Social behavior Sciences, 7(c), 145-
150.
-Lane, K. L. , Harris,K.R., Graham,S., Weisenback, J. L., Brindle, m. and Morphy, P.(2008).
The Effects of Self-Regulated Strategy Development on the Writing Performance of
Second- Grade Students with Behavioral and Writing Difficulties. The Journal of
Special Education, 41(4), Winter, 234-253.
-Lee, K. R. and Oxford, R.( 2008). Understanding EFL Learners' Strategy Use and Strategy
Awareness. The Asian EFL Journal, 10 (1), March, 7-32.
-Lee, C. K. (2010). An Overview of Language Learning Strategies. ARECLS, 7, 132-152.
-Luchini , P. L.(2010). Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Complimentary Approach to
Teaching Writing Skills. International Journal of Language Studies, 4(3), 73-92.
-Luke, S. D.(2006). The Power of Strategy Instruction. Evidence for Education, I (I), 1-11.
-Lv , F. and Chen, H. (2010). A Study of Meta-cognitive-Strategies-Based Writing
Instruction for Vocational College Students. English Language Teaching, 3 (3),
September, 136- 144.
-Mahnam , L. and Nejadansari, D. (2012). The Effects of Different Pre-Writing Strategies on
Iranian EFL Writing Achievement. International Education Studies, 5(1), February,
154-160.
-Manchon, R. (2001). Trends in the conceptualization of Second Language Composing
Strategies: A critical Analysis. International Journal of English Studies. 1(2), 47-70.
-McMullen, M., G. (2009) Using Language Learning Strategies to Improve the Writing Skills
of Saudi EFL Students: Will it really work? System, 37(3), September, 418-433.
-Meyer, D. J.(1995).The Effects of Graphic Organizers on the Creative Writing of Third
Grade Students. Unpublished MA in Education, Kean College of New Jersey.
-Min, H.,T. (2006). The Effects of Trained Peer Review on EFL Students' Revision Types
and Writing Quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118-141.
-Morra, A. and Asis, M. (2009). The Effect of Audio and Written Teacher Responses on EFL
Student Revision. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 39(2), 68-82.
-Nasir ,L.; Naqvi ,S.M. and Bhamani, S.(2013).Enhancing Students' Creative Writing Skills:
an Action Research Project, Acta Didactica Napocensia, 6 (2), 27-32
-Nunan, D., 1997: Does learner strategy training make a difference? Lenguas Modernas, 24,
123-142.
-Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
-O'Malley,J. M. and Chamot, A. U. (1990).Learning Strategies in Second Language
Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Oxford, R. L. (1990).Language Learning Strategies: What every teacher should know.
Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
171
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
-Oxford, R. and Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables Affecting Choice of Language Learning

Strategies by University Students, Modern Language Journal, 73 (iii), 291-300.
-Qian, X. (2010).A Balanced Approach to the Teaching of Intermediate-Level Writing Skills
to EFL students. English Language Teaching, 3(2), June, 13-16.
-Quintero,L. M.(2008). Blogging: A Way to foster EFL Writing. Colombo Applied
Linguistics Journal, 10, 7-49.
-Rahimi , M., Riazi, A. and Saif ,S. (2008) An investigation into the Factors Affecting the
Use of Language Learning Strategies by Persian EFL Learners. Canadian Journal of
Applied Linguistics, 1 (2), 31-60.
-Raimes, A. (1983).Techniques in Teaching Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Riazi, A. (1997). Acquiring disciplinary literacy: A social-cognitive analysis of text
production and learning among Iranian graduate students of education. Journal of
Second Language Writing, 6(2), 105-137.
-Riazi, M. and Rezaii, M. (2011). Teacher- and peer-scaffolding behaviors: Effects on EFL
Students' Writing Improvement. In A. Feryok (Ed.), CLESOL 2010: Proceedings of
the 12th National Conference for Community Languages and ESOL (pp. 55-63).
Retrieved on January 3, 2012 from http://www.tesolanz.org.nz/
-Rijlaarsdam, G. and Bergh, H. V.(2005).Effective Learning and Teaching of Writing: A
Handbook of Writing in Education.(2nd ed.).U.S.A: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
-Rogers, R. J.(2010).Incorporating Meta-cognitive Strategy Training in ESP Writing
Instruction: English for Lawyers. English Language Teaching, 3(4), December, 3-9.
-Sasaki, M. (2000).Toward an Empirical Model of EFL Writing Processes: An Exploratory
Study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 259-291.
-Schweiker-Marra,K. E.and Marra, W. T.(2000).Investigating the Effects of Prewriting
Activities on Writing Performance and Anxiety of At-risk Students. Reading
Psychology, 21 (2), 99-114.
-Seifoori, Z.; Mozaheb,M.A. and Beigi,,A.,B (2012).A Profile of an Effective EFL Writing
Teacher(A Technology-based Approach),English Language Teaching, 5(5),May, 107-
117
-Setyono, B. (2014).Approaches in Teaching Writing Designed by High School English
Teachers in Indonesia. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied
Research), 14 (1), 477-494
-Sharrock, T.(2008). The Effect of Graphic Organizers on Students' Writing. An action
research project. Kennesaw State University.
-Shih,S. C.(2005). A Study of Junior High School Students' Perceptions of Writing
Strategies Instruction and Their Writing Performance. Unpublished M. A. Thesis,
National Chung Cheng University.
-Silva, T. (1990). Second language Composition Instruction: Developments, Issues and
Directions in ESL. In B. Kroll (ed.) Second Language Writing: Research Insights for
the Classroom (pp.11-36).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Steve G. and Perin D.(2007).Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of
Adolescents in Middle and High School. New York: Alliance for Excellent Education.
-Tangpermpoon, T. (2008). Integrated Approaches to Improve the Writing Skills of
English Major Students. ABAC Journal, 28(2), May-August, 1-9.
-The Higher Committee of Education Policy (2007).Student Evaluation By-law. Riyadh.
M.O.E.
-Thomas, K.M.(1993). The Effects of the Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing
Curriculum on Expository Writing Skills and meta-cognitive Knowledge of the writing
172
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Process in Learning Disabled Students. Unpublished M. A. in Education. Faculty of

Education, Simon Fraser University.
-Tompkins, Gail E. (1990).Teaching Writing: Balancing Process and Product. Columbus:
Merrill.
-Tong, W. (2007).Teach Writing as an Ongoing Process: Tips for EFL Learners on
Reviewing EFL Composition. US-China Foreign Language. 5(11), 53-56.
-Tribble, C. (1996).Writing .Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Tsai, C. H. (2004). Investigating the Relationships between ESL Writers' Strategy Use and
Their Second Language Writing Ability. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Columbia
University (USA).
-Veerappan, V. A.L., Suan W. H. and Sulaiman, T. (2011). The Effect of Scaffolding
Technique in Journal Writing among the Second Language Learners. Journal of
Language Teaching and Research, 2(4), July, 934-940.
-Wang, C. (2013).A Study of Genre Approach in EFL Writing. Theory and Practice in
Language Studies, 3(11), November, 2128-2135.
-Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Wenden, A. L. (1991).Meta-cognitive Strategies in L2 Writing: A Case for Task
Knowledge. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages
and Linguistics: Linguistics and Language Pedagogy: The State of Art (pp.302-322).
Washington, DC. : Georgetown University Press.
-Williams, M. and Burden, R. L. (1997).Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social
Constructivist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-White, R., and Arndt, V. (1991). Process Writing. Harlow: Longman.
-Woo, M., Chu, S., Ho, A., and Li, X. (2011). Using a Wiki to Scaffold Primary-School
Students' Collaborative Writing. Educational Technology and Society, 14 (1), 43–54.
-Xiao-xia, Q. (2007).Raising Learners' awareness of Readership in their EFL Writing. US-
China Foreign Language, 5(11), 31-36.
-Yan, Y. (2010).Towards an Eclectic Framework for Teaching EFL Writing in a Chinese
Context.US-China Educational Review, 7(3), March, 29-33.
-Yi, Y. (2010).Towards an Eclectic Framework for Teaching EFL Writing in a Chinese
Context. US-China Education Review, 7(3), 29-33
-Zimmaro, D. M. (2004). Developing Grading Rubrics. Measurement and Evaluation
Center. The University of Texas,
-Zimmerman, B. and Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of Self-Regulatory Influences on
Writing Course Attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31, (4), Winter,
845-862.
173
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix One
174
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
175
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Two (Sample Graphic Organizers and Webs)
176
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
177
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
178
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
179
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
180
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
181
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
182
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
183
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
184
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
185
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
186
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
187
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
188
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Three
Self-Evaluation Checklist
Before submitting a finished piece of writing, evaluate it against the following criteria to
ensure that you have created the best composition possible.
Criteria Yes No
Content
1- My composition shows good knowledge of the writing topic.
2-The main idea /sentence is clear.
3- Supporting detail are thoroughly elaborated
Organization
1- Opening sentence is correctly placed and reflects precisely the
topic.
2- Ideas are well-organized and logically sequenced

3--The concluding sentence summarizes precisely what was
written.
Vocabulary
1- Words are precisely and carefully chosen.
2-I used wide range of vocabulary
3- I used correct word form
Grammar
1- I used complete and correct sentence constructions.
2- I used correct subject verb agreement.
3--I used correct tense, word order/functions, articles, pronouns,
prepositions
Mechanics
1- I have strong control of conventions /Paragraphing
2- I used correct spelling, punctuation, capitalization,
paragraphing.
3-My handwriting is legible
189
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Four
Strategy Use Reflection Checklist
Name:……………………… Date……………………….. Class:………………………..
Writing Topic………………
The purpose of this checklist is to collect information about your use of proper writing
strategies. This will help you to reflect on your writing performance. The checklist includes
30 statements. Each statement is followed by three numbers, 1,2 and 3 and NA means the
following:
“1” means that “You never do this”.
“2” means “You Sometimes do this”( About 50% of the time).
“3” means that “You always or almost do this”.
“NA” means that “You didn't used the specified strategy but you used other strategies”.
After reading each statement, circle the number (1, 2, or3) which applies to you. Note that
there are no rights or wrong responses to any of the statements on this checklist.
Statements 1 2 3
The Pre-Writing Stage (Never) (Sometimes) (Always) NA
Cognitive Strategies:
1-I used elaboration , clustering and
brainstorming strategies
2-I activated my prior knowledge about the topic.
3-I responded to the teacher's pre-writing questions
and discussions to activate my prior knowledge
about the topic.
4-I set purposes in mind before I started writing.
5-I planned future steps or actions before writing.
6-I used graphic organizers and webs to organize
my ideas
Affective Strategies:
7-I convinced myself that writing anxiety is only
temporary.
8-I told myself that errors are the means to improve
my writing.
9-I tried to set goals and planned to alleviate writing
apprehension.
Compensational Strategies
190
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
10-I referred to a dictionary , a model text …etc.

11-I asked my peers or teacher for information
Multiple Strategies
12-I used more than one strategy simultaneously
before I start writing
The Writing Stage
13-I used my prior knowledge of the topic to write
my piece.
14-I used the generated ideas to write my piece.
15-I managed to choose proper words.
16-I connected important ideas in the composition.
17- I used effective Sentence combination.
18-I composed the first draft

19- I noticed when my writing performance is
hindered.
20- While writing, I decided what to ideas use and
what to ignore.
21-While writing , I answered questions readers
may like to have answers in my composition..
22-I Stopped writing and relaxed for a while
23- I encourage myself to go
On writing to overcome
writing problems.
24-I Used various resources
25-I Asked teacher or peer help
Social Strategies
26-I engaged in Pair work
27-I asked the teacher /peers for information
28-I received teacher/ peer scaffolding
Multiple Strategies
29-I used more than one strategy simultaneously while writing.
The Post-writing Stage
30-I proofread /Revised my first draft.
31-I edited my writing piece.
32-I Self-evaluated my writing piece.
33-I reflected on my writing performance.
191
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
34-I Self-rewarded myself.
35-I received teacher reinforcement
36- I asked the teacher/ peers for information
37-I asked my peers to review my writing piece and give
feedback.
Social Strategies
38-I shared my writing with peers.
39-I held teacher/ peer conference
Multiple Strategies
40- I used more than one strategy simultaneously.
Comment ……………………………………
192
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Five
The Three-Step Writing Sheet
(Pre-writing, Writing, Post-writing)
Prewriting
-With the teacher and classmates, decide a topic to write about.
-Consider who will read or listen to your composition.
-Brainstorm ideas about the target topic.
- Write down the ideas.
Writing
-Put ideas into your own words.
-Write sentences and paragraphs even if you think they are not perfect.
-Read what you have written and see if it says what you mean.
-Show it to your teacher or classmates and ask for suggestions.
Post-writing
a- Revising (Make it Better)
-Read what you have written again.
-Think about your teacher's or classmates'
suggestions.
-Make sure that the sentences are correct and
-Delete, add or modify unclear or overused words, parts based on the
given suggestions.
-Read your composition aloud to make sure that it flows smoothly.
b- Proof Reading (Make it correct).

-Make sure that all the sentences are correct.
- Correct spelling and punctuation errors.
-Replace words or structures that are not used correctly.
-Ask the teacher or a classmate for feedback.
-Recopy your composition correctly.
c- Editing ( Share your Composition).
-Read your composition to your classmates.
-Put your writing on display.
- Congratulate yourself on a well-done writing piece.
193
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Six
Sample Grammar Lessons
Lesson 1
Part 1:Understanding Key Grammatical Terms
To know how to form grammatically correct sentences, you should learn the following key
terms:
Subject : the topic of the sentence
Predicate : the statement made about the subject
Phrase :a group of related words, but lacking either a subject, predicate, or both
Clause : a group of related words that expresses a thought (either complete or incomplete).
Sentence: a group of words with a grammatical subject, a predicate, and a complete thought.
Sentence fragment: a group of words lacking a subject, predicate, or complete thought;
fragments generally are just phrases or subordinate clauses
Main (or independent) clause : A group of words that expresses a complete or major
thought; a main clause can stand by itself
Subordinate (or dependent) clause : A group of related words that expresses an incomplete
or minor thought; a subordinate clause cannot stand by itself.
Verbal : A verb used as another part of speech; the category of verbals is made up of
gerunds, participles, and infinitives.
Gerund : A verb used as a noun; always ends in -ing
Participle :A verb used as an adjective; ends in -ing or the past participle form of the verb
(whether regular (-d or –ed) or irregular).
Infinitive : A verb used as a noun, adjective, or adverb; always in the form of to + verb—for
example, to run, to sing, to dance, to write, etc.
Part 2: Understanding Parts of Speech

You also should understand the parts of speech. A part of speech identifies a word according
to its grammatical function in a sentence. Parts of speech are the noun, pronoun, verb,
adjective, adverb, preposition, conjunction, and interjection.
Noun :names of a person, place, or thing
Pronoun :takes the place of a noun
Verb :expresses action or a state of being
194
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Adjective : modifies a noun or pronoun

Adverb : modifies a verb, adjective, or other adverb
Preposition : A connecting word that introduces a prepositional phrase
Conjunction : A connecting word that introduces a main clause or subordinate clause
Interjection : expresses emotion.
As noted above, once you know the basic grammatical terms, you can begin to repair
problem sentences.
Lesson2
Part 1: Understanding Verb Tenses
Verb tense is the form of the verb that indicates the time at which an event occurs, or the time
at which a state of being exists. Tense also indicates whether an event has happened once or
is ongoing. For example, the simple tenses of verbs indicate a one-time event, while the
progressive tenses indicate an ongoing action or state of existence. The verb tense that
indicates something existing or occurring right now is, of course, the present tense. The other
five verb tenses relate to or build upon the present tense—that is, they indicate the existence
or occurrence of something in relation to the present. The following table lists the six main
verb tenses, explains how to use them properly in English sentences, and gives examples of
each tense.
Past Perfect – Past – Present Perfect – Present - Future Perfect – Future
Verb Tense Verb Use Examples

Simple Present Indicates an action that - I see what you mean.
happens as regularly, or - I understand what you are talking about.
habitual actions. - We study hard to do well in the final test.
-The sun shines in the east.
Simple Past Indicates a completed - I prepared this lesson earlier today.
action that already - My brother was born in 1974.
happened
Simple Future Indicates an action that - Ahmed will go to school.
will occur later on, or is - Fast population growth will continue to
likely to happen occur in Saudi Arabia.
- We will have a party at the end of the
second term.
Present Indicate continuing or -I am explaining the lesson.
Progressive ongoing actions happening - Abdul-Rahman is reading loudly.
now or at the present time -Mohammad is sitting down.
Past Progressive Indicates continuing or -I was explaining the lesson.
ongoing actions happening - Abdul-Rahman was reading loudly.
in the past. -Mohammad and Ahmed were sitting
down.
Present Perfect Indicates an action that - Fahd has just come home.
began in the past and is -My father has invested his money wisely.
195
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
finished in the present, or • We have studied English several

an action that minutes.
began in the past and • Some students have come to class late.
extends into the present.
Past Perfect Indicates an action that • By 1432, engineers had built five new
was happening before a schools in Bisha.
certain time in the past. • Before teachers used data show, they had
used the white board.
• Ali came back after he had gone to
school .
B. Distinguishing Between Sentences and Fragments

You should know the difference between groups of word that are just fragments and groups
that constitute actual sentences. A fragment expresses an incomplete thought, while a
sentence includes a subject, verb, and complete idea.
Fragment and Complete Sentence

After I left the house. I left the house after I had breakfast.
When I went to lunch that day. When I went to lunch that day, I had pasta and sugar-free
cola.
Brushing my teeth in front of the mirror in the first-floor bathroom. I brushed my teeth in
front of the mirror in the
first-floor bathroom.
Because I was tired and wanted to go to bed early. I did not watch the news because I was
tired and wanted to go to bed early. Notice that fragments 1, 2, and 5 begin with the
connecting words after, when, and because. These words are subordinating conjunctions.
Subordinating conjunctions join a subordinate clause to a main clause. Fragments 3 and 4
begin with verbals known as participles. 3. Action Verbs are the strongest part of speech in an
English sentence. Thus, you should prefer sentences with action verbs over those with just
linking verbs. An action verb expresses action, while a linking verb simply expresses a state
of being or existence.
Active and Passive Voice

Sentences with action verbs in the active voice are preferred over those in the passive voice.
In an active voice sentence, the grammatical subject performs the action, and therefore is
active. In a passive voice sentence, the subject is someone or something other than the
performer and therefore is passive.
Examples
The wallpaper was completely examined by Fahd.
Fahd examined the wallpaper thoroughly.
196
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
The car was struck by a van which had its headlights broken.
A van with broken headlights struck the car.
Our country will be considered economically stronger when Saudi cars are being
manufactured.
Saudi economy will improve if factories manufacture Saudi-made cars.
197
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Seven
The Analyzed Texts
Text One
I. Identifying the elements of a paragraph.

A.Read the paragraph. How does the writer try to improve his English? Ways to
Improve my English
Although I face some difficulties when I use English for communication
purposes, I try some ways to improve my English. I revise my revisions or worksheets
regularly. This helps me to keep the knowledge fresh in my mind. I like playing football on
Thursdays. I also read widely - newspapers, short stories, books, etc. I usually take down
notes during lessons and check the dictionary for unfamiliar words. I play word games and
puzzles. In addition, I try to speak proper English. Moreover, I watch English channels. I
study with a friend who is good in the English language. Thus, I have achieved some
improvement in my English.
B.Answer the questions about the paragraph above. Give reasons for your answers.
will be about?
feel finished?

1.Underline the topic sentence. Is it the first or the second sentence?
2.Write the controlling idea from the topic sentence in your own words.
……………………………………………………………………
3.One sentence in the paragraph is irrelevant. Draw a line through it.
4.Why the sentence is irrelevant? Write your explanation below.
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
198
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
III. Reordering for coherence

…….a. At the beginning, he suffered a lot.
…….b. My neighbor is a kind man called Awad.
…….c.He was a soldier in the army.
…….d. He can go to the mosque and come back independently.
…….e. But, he persisted and tried to cope with that problem.
…….f. So, he fought in the Gulf war and lost his sight
…….g. Now, he lives happily; he can manage his own affairs
independently.
…….h. He was active, strong and patriot.
…….i. In addition, he goes to the grocery to buy some goods for his family.
……. j. Moreover, he visits his neighbors and spends his time happily.
Text Two

A.Read the paragraph. Who will deliver certificates and prizes?
Planning an Event
We are planning for a graduation party next week. The party will be on
Wednesday evening. It will be on the school theatre. Graduates will be honored. Parents are
also invited to attend this important occasion. The school principal will deliver certificates as
well as prizes to cleverer graduates as well as their parents. My parents will watch TV.We
should buy many things like certificates, prizes, sweets, water bottles, refreshments … etc.
Also, we should prepare and send invitation cards for the participants. We are all happy to
participate in this party.
will be about?
feel finished?
199
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015

……………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

…….a. The first kind is air pollution which is the most dangerous type.
…….b. Factories pour chemicals into the nearest seas and rivers.
…….c. There are many kinds of pollution which make life difficult, unhappy and unhealthy.
…….d. Pollution is one of the biggest problems of this age.
…….e. It is also caused by tankers spilling oil or towns pouring waste.
…….f. This kind is commonly found in industrial and big cities.
…….g. Those poisonous chemicals and waste make water dirty and unhealthy to drink.
…….h. In such cities, air is not clean and unhealthy.
…….i. The other kind is water pollution.
……. j. It is caused by factories and cars sending out smoke.
Text Three

A.Read the paragraph. Who will deliver certificates and prizes?
Pollution
Pollution is one of the biggest problems of this age. There are many kinds of
pollution which make life difficult, unhappy and unhealthy. The first kind is air pollution
which is the most dangerous type. It is caused by factories and cars sending out smoke. This
kind is commonly found in industrial and big cities. In such cities, air is not clean and
200
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
unhealthy. The other kind is water pollution. Factories pour chemicals into the nearest seas
and rivers. Many people like seas and rivers It is also caused by tankers spilling oil or towns
pouring waste. Those poisonous chemicals and waste make water dirty and unhealthy to
drink. They also kill fish that people eat. Many countries tried hard to stop pollution and they
succeeded. Air and water on their cities became much cleaner. They now breathe and drink
fresh and healthy air and water.
will be about?
feel finished?

……………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

…….a. Photocopying machine Saves time – makes books available to everyone
…….b. Finally push the start button.
…….c. Photocopying machine is an important invention.
…….d. Then –put the paper on the glass copy board face down.
…….e. It is a big box-shaped white metal machine.
…….f. After that, press the keys to enter the number of the copies.
201
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
…….g. First, press the switch on.

…….h. It is used for copying paper, books issue and newspaper .
…….i. I can use it by doing the following.
……. j. Next, lower the cover.
Text Four
Here are some ideas about how to write a polite and friendly postcard in English. It's
easy! There's not much space on the card, so you can only write a few lines.
If you write a postcard to a stranger, you could write something like the below example. Of
course, the underlined sections are up to you.
Dear Ahmed,
My name is Fahd. I am an English teacher and I love to read and surf the web. I live in Bisha,
Asir, KSA, which is a medium-sized city near Abha. The picture on this postcard is a photo
of the Bisha. I often see the bay when I drive around my town.
Anyway, I would love to hear back from you. My return address is: 123 Alroashin St., Bisha
94538, KSA.
– Al-Shahrani[Lastname]
Here is another possible Post Crossing example, written for you by my former roommate,
Sami:
Dear Khalid,
I found this post card and had to send it to someone. It was much too pretty to keep. I hope
that you are well and will send me a postcard back.
Sincerely,
Sami W.
123 Alseteen St.
Abha 94538
KSA
Text Five

A.Read the paragraph. How did the man lose his sight?
A Person Who Has Lost His Sense
My neighbor is a kind man called Awad. He was a soldier in the army. He was
active, strong and patriot. He fought in the Gulf war and lost his sight. At the beginning, he
202
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
suffered a lot. But, he persisted and tried to cope with that problem. He drinks a lot of
tea.Now, he lives happily; he can manage his own affairs independently. He can go to the
mosque and come back independently. In addition, he goes to the grocery to buy some goods
for his family. Moreover, he visits his neighbors and spends his time happily.
will be about?
feel finished?

……………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

…….a. This helps me to keep the knowledge fresh in my mind.
…….b. I also read widely - newspapers, short stories, books, etc.
…….c. I also read widely - newspapers, short stories, books, etc.
…….d. Although I face some difficulties when I use English for communication purposes, I
try some ways to improve my English.
…….e. I play word games and puzzles.
…….f. I revise my revisions or worksheets regularly.
203
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
…….g. I usually take down notes during lessons and check the dictionary for unfamiliar
words.
…….h. Moreover, I watch English channels. I study with a friend who is good in the
English language.
…….i. Thus, I have achieved some improvement in my English.
…….j. In addition, I try to speak proper English.
Text six
Photocopying machine
Photocopying machine is an important invention. It is a big box-shaped white
metal machine. It is used for copying paper, books issue and newspaper .I can use it by doing
the following. First, press the switch on. Then –put the paper on the glass copy board face
down. Next, lower the cover. After that, press the keys to enter the number of the copies.
Finally push the start button. Photocopying machine Saves time – makes books available to
everyone
Text Seven
My best Friend
A best friend is the first person who comes in when, out of the door, the whole world has
gone. A best friend is one who loves the truth and me, and will tell the truth. I am very lucky
that I have a best friend with whom I can share my feelings and divide grief with. His name is
Saiaf.
First, Saiaf has all those friendly habits which I seek in a friend such as friendly behavior and
respectfulness. He is very respectful and friendly person. For example, to be more respectful
person, if I come to his house, he welcomes me to come in and asks to have a seat and then
he asks me to have something to drink very nicely. He is also very helpful person. For
instance, he helps his parents in their work such as mowing the lawn and cleaning the house.
He also helps his mother preparing the meals and helps her in washing the dishes.
Also, J Saiaf is a hardworking and a very punctual person. He likes doing his work on
time. He always attends his classes and prepare for his tests and quizzes. On the other hand,
he works a part time job, so he could make his pocket money. But also sometimes he works
overtime on the weekend to make more money for his future studies for college.
In conclusion, Saiaf is very friendly and well organized person. He loves the people who
speak truth and to be successful in life he is working very hard. And I am very happy to have
him as my best friend!
Text Eight
David Copperfield
David was born in the "Rookery," in Blunderstone, Suffolk, England. Already
agitated by the impending birth of this new baby, and by the death of David's father six
204
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
months before, Mrs. Copperfield is further troubled by the abrupt appearance and manner of
Miss Trotwood. She becomes ill with labor pains, and Ham, the nephew of the servant,
Peggotty, is sent to get the doctor, Mr. Chillip. The mild-mannered Chillip is astonished, as is
everyone else, by the brusqueness of Miss Trotwood. Later, when he tells her the baby is a
boy, she silently but swiftly puts on her bonnet, walks out of the house, and vanishes "like a
discontented fairy."
David recalls his home and its vast and mysterious passageways, the churchyard
where his father is buried, Sundays in church, and his early life with his youthful, pretty
mother and the kindly, capable Peggotty. One night, after David learned to read, he is reading
a story to Peggotty, and he asks, "if you marry a person, and the person dies, why then you
may marry another person, mayn t you?" Almost immediately afterward, his mother enters
the house with a bearded man whom David resents at once. After the stranger's departure,
David hears an argument between his mother and Peggotty about the man. Peggotty insists
that the man, Mr. Murdstone, is not an acceptable suitor. About two months later, Peggotty
invites David to spend a fortnight with her at her brother's place at Yarmouth. David is eager
to go, but he asks what his mother will say. "She can't live by herself, you know," he insists.
Young as he is, he does not realize that he is being sent away deliberately. His mother has a
tearful farewell with him. As David and Peggotty drive off in a cart, David looks back. He
sees Mr. Murdstone come up to his mother and apparently scold her for being so emotional
Text Nine
Telephone Message Form

Many people who work in offices must answer the telephone for other people. This form
shows what kind of information you must write in the message.
205
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Text Ten
Misuse of the Phone

Cell phones are considered one of the greatest and most useful inventions of mankind.
Earlier, people had to depend on mails, computers etc to communicate with different parts of
the world but these were not always available. Cell phones help people to stay in touch with
other people in different corners of the world in a jiffy. For those who are looking for snazzy
gadgets to flaunt, cell phones are exactly what they need. Even the tech-savvy consumer is
not disappointed-cell phones these days come equipped with the coolest new features and
functionalities like web clients, various gaming platforms for mobile gaming, audio and video
recorders, MMS or multimedia messaging services, email clients, document readers, PDA or
personal digital assistant services, facilities for streaming and watching videos, video
callings, music players etc. The prices are just right and these features are just what you need
in your phone.
However, there is another darker and graver side to the story too. Widespread use of cell
phones has made way for its rampant misuse too especially by the youth, anti-socials,
terrorists and other criminals. Camera phones, those that come with MMS facilities enabled
are used to take unauthorized explicit photos, shoot pornographic videos etc and spread them.
Moreover since SIM cards can be easily available and there is no proper facility for full-proof
checking of one's records, these phones are being misused by terrorists for various activities.
The young generation is so engrossed in sending SMSes, talking over the phone and
spending most of their times in the virtual world that in the real world, they are gradually
becoming socially ill-equipped and repressive. This leads to communication problems and
also causes disturbances as one is always busy texting and receiving texts.
Mobile phones are both a boon and a bane. It is up to us to use it responsibly and make it a
boon for the rest of our lives and beyond.
206
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Eight
(The Writing Test and The Rating Rubric)
Writing Test for Third-Year Intermediate Pupils
(45 Minutes)
Answer the following questions:
I-Use the friendly letter below to answer questions 1,2,3,4 and 5:
(1)………………..
I…….. to Mekah on Thursday. (2) It's really beautiful. People
here are kind and generous. I performed Alomrah and prayed in
Alharam. i enjoyed looking at alKaaba (3)It was interesting to see some
people wearing Thobes…….…………………………………………..
(4).
………………(5)
Ahmed
1-Choose the correct answer for the blank (1) in the letter above.
(a)Dear friend Osama.
(b) Dear Osama,
(c) Hello Osama!
(d) Hi Osama,
2- Which word can fill the blank (2)?

(a) enjoyed
(b) saw
(c)reached
(d) arrived
207
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
3- Which sentence has the correct punctuation?

(a) i enjoyed looking at AlKaaba
(b) i enjoyed looking at alKaaba.
(c) I enjoyed looking at AlKaaba.
(d) I enjoyed looking at AlKaaba,
4- Which of the following is a good concluding sentence?

(a) I'll tell you about the sizes of the Thobes.
(b) I need a Thobe like the ones people were wearing.
(c) I should buy a Thobe like the ones people were wearing.
(d) I'll bring one for you when come back home.
5- Choose the correct closing (2) for this friendly letter.
(a) Best regards.
(b) Best regards:
(c) Best regards,
(d) Best regards!
6-Choose the word that best completes the sentence.

Saud was _________to his teacher.
(a) listen
(b) listens
(c) listening
(d) listened
7- Which of the following is a complete sentence?

(a) She walked home.
(b) Once upon a time!
(c) The long hot day,
(d) At the baseball game?
208
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
8-Fahd wrote a report about his bean seed experiment. Choose from (a),(b), (c) or (d) to
help him fill in the missing sentence in his report.
First, I soaked some bean seeds in water. Then, I filled a paper cup with soil. Next, I
planted the bean seeds in the soil………………………………….. .. Finally, I watched
them grow!
(a) I irrigated the bean seeds.
(b) I asked my brother to see the seeds.
(c) I wanted to buy some bean seeds.
(d) I sold the seeds to a farmer.
9-What information is NOT NEEDED in an invitation to a birthday party?

(a) where the party is
(b) when the party is
(c) who is giving the party
(d) who else is invited
10-In the sentence below, circle the letter below the word that needs a capital letter.
she likes to read books about space.
(a) (b) (c) (d)
II. Write about your most memorable holiday by answering

The following questions.
1 Where did you go?
2 Where did you stay?
3 Who did you go with?
4 What were the best moments?
5 What were the worst moments?
6 Why is it memorable?
Name:……………………………………………..Topic:……………………………
Date……………………………………………….Rater:………………………………
209
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Content Organization Vocabulary Grammar Mechanics

Writing -Knowledge of -logical sequence of -Word choice -Constructions -Paragraphing
Dimensio the subject ideas. and use -Subject-verb -Punctuation Score
ns -Main idea/theme -Effective -spelling agreement -Capitalization
-Supporting organization of -Precision -Word
details theintroduction, order/function,
structure (body) and tense, articles,
conclusion. pronouns,
Criteria using effective prepositions
cohesive devices.
Excellent -Exceptionally -Opening sentence is -Words are - Exceptionally - Exceptionally
knowledgeable, correctly placed and precisely and complete and strong control
substantive, reflects precisely the carefully correct sentence of conventions. 6
thorough topic. chosen. constructions. - No errors of
development of -Ideas are well- -Wide range of -No errors of spelling,
the writing topic. organized in a way vocabulary. agreement, punctuation,
- Main/Topic idea that help readers -Correct word tense, word capitalization,
sentence is clear, follow with quite clear form. order/functions, paragraphing.
correctly placed. transitions. articles, - Exceptionally
- Supporting -Logical sequencing pronouns, legible
details relate back and cohesion are prepositions. handwriting
to the main idea. quite clear
-supporting detail -The concluding
are thoroughly sentence summarizes
elaborated precisely what was
written.
Very - knowledgeable, Opening sentence is -Few errors in Complete and - Strong control
Good substantive, correctly placed and word choice correct sentence of conventions. 5
thorough reflects the topic. and usage. constructions. - Few errors of
development of the -Ideas are well- -Mostly wide -Few errors of spelling,
writing topic. organized in a way that range of agreement, punctuation,
- Main/Topic idea help readers follow with vocabulary. tense, word capitalization,
sentence is mostly clear transitions. --Few errors in order/functions, paragraphing.
clear ,correctly -Logical sequencing word form. articles, - Legible
placed. and cohesion are clear
pronouns, handwriting
- Supporting details -The concluding
prepositions.
mostly relate back sentence summarizes
to the main idea. effectively what was
-Supporting detail written.
are mostly
elaborated
Good -Good knowledge Opening sentence is - Occasional -Occasional -Adequate
of subject. adequately placed and errors of errors in control of 4
- Main/Topic idea reflects the topic. word/idiom sentence conventions.
sentence is -Ideas are organized in choice ,usage , constructions. - Occasional
adequately clear a way that help readers form but - Occasional errors of
,correctly placed. follow with somewhat meaning is not errors of spelling,punctua
- Supporting clear transitions. obscured. negation, tion,capitalizatio
details adequately -Logical sequencing -Good or agreement, tense, n, paragraphing
word
relate back to the and cohesion are adequate range but meaning is
order/functions,
main idea. somewhat clear of vocabulary. not obscured.
articles,
-Supporting detail -The concluding pronouns,
- Adequate
are adequately sentence summarizes prepositions but Legibility.
elaborated. adequately what was meaning is not
written.. obscured.
210
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Fair - Fair knowledge Opening sentence is -Words are -Frequent errors -Fair control of
of subject. afairly placed and fairly correct in sentence conventions. 3
- Main/Topic idea reflects the topic. but mundane. constructions. - Frequent
sentence is fairly -Ideas are organized in -Fair range of - Frequent errors of
clear ,correctly a way that help readers vocabulary. errors of spelling,
placed. follow with somewhat - Common negation, punctuation,
- Supporting clear transitions. words are agreement, capitalization,
details fairly -The sequence is fairly chosen. tense, word paragraphing
relate back to the difficult to follow. order/functions, but meaning is
main idea. -The concluding articles, not obscured.
-Supporting detail sentence summarizes pronouns, - Adequate
are fairly fairly what was prepositions but Legibility.
elaborated. written.. meaning is not
obscured
Poor -limited Opening sentence is - Frequent - Limited control -Limited control
knowledge of poorly placed and does errors of of constructions. of conventions.
subject. not reflect the topic. word/idiom - Limited control -Numerous 2
- Main/Topic idea -Ideas are presented choice, usage , of negation, errors of
sentence is without regard for form and agreement, tense, spelling,
somewhat order . meaning is word punctuation,
confusing and -The sequence rambles obscured or order/functions, capitalization,
incorrectly placed. and is confusing . confused. articles, paragraphing.
pronouns,
- Supporting -The concluding -Limited range Meaning is
prepositions but
details relate sentence d what was of vocabulary. confused or
meaning is not
poorly back to the written.. obscured.
obscured.
main idea. Meaning is - Limited
-Supporting detail confused or Legibility.
are poorly obscured.
elaborated
Very - No knowledge of -There is no opening -Little -No Control of -No mastery of
Poor subject. sentence. knowledge of sentence conventions. 1
- Main/Topic idea There is no word/idiom construction. -No control of
sentence is organization of ideas choice, usage -No Control errors of
confusing and There is no concluding and form. errors of spelling,
wrongly placed. sentence.. - no range of negation, punctuation,
- Supporting -Or not enough to vocabulary agreement, capitalization,
details do not evaluate. -Or not enough tense, word paragraphing.
relate back to the to evaluate. order/functions, - Illegible
main idea. articles, handwriting.
-Supporting detail pronouns, -Or not enough
are not elaborated prepositions . to evaluate.
-Or not enough to -Or not enough
evaluate. to evaluate.
Total
211
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Nine
Questions Teachers Ask during Teacher-Student Writing Conferences
Writing Stages Teacher Questions

The Pre-Writing Stage -What are you going to write about?
-What do you know about the topic?
-What prewriting strategies are you adopting?
-What ideas are you gathering for writing?
-How will you organize your ideas and writing?
-How will you start writing your first draft?
-What form will your writing take?
-Who will be your readers?
-What writing problems do you think you might encounter?
-What do you plan to do next
The Writing Stage -Did you get anxious when you started writing?
-How is your writing going?
-Are you using correct sentence structures?
-Are you choosing correct and precise words?
-Are you controlling the content of your writing?
-Are you facing any problems?
-How will you overcome such problems?
-What do you plan to do next?
The Post-Writing Stage Revising
How will you revise your writing?
What is the best or strongest part in your writing?
What part does not make sense?
What is the main idea of the writing?
Is opening sentence suitable? If not, why?
Is concluding sentence suitable? If not, why
Is there a part that needs to be adapted or deleted?
Is there a sentence that should be combined with another sentence?
Is there a word to need to be changed?
What questions do you have for your peers?
What information will you ask your peers for?
What compliments did your writing group give you?
What are the suggestions given to you by your peers?
What do you plan to do next?
Editing
Are there any spelling mistakes?
If yes, what are they?
Are there any punctuation mistakes? ( Periods - Question marks -
Capital letters at beginning of sentence -Capital letters for names ).
Are there any grammatical mistakes? (- Sentence structure - The use
of verb (tense/form-- Subject-verb agreement - The use of article-
The use of modal verb - The use of preposition).
How can I help you identify (or correct) those errors?
212
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
What do you plan to do next?

Are you ready to make your final copy?
Who will you share your writing with?
What did your peer say about your writing?
What do you like best about your writing?
If you were writing the composition again, what changes would you
make?
213
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Ten
Error Code and Symbols
Codes/Symbols English Meaning Arabic Meaning
cap/no cap Capital/no capital letter ‫ ال‬/‫حرف كبير‬
ًًًًًًًًًًًWSs Sentence structure error ‫خطأ في تركيب الجملة‬
WO Error in word order ‫خطأ في ترتيب المفردات‬
VF Error in verb form ‫خطأ في تكوين الفعل‬
VT Error in verb tense ‫خطأ في زمن الفعل‬
Art Article error ‫خطأ في األداة‬
S-V agr Subject-verb agreement ‫خطأ في تناسق الفعل مع الفاعل‬
W Pro Wrong Pronoun ‫ضمير خاطأ‬

Aux Auxiliary error ‫فعل مساعد خاطأ‬
WF Error in word form ‫خطأ في تكوين الكلمة‬
Sp Spelling error ‫خطأ في الهجاء‬
Prep Preposition error ‫خطأ في حرف الجر‬

WP Error in punctuation ‫خطأ في عالمات الترقيم‬
214
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Eleven
The Jury Members of the Writing Test and the Teacher's Book
1-Prof. Dr. Eman M. Abdelhak
Professor of TEFL , Banha Facuty of Education.
2- Dr. Humod A. El-Said
Assisstant Professor of TEFL, Bisha Teachers'College
3-Dr. Abdelfattah M. Adel.
Assisstant Professor of TEFL, Bisha Teachers'College
4-Mr. Mohammad F. Aldossary.
EFL teacher, Bisha Intermediate School
5- Mr. Abdul-Rahman A. Aad
EFL teacher, Prince Sultan Intermediate School
6- Mr. Saad M. Musaed
EFL teacher, Al-Hazmy Intermediate School
215
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Twelve
The Teacher's Book
Adapted by
Hussein El-Ghamry Mohammad
2012
Introduction
This EFL course was adapted to enable third-year intermediate pupils' to use a strategy-based
writing model which includes six types of strategies (cognitive, metacognitive, social,
affective, compensational and multiple strategies) during the three stages of writing (Pre-
Writing, Writing and Post-Writing).
Goals
The course aims at:
-Developing the learners' writing skills in five categories (content, organization, vocabulary,
grammar and mechanics).
-Developing the learners' ability to use six types of strategies during the three stages of
writing (Pre-Writing, Writing and Post-Writing)..
Content
The course-book includes twelve units with a review unit after every three units. Each
unit is made up of four lessons. Lesson four is a revision of the unit itself. The topics of the
twelve units are: Learning Tools, Making Plans, Going to Places, Revision, Save Our Planets,
The Senses, Friendship, Revision, Inventions, Cultures, Stories, Healthy Eating, On the
Phone and People Said.
Evaluation
A Writing test was designed to be used as a pre-and post-test. It is to be administered at the
beginning and end of the academic year. It includes five dimensions (content, organization,
vocabulary, grammar and mechanics).
The Strategy-Based Writing Model
216
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
For the purpose of this study the strategy-based writing model includes three main
stages which are based on the integrated approach. These are prewriting, writing and post-
writing (revising, editing).
5.a. The Prewriting Stage

It is generally defined by idea generation, shaping, refining and organization. During
this start-up stage, the teacher creates a writing task which students may meet in real life. The
aim is to draw students' attention, activate their prior knowledge about the target topic and
prepare them for the writing task
Aims:
This stage aims at enabling students to:
1. activate their prior knowledge about the writing topic.
2. generate and organize ideas.
3. consider their assignment, audience, purpose, and tone.
4. engage them with the writing task.
5. plan and set goals.
6. use visual and sensory images such as graphic organizers and webs to organize main
ideas and supporting or related ideas.
7. help the EFL teacher to determine students' background knowledge about the target
topic.
8. collect information from reading, taking notes ..etc.
9. enhance their motivation to write the topic.
10. alleviate their pre-writing anxiety/apprehension.
The writer's knowledge base or existing knowledge of the writing topic plays an
important role in the writing process. . However, students do not activate their prior
knowledge spontaneously while writing, even if they do possess prior knowledge about the
topic. It is important to activate students' prior knowledge about the writing topic so as to
enhance their ability to generate and organize appropriate ideas about the topic. Students
need to generate and organize before they actually start writing. The teacher can create
visual/aural contexts to students' prior knowledge about the writing topic. Once students are
engaged, their brains start generating ideas about the target writing topic. Then, ideas are
organized and the active process of writing becomes ready to begin. This ensures better
student engagement from the beginning of the writing class. Through discussions, the
teacher can identify the existing writing abilities of the students. The activation of prior
knowledge strategy was done as part of warming-up activities. The reason for this is to
enable each student to relate to prior knowledge in their own way and to save time in the
overall introduction of the writing topic. This helps the teacher to provide the proper
217
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
scaffolding which students need to accomplish the writing task. In addition, discussions
about the target writing topic enhance students' awareness of the knowledge they already
have about the topic of the text.
Procedures:
1. Teacher activates students' prior knowledge through warming-up activities using
visual aural contexts.
2. Students respond to the teacher's questions and discussions included in the
warming-up activities.
3. Teacher declares the objectives by eliciting students' predictions about the
writing topic.
4. Teacher discusses the importance of the topic with the students.
5. Teacher presents the paragraph format/ features.
6. Teacher models important strategies.
7. Teacher tells students that the anxiety some students may feel before they start
writing English compositions is temporary.
8. Teacher tells students that persistence is important for successful EFL writing.
Activities:
- Background knowledge discussions.
- Picture talk.
- Brainstorming
- Listing
- Clustering
- Free-writing
- Elaboration
- Resourcing
- Grouping
-Planning
- Model text analysis.
- Graphic organizers.
-Using Webs.
- Think-aloud activities.
218
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
5.b. The Writing Stage:

The aim of this stage is to enhance students' ability use the ideas they generated at the
prewriting stage to write their compositions by adopting appropriate writing strategies
(cognitive, meta-cognitive ,social , compensational, affective and multi strategies).
Aims:
This stage aims at enabling students to:
1- use the ideas generated at the pre-writing stage to write their first draft.
2- use effective cognitive, meta-cognitive ,social , compensational, memory and
affective strategies as they write.
3- elaborate upon ideas; explain them more fully.
4- self-monitor and self-regulate their writing performance.
5- Use available resources like dictionaries, illustrations.. etc.
6- persist as they write even though they encounter writing difficulties.
At this stage, students practice writing with a clear aim in mind. They use the ideas they
generated and organized in graphic organizers or webs to write their first draft. While writing,
students need to select suitable vocabulary, idioms and structures. Teacher scaffolding is
important at this stage to help students use various writing strategies which ensure better
writing performance. In addition, students may discuss and share their drafts or even ask their
peers help. These discussions students overcome the difficulties they encounter as they write
and perform their writing task. Furthermore, the accompanying activities and exercises were
designed in a way which allows students to use multiple resources.
The role of the teacher is to facilitate students' writing about the target topic of the text
through modeling, scaffolding, discussions and constructive feedback. The teacher gives
models demonstrating how to adopt effective writing strategies while writing. Then, he
scaffolds students as they try to use these strategies to construct their compositions.
Furthermore, the teacher encourages constructive discussions which are based on mutual
respect and negotiation of multiple points of views about the topic.
Procedures
1- Teacher asks students to use the ideas they generated and organized in graphic
organizers or webs to write their first draft.
2-Teacher advices students not give up writing despite writing difficulties or lack of
motivation.
3-Teacher tells students that their errors are accepted as a part of the learning process and
that they are means for improving their writing performance.
4-Teacher tells students that they should focus on more global aspects of writing
(topic, organization, and evidence) while ignoring surface problems (spelling,
punctuation, and wordiness) Students write their first draft.
219
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
5-Teacher monitors and provides scaffolding.
Activities
- Think-Aloud Activities
- Resourcing activities.
- Sentence combining.
- Using mnemonics.
- Resourcing
- Collaborative writing.
- Self-monitoring and self-regulation activities.
- Sharing writing with a partner.
- Enrichment activities.
-Reflection
5.c. The Post-Writing Stage:

At this stage, students should decide how to improve their writing by
looking at their compositions from a different point of view.
Aims:
This stage aims at:
1- improving students' writing through discussions and feedback.
2- evaluating their drafts using the self-evaluation checklist.
3- giving constructive feedback to students about their compositions.
4- applying feedback information by adding, substituting, rearranging or
deleting parts of students' compositions.
2- reflecting on students' writing performance.
3- reflecting on the writing activity.
At this stage, the teacher attempts to consolidate students' learning providing
ample opportunities for students to receive and provide constructive feedback on their
compositions. The teacher also encourages self and peer correction to enhance student-
student interaction. Students can self-correct their writing using an evaluation checklist
( Appendix Two ).Students are allowed to provide multiple perspectives as they give
220
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
feedback. In addition, they are encouraged to add, substitute, rearrange or delete parts
of their compositions, based on the given feedback.
Moreover, students reflect on their use of the suggested strategies by the end of
this stage using the strategy-use reflection checklist (Appendix Four). Reflection
activities ensure better improvement in the performance of both students and the
teacher.
Procedures
1-Students revise the drafts individually and/or in pairs/groups.
2- Students read their drafts to their peers or to the whole class.
3-Teacher guides peer feedback about the given drafts.
4- Students play the role of the teacher in commenting and providing feedback.
5- Teacher provides feedback to students.
6- Students add, substitute, rearrange or delete parts of their
compositions, based on the given feedback.
7-Teacher allocates some time for free questions.
8-Teacher ends the class with lesson closure.
9-Students reflect on their writing performance using the strategy use checklist.
10-Teacher assigns homework.
Activities:
- Revision exercises.
- Self and peer evaluation
- Self and peer correction.
- Discussion activities.
- Feedback sessions.
- Edition activities.
- Think-pair-share activities
- Follow-up activities.
- Summarizing activities.
- Correction activities.
- Drawing conclusions.
221
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
- Reflection activities.
To help the participants follow the suggested procedure of the strategy-based writing model,
a three-step writing sheet was designed (Appendix Five).
222
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Thirteen
Teacher Observation Checklist in Writing Classes
Class:…………………………………………..Date: …………………………………
Observer:……………………………………Teacher:…………………………………
Items for Observation

I-The Pre-writing Stage
1-T activates students' prior knowledge about the writing topic.
2- T helps students (ss.) to develop a sense of audience.
3-T provides contextualized tasks.
4-T encourages Ss to work in pairs and / or groups
5- T provide Ss with strategies for generating ideas through, organizing
them and planning.
6-T teaches Ss how to apply these strategies
7-T provides ample opportunities for Ss to apply proper strategies for
generating ideas.
8- T encourages Ss to use visual and sensory images such as graphic
organizers and webs to organize main ideas and supporting or related
ideas
9- T enables Ss to collect information from reading, taking notes ..etc
10-T helps Ss analyze a model text related to the writing topic.
11-T helps Ss alleviate their pre-writing anxiety/apprehension.
II-The Writing Stage
12- T lead ss. into building awareness of discourse organization
13- T models "crafting skills"
14- T models how the parts of a text are linked through cohesive devices
15-T illustrates how sentence structure can vary to develop meaning.
16- T helps Ss use correct punctuation, word form, structures ….etc.
17- T encourages collaborative tasks
18- T promotes drafting
III-The Post Writing Skills
19- Ss. Are encouraged to use revision strategies
20- When assessing Ss' work, T marks areas for improvement
21-T encourages self and peer correction.
22-T locates errors and gives them symbols to denote types of errors
(using a coding system)
23-T indicates in the margin that there is an error of a particular kind
somewhere on that line and asks Ss. to locate it and correct it
24- T shares with Ss. the grading criteria that are to be used to assess
their written work.
25- T provides constructive feedback.
223
Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015
Appendix Fourteen
The Schedule of the Researcher's Visits to the EFL Teacher during the Experiment
N Type of Visit Date
o
.
1 In-class Saturday 17/9/2011
2 In-class Sunday 25/9/2011
4 Out-of- Saturday 22/10/2011

class
5 Out-of-class Saturday 19/11/2011

class

class

0
224

The Effect of A Proposed Strategy Based Writing Model On EFL Learners Writing Skills

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Effect of A Proposed Strategy Based Writing Model On EFL Learners Writing Skills

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Effect of A Proposed Strategy Based Writing Model On EFL Learners Writing Skills

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of English Language Teaching

Vol.3, No.4, pp.98-224, June 2015

THE EFFECT OF A PROPOSED STRATEGY-BASED WRITING MODEL ON EFL

Context of the Problem

Statement of the Problem:

Purpose of the Study:

Significance of the Study

3-to determine, through experimentation, whether this strategy-base writing model

Limitations of the Study:

Strategy-Based Writing Model (SBWM)

EFL (English as a Foreign Language)

ESL (English as a Second Language)

Cognitive Writing Strategies

Meta-cognitive Writing Strategies:

Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD):

Part One: Learning Strategies

Definitions of Learning Strategies

Table (1): Oxford's Features of Language Learning Strategies

Language Learning Strategies and Language Teaching Methods/Approaches

Strategy Use and EFL/ESL Writing

Factors Affecting Learners' Use of Language Learning Strategies

Importance of Strategy Instruction

Separate versus Integrated Strategy Instruction

Direct versus Indirect or Embedded Strategy Instruction

The Direct (Explicit) Approach

The Embedded (Implicit) Approach

Stages of Strategy Instruction in the Proposed Model

Activating Background Knowledge

General Strategy Discussion

The Five Senses

Hearing Smelling Touching Tasting

Eyes Ears Nose Skin Tongue

Student Guided Strategy Use

Analysis and Evaluation of Strategy Use

Independent Strategy Use

Language of Strategy Instruction

Table (2): Oxford's Language Learning Strategy Classification.

strategies are included in this classification as shown in table (4).Meta-cognitive strategies

Table (4): Wenden's Classification of Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies in Writing

Meta-cognitive Cognitive Strategies

Table (5): Riazi's Classification of Composing Strategies.

Composing Strategies Constituents Phase of Composing Process

Table (6): Sasaki's Classification of Composing Strategies

Generating idea Generating an idea without any stimulus

-Using others' writing as models.

Implications for EFL Teachers

Part Two: Writing

The Nature of EFL Writing

Figure (1):Raimes' Factors Included in Producing a Piece of Writing

Sentence boundaries, originality, logic, etc.

Stylistic choices, ..etc. The Writer's Process

Grammar getting ideas, getting

Rules for verbs,

The reason for writing Organization Mechanics

support, cohesion and unity. Word choice

Major Approaches to Writing Instruction

The Product Approach

Stage One: Familiarization

Correlation 0.752 0.761 0.880 0.861 0.762 0.803