ENGLISH WRITING PROBLEMS IN EFL UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
English Writing Problems in EFL Undergraduate Students: A Diagnosis
Jennifer GALEANO-PALENCIA
Research Report submitted
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master in English Language Teaching for Self-Directed Learning
Directed by First Names SURNAME
Department of Foreign Languages and Cultures
Universidad de La Sabana
Chía, Colombia
February 2017
ENGLISH WRITING PROBLEMS IN EFL UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
Declaration
I hereby declare that my research report entitled:
[English Writing Problems in EFL Undergraduate Students: A Diagnosis]

is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in
collaboration except as declared and specified in the text;

is neither substantially the same as nor contains substantial portions of any similar work
submitted or that is being concurrently submitted for any degree or diploma or other
qualification at the Universidad de La Sabana or any other university or similar
institution except as declared and specified in the text;

complies with the word limits and other requirements stipulated by the Research
Subcommittee of the Department of Foreign Languages and Cultures;

has been submitted by or on the required submission date.
Date: __February 20, 2017_________________________________________________
Full Name:
___Jennifer Galeano Palencia ___________________________________
Signature:
____________________________________________________________
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
Acknowledgements
I want to give thanks to God, my family and friends for their valuable support.
i
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
ii
Abstract
This research proposal is intended to explore on the English writing problems that face
undergraduate students from the B. A. in Foreign Languages Teaching at Universidad del
Atlántico enrolled in the English 1 course. By administering a questionnaire and collecting
writing samples, students’ attitudes will be studied and written errors will be gathered and
analyzed to find the answer to the proposed research questions. Errors will be considered under
the framework proposed by Richards (1971) about interlingual and intralingual errors, depending
on the interference of the first language in the process. It is expected that the findings of this
study can help to understand the actual condition of participants and lead to pedagogical
strategies to improve student’s written production in English.
Key words: Writing problems; writing proficiency; error analysis; students’ attitudes.
Resumen
Esta propuesta de investigación pretende explorar los problemas de escritura en inglés
que enfrentan los estudiantes de la Licenciatura en Idiomas Extranjeros de la Universidad del
Atlántico de la asignatura Inglés I. Mediante la aplicación de un cuestionario y la recolección de
muestras de escritura, se estudiarán las actitudes de los estudiantes y los errores en la escritura
serán agrupados y analizados para encontrar la respuesta a las preguntas de investigación
propuestas. Los errores serán analizados bajo el marco propuesto por Richards (1971) sobre
errores interlinguales e intralinguales, dependiendo de la interferencia de la lengua materna en el
proceso. Se espera que los hallazgos de este estudio puedan contribuir a comprender la condición
actual de los participantes y apuntar a estrategias pedagógicas para mejorar la producción escrita
en inglés de los estudiantes.
Palabras claves: Problemas de escritura; suficiencia en la escritura; análisis del error;
actitudes de los estudiantes.
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
iii
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Introduction to the study ......................................................................................... 1
1.2
Rationale for the study ............................................................................................ 2
1.2.1 Rationale for the problem of the study........................................................ 2
1.2.2 Rationale for the strategy selected to address the problem of the study ..... 2
1.3
Research questions and objectives .......................................................................... 2
1.4
Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 2
Chapter 2: Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 3
2.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3
2.2
Theoretical framework ............................................................................................ 3
2.2.1 Writing skill ..............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.2.2 Students’ attitudes towards learning ........................................................... 4
2.2.3 Writing problems .......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3
State of the art ......................................................................................................... 5
2.3.1 Previous research on [strategy selected to address the problem] ................ 5
2.3.2 Previous research on [problem/competence to be improved] ..................... 5
2.3.3 Previous research on [use of selected strategy to address problem {if any}]
..................................................................................................................... 5
2.3.4 Justification of research question/objectives ............................................... 6
2.4
Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 6
Chapter 3: Research Design ............................................................................................................ 7
3.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 7
3.2
Type of study .......................................................................................................... 7
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
3.3
iv
Context .................................................................................................................... 7
3.3.1 Participants .................................................................................................. 7
3.3.2 Researcher’s role ......................................................................................... 7
3.3.3 Ethical considerations ................................................................................. 7
3.4
Data collection instruments..................................................................................... 7
3.4.1 Descriptions and justifications .................................................................... 8
3.4.2 Validation and piloting ................................................................................ 8
3.5
Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 8
Chapter 4: Pedagogical Intervention and Implementation.............................................................. 9
4.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 9
4.2
Visions of language, learning, and curriculum ....................................................... 9
4.2.1 Vision of language ...................................................................................... 9
4.2.2 Vision of learning ........................................................................................ 9
4.2.3 Vision of curriculum ................................................................................... 9
4.3
Instructional design ................................................................................................. 9
4.3.1 Lesson planning .......................................................................................... 9
4.3.2 Implementation ........................................................................................... 9
4.4
Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 9
Chapter 5: Results and Data Analysis ........................................................................................... 10
5.1
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 10
5.2
Data management procedures ............................................................................... 10
5.2.1 Validation .................................................................................................. 10
5.2.2 Data analysis methodology ....................................................................... 10
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
5.3
v
Categories ............................................................................................................. 10
5.3.1 Overall category mapping ......................................................................... 10
5.3.2 Discussion of categories ............................................................................ 10
5.3.3 Core category ............................................................................................ 11
5.4
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 11
Chapter 6: Conclusions and Pedagogical Implications ................................................................. 12
6.1
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 12
6.2
Comparison of results with previous studies’ results ........................................... 12
6.3
Significance of the results ..................................................................................... 12
6.4
Pedagogical challenges and recommendations ..................................................... 12
6.5
Research limitations on the present study ............................................................. 12
6.6
Further research .................................................................................................... 12
6.7
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 12
Table of Figures
Figure 1. . ...........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table of Tables
Table 1................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1
Introduction to the study
Teachers and researchers consider writing the most difficult skill to develop. Nunan
(1999) supports this assertion by stating that “the most difficult task to do in language learning is
to produce a coherent, fluent, extended piece of writing, which is even more challenging for
second language learners.” High metacognitive engagement and language proficiency are
necessary to perform well in writing tasks and assignments. However, as learning a language is a
complex process, learners’ present problems that can give valuable insights about their
perspective on the target language. As Hyland (2008) indicates, when students undertake writing
tasks, they face a series of problems and then look for solutions. Error analysis emerge as a
branch of Applied Linguistics to describe the sources of those errors and the factors that affect
students when performing language tasks.
This research proposal is intended to explore on the English writing problems that face
undergraduate students from the B. A. in Foreign Languages Teaching at Universidad del
Atlántico enrolled in the English 1 course. By administering a questionnaire and collecting
writing samples, students’ attitudes will be studied and written errors will be gathered and
analyzed to find the answer to the proposed research questions. Errors will be considered under
the framework proposed by Richards (1971) about interlingual and intralingual errors, depending
on the interference of the first language in the process.
It is expected that the findings of this study can help to understand the actual condition of
participants and lead to pedagogical strategies to improve student’s written production in
English.
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
1.2
Rationale for the study
1.2.1
1.2.1.1
Needs analysis and problem statement
1.2.1.2
Justification of problem’s significance
1.2.2
1.3
Rationale for the problem of the study
Rationale for the strategy selected to address the problem of the study
Research questions and objectives
This study will attempt to answer the following questions:
What are the writing problems that present 1st semester students from the BA in Foreign
Languages Teaching at Universidad del Atlántico enrolled in the English 1 course?
What categories of writing errors are the most frequent in 1st semester students from the
BA in Foreign Languages Teaching at Universidad del Atlántico enrolled in the English 1
course?
What are student’s perceptions and attitudes towards the writing process?
Missing objectives
1.4
Conclusion
2
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
3
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1
Introduction
2.2
Theoretical framework
2.2.1
Writing skill
Good writing for students at the undergraduate level is an essential. According to
Cumming, “it is through written texts that students demonstrate knowledge in tests, course
papers, assignments and formal projects such as theses” (Cumming, 2006, p. 10). However,
writing is not an activity limited to task accomplishment, but to learning itself, since it is a means
clarify students’ thoughts and hence, benefit their own learning (Langer & Applebee, 1987).
Along with speaking, writing it is a productive skill that requires a high cognitive demand
and a certain level of language knowledge and proficiency. Nunan (2003) describes writing as a
mental work in which the writer is required to invent, organize and express ideas into statements
and paragraphs, obtaining a product that should be clear to a reader. The sub-processes implied
in this concise definition have attributed writing the status of a complex and effortful skill. In
fact, among the sub-processes involved in writing we can briefly mention generating content,
structuring information, translating information into language, checking and revising the results
against rhetorical aims, language rules, spelling rules, etc. (Rijlaarsdam et al, 2005).
This contemporary vision of writing have been developed from Flower and Hayes (1981)
cognitive process theory that divides the writing process as a set of thinking sub-processes with a
hierarchical structure that are managed by the writer during the act of composing. On one hand,
this model differs from traditional models focused on the product, to highlight the mental
processes involved in writing. On the other hand, it is a deep deconstruction of the writing
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
4
process that was defined in terms of different stages such as pre-writing, free-writing, and
rewriting (Hughey et al., 1983).
2.2.2
Students’ attitudes towards learning
Students’ attitudes towards the learning process are an aspect of high relevance, since
“students’ beliefs affect their choices of strategies, which, in turn, affect learning outcomes”
(Lavelle & Zuercher, 2001). In fact, action research focused on the effect of principles like selfefficacy, self-regulation and goal setting in writing have highlighted the relationship of the
development of metacognition in good writing. This conclusion is in line with Grabe (2006)
assertion that writing is a strongly goal-directed activity and is metacognitively demanding (p.
xi), and Cumming (2006) explanation of goals as mechanisms of regulation that students use to
cope with the amount of effort required to coordinate thought processes involved in composition.
In a study about Iranian EFL students’ failure in writing, Jafari & Ansari (2012) identify
factors related that along to lack of target language proficiency and vocabulary, include factors
such as lack of motivation, L2 writing feedback, the interference of L1into L2 and psychological
variables such as anxiety.
2.2.3
Writing problems
Undergraduate problems in writing are evidenced by errors in texts. From James’ point of
view, “committing errors is an inevitable circumstance that occurs in human learning, including
language” (James, 1998, p. 1). Brown (2007) defines errors as recognizable alterations of the
language elements that differs from those of a native speaker. It is to be added that this alteration
is not conscious, as it occur recurrently without any notice by the writer (Gass & Selinker, 2008)
Returning to the subject of the complexity of good writing, there are series of elements
involved when assessing the correctness of a text. In 1971, Richards advanced towards a
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
5
taxonomy of language error by compiling them into three categories: interlingual, intralingual
and developmental errors. After theoretical discussion about the clarity on the nature of
developmental errors, the categories were decanted, remaining the first two categories.
Interlingual errors
Interlingual errors are caused by the interference of the native language (Richards, 1971).
Ellis (2008) claims that that interference can be at the level of phonology, morphology, grammar,
syntax, lexis and semantics. Among the good writing requirements, it expected not only
correctness but high development of ‘syntax and morphology, a wide range of vocabulary, and a
good command over conventional forms and over the means of signaling the relation of the
texts’ (Cumming, 200,m p. 3).
Intralingual errors
Intralingual errors bear not relation to the native language interference, but to ‘faulty
application of rules and unawareness of the restrictions of rules’ (Richards, 1971, p. 206). This
can be due to ineffective traits of learning such as overgeneralization, ignorance of rule
restriction, incomplete application of rules and false concepts hypothesized.
2.3
State of the art
2.3.1
Previous research on [strategy selected to address the problem]
2.3.2
Previous research on [problem/competence to be improved]
2.3.3
Previous research on [use of selected strategy to address problem {if any}]
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
2.3.4
2.4
Justification of research question/objectives
Conclusion
6
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
7
Chapter 3: Research Design
3.1
Introduction
3.2
Context
3.2.1
Type of study
This study follows a survey research method along with a complementary elicitation
procedure.
3.2.2
Participants
One hundred students from the first semester of the B.A. in Foreign Languages Teaching
enrolled in English 1 course at Universidad del Atlántico compose the population, and they have
received English instruction in elementary and secondary level. The sample was calculated with
an error margin of 10 % and a confidence level of 90 %, setting the sample size in 41 students.
To select the participants it was used a non-probabilistic convenience sampling taking into
account that they are legal adults with no other exclusion criteria.
3.3
3.2.3
Researcher’s role
3.2.4
Ethical considerations
Data collection instruments
This study will use a questionnaire and an L2 production task to gather the data and
characterize the situation. On one hand, questionnaires are intended to explore on the students’
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
attitudes and perceptions towards their abilities in the writing process. On the other hand,
participants will perform a written discourse completion task (Appendix 1) and writing samples
will be collected to conduct text analyses oriented to quantify and classify writing errors.
3.3.1
Descriptions and justifications
3.3.1.1
Questionnaire
3.3.1.2
Discourse completion task
3.3.2
Validation and piloting
Both instruments will be piloted with a sample from the students’ research community
(Semillero).
3.4
Conclusion
8
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
Chapter 4: Pedagogical Intervention and Implementation
4.1
Introduction
4.2
Visions of language, learning, and curriculum
4.3
4.4
4.2.1
Vision of language
4.2.2
Vision of learning
4.2.3
Vision of curriculum
Instructional design
4.3.1
Lesson planning
4.3.2
Implementation
Conclusion
9
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
10
Chapter 5: Results and Data Analysis
5.1
Introduction
5.2
Data management procedures
5.2.1
Validation
5.2.2
Data analysis methodology
The descriptive analysis of collected data in questionnaires and sociodemographic
characteristics will be analyzed through SPSS software to identify the most frequent patterns in
the answers. Texts will be revised individually for error detection and coding. Then errors will be
quantified and data will be grouped according to the corresponding category of error types
described in Appendix 2. Then the results of both analysis will be compared to allow the framing
of core categories to identify the recurrent problems from the analyzed data.
5.3
Categories
5.3.1
Overall category mapping
5.3.2
Discussion of categories
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
5.3.3
5.4
Core category
Conclusion
11
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
12
Chapter 6: Conclusions and Pedagogical Implications
6.1
Introduction
6.2
Comparison of results with previous studies’ results
6.3
Significance of the results
6.4
Pedagogical challenges and recommendations
6.5
Research limitations on the present study
6.6
Further research
6.7
Conclusion
Dear Jennifer,
You have preliminary ideas that can be fnely tuned-in. Your rationale needs to fully
support the existence and pertinence of your project for the educational community you
are working with.
These are the key things to focus on:
1. Use Mendeley in your document
2. Design instruments
3. Apply them
4. Analyze data
5. Write missing chapters
6. Create the state of the art
7. Strenghten existing sections
8. Revise entire document
9. Proofread it
10. Hand manuscript in.
So, proceed accordingly. Kind regards,
Dr. LC
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
13
References
Afrin, S. (2016). Writing problems of non-English major undergraduate students in Bangladesh:
An observation. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 4, 104-115.
Cumming, A. (2006). Goals for Academic Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing
Company. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com.ez.unisabana.edu.co
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flower, L. & Hayes, J. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College composition and
Comunication, 32(4), 365-387.
James, C. (1998). Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis. Essex:
Pearson.
Hyland, K. (2008). Writing theories and writing pedagogies. Indonesian Journal of English
Language Teaching, 4(2), 91-110
Hughey, J. B., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Jacobs, H. L. (1983). Teaching ESL
composition: Principles and techniques. Rowley: Newbury House.
Langer, J.A. & Applebee, A.N. (1987). How Writing Shapes Thinking: A Study of Teaching
and Learning. Champaign: National Council of Teachers of English
Lavelle, E. & Zuercher, N. (2001). The writing approaches of university students. Higher
Education, 42(3), 373-391.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching and Learning. USA: Heinle & Heinle.
Nunan, D. (2003) Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Rijlaarsdam, G., Van den Bergh, H. Couzijn, M. (2005). Effective learning and teaching of
writing. Boston: Springer Science.
Rattanadilok, P., Binti, N. (2015). Understanding EFL Students’ Errors in Writing. Jornal of
Education and Practice, 6(32), 99-106.
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
14
Richards, J. C. (1971). A non-contrastive approach to Error Analysis. English Language
Teaching Journal, 25, 204-219.
Younes, Z. B., & Albalawi, F. S. (2015). Exploring the most common types of writing
problems among English Language and Translation major sophomore female students at
Tabuk University. Asian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 7-26
Vasylets, O., & Gilabert, R. (in press). Second language writing as moderated by cognitive task
complexity. In 31st International Conference of AESLA (Communication, Cognition and
Cybernetics), April 18-20 2013, La Laguna, Spain.
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
15
Appendix A: Survey Questionnaire (Adapted from Afrin, 2016)
This questionnaire is designed to conduct a research on “English writing problems in EFL undergraduate
students”.
The major objective of this research is to explore writing problems of EFL undergraduate students at a
public university in Barranquilla. Please complete the following questions to reflect your opinion as accurately as
possible. The data collected through this survey will be kept strictly confidential and will be used for the academic
research only.
Thank you very much for your time and opinion.
Demographic Information
Name of the Participant: ...................................................................................................................
Name of the Institute and Department: ....................................................................................... ......
Semester/Trimester: ..........................................................................................................................
Age: ........................................................................................................................ ...........................
Questionnaire
Please put a tick mark on your answer.
1) Do you have sufficient command over the necessary sentence structures for writing in English? Y/N
2) Are you more concern about your grammar rather organization pattern of writing? Y/N
3) Can you easily write on any relevant topic easily? Y/N
4) Do you use prewriting techniques? Y/N
5) Do you practice at home for writing? Y/N
6) Do you feel confident in your ability to express your ideas in writing? Y/N
7) Do you feel motivated in your English classes? Y/N
8) Do you like the English languages courses for developing your writing skill? Y/N
9) Do you like the way in which you are taught English writing skill? Y/N
10) Do your teachers encourage you to practice writing in English in the classroom? Y/N
11) Do you think your English is now better than it was at the college? Y/N
.
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
A.1
Appendix sub-heading
A.1.1 Appendix sub-sub-heading
A.1.1.1
Appendix sub-sub-sub-heading
16
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
17
Appendix B: Discourse completion task (Adapted from Vasylets & Gilabert, in press)
Imagine that your friend Kira has an opportunity to go to study at a UK university.
The problem is that Kira´s parents, Alex and Dina, are not able to reach an agreement with her because she also was admitted to a
public university in her hometown, and they do not what them to leave the country.
Write a letter (200 words), addressed to Alex and Dina, giving your recommendations for them to let her go to the UK university,
which in your opinion, would be the best choice for her.
Good luck with the task!
ALL CAPS SHORT TITLE 50 CHARACTERS OR LESS
Appendix C: Errors in writing (Taken from Rattanadilok & Binti, 2015).
18