Using word processor as a tool to enhance the teaching of writing in a Turkish EFL context: An action research / Türk EFL bağlamında yazma öğretimini iyileştirme aracı olarak kelime işlemci kullanımı: Bir eylem araştırması

Abstract

The present study attempted to explore the effects of using word processor as opposed to the traditional paper and pencil on the development of Turkish EFL learners’ performance in essay writing. Being an action research in nature, the main task in this study was to identify the progressive changes on writing brought about by the introduction of word processing. The sample of the study consisted of two groups: the experimental group which engaged in writing via word processor, and the control group which studied the same skill through the handwritten method. Several computer-based activities included checking errors, checking grammar and using word count to facilitate student writing in the experimental group. It was found that the participants in the experimental group outperformed those in the control group, suggesting that the implementation of word processor in writing helped improve students’ performance in writing in comparison with that of the handwritten method.  Moreover, the results derived from the questionnaire indicated that word processing served as a tool for assisting learners in developing positive attitudes towards writing. The pedagogical implications for the study suggest that tailoring the writing instruction with computer to students’ writing needs will lead to better learning outcomes in writing.

Keywords

• Writing, action research, word processors. process writing

(TÜRK EFL BAĞLAMINDA YAZMA ÖĞRETİMİNİ İYİLEŞTİRME ARACI OLARAK KELİME İŞLEMCİ KULLANIMI: BİR EYLEM ARAŞTIRMASI)

Abstract

Bu çalışma İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen Türk öğrencilerin kompozisyon yazma konusundaki performanslarını değerlendirmede geleneksel kağıt kaleme karşın kelime işlemci kullanımının etkilerini araştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bir eylem araştırması olarak, çalışmanın ana amacı kelime işlemci programlarının beraberinde getirdiği değişiklikleri tanımlamaktır. Çalışmanın örneklemi iki gruptan oluşmaktadır. Deney grubu çalışmalarını kelime işlemci ile kontrol grubu ise çalışmalarını el yazısı metodu ile yapmıştır. Hata kontrolü, dilbilgisi kontrolü, kelime sayısı belirleme gibi bilgisayar temelli aktiviteler deney grubundaki öğrencilerinin yazılarını desteklemiştir. Deney grubundaki öğrencilerin kontrol grubundakilerden daha başarılı oldukları ve kelime işlemci kullanımının elle yazmaya göre öğrencilerin performansını arttırmaya yardımcı olduğu bulunmuştur. Ayrıca anketten alınan sonuçlar öğrencilerinin kelime işlemci kullanımına karşı olumlu bir tutuma sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Çalışmanın pedagojik etkileri olarak, öğrencilerin ihtiyaçları doğrultusunda yazma öğretiminde düzenlemeler yapmanın daha iyi sonuçlar elde edileceğini göstermektedir

Keywords

• Yazma, eylem araştırması, kelime işlemci, yazma süreci

References

1. Akyel, A., & Kamisli, S. (1999). Word processing in the EFL classroom: effects on writing strategies, attitudes, and products. In M. C. Pennington (ed.), Writing in an electronic medium: research with language learners (pp. 27-60). Houston, TX: Athelstan.
2. AbuSeilek, A.F., (2006) The use of word processor for teaching writing to EFL learners in King Saud University. Journal of eductional Sciences and ıslamicstudies, 19, 1-15.
3. Brierley, B., & Kemble, I. (1991). Computers as a tool in language teaching. New York: Ellis Horwood.
4. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical. education, knowledge and action research. Lewes: Falmer.
5. Cononelos, T., & Oliva, M. (1993). Using computer network to enhance foreign language/culture education. Foreign Language Annals, 26, 234-252.
6. Cohen, M., & Riel, M. (1989). The effect of distance audiences on students. American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 143-159.
7. Cunningham, K. (2000). Integrating CALL into the Writing Curriculum. The Internet TESL Journal (http://iteslj.org/Articles/Cunningham-CALLWriting), 6 (5).
8. George, N., Bourret, R., & Nelson, R. (1992). Computer-aided writing: An emerging field. T.H.E. Journal (Technological Horizons in Education), 20(1), 73-80.

9. Gu, P. (2002). Effects of project-based CALL on Chinese EFL learners. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 12, 195-210.
10. Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Hulstijn, J. (2000). The use of computer technology in experimental studies of second language acquisition: A survey of some techniques and ongoing studies. Language Learning & Technology, 3(2), 32-43.
12. Jacobs, H. L., Zinkgraf, S.A., Wormouth, D.R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. Rowely, MA: Newbury House.
13. Maybin , J. (1999). Teaching writing process or genre. In Bridley, S. (1999). (ed) Teaching English. New York: Open University press.
14. Neu, J., & Scarcella, R. (1991). Word Processing in the EFL Writing Classroom. In P. Dunkel (Ed.), Computer-assisted Language Learning and Testing: Research Issues and Practices. New York: Newbury House.
15. Nunan, D., & Bailey, K.M. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research. Boston: Heinle.
16. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston Massachusetts: Heinle&Heinle.
17. Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge, CUP.
18. Pennington, M. (1993). Exploring the potential of word processing for non-native writers. Journal of Computers and the Humanities, 27 (3), 149-163.
19. Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. Oxford: Oxford University press.
20. Owston, R.D., Murphy, S., & Wideman, H.H. (1992). The effects of word processing on students' writing quality and revision strategies. Research in the Teaching of English, 26(3), 249-276.
21. Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 148-156.
22. Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge University Press
23. White, R., & Arndt, V. (1991). Process writing. Longman
24. Williamson, M. M., & Pence, P. (1989). Word processing and student writers. In B. K. Britton & S. M. Glynn (Eds.) (1989). Computer writing environments: Theory, research, and design. (pp.93-127). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 165-87.