Individual and Collaborative Computerized Mind Mapping as a Pre-Writing Strategy: Effects on EFL Students’ Writing

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 16, 428 - 452, 20.10.2020

Sena Sebit , Senem Yıldız

https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.710461

Cited By: 1

Öz

This study examined the effects of computerized concept mapping on EFL students’ essays in terms of content, organization, language use, vocabulary, and mechanics. The theoretical framework was based on writing-as-process approach. Explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used to collect data. Quasi-experimental research data was collected from 45 students who were assigned to two treatment groups as individual and collaborative computerized concept mapping and control group. All participants completed a survey before and after the treatment. The experimental groups were trained on the use the mapping tool. The essays were scored according to Jacobs et al.’s (1981) rubric. The quasi-experimental phase was followed by semi-structured interviews. The results suggested the individual-mapping group performed better than the control group in terms of content and organization in all essay tasks while the collaborative-mappers outperformed control group in the second task. The results of semi-structured interviews revealed that learners had positive experiences using computerized concept mapping as a pre-writing activity in EFL context and their attitudes towards writing were quite positive.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Computerized Concept Mapping, L2 Writing, English as a Foreign Language, Collaboration

Destekleyen Kurum

The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK)

Kaynakça

• Abrams, Zs. I., & Byrd, D. R. (2016). The effects of pre-task planning on L2 writing: Mind-mapping and chronological sequencing in a 1st-year German class. System, 63, 1-12.
• Al-Shaer, I. (2014). Employing concept mapping as a pre-writing strategy to help EFL learners better generate argumentative compositions. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2).
• Anderson-Inman, L., & Zeitz, L. (1993). Computer-based concept mapping: Active studying for active learners. The Computing Teacher, 21(1), 1-5.
• Chiou, C. C. (2015). The Comparative Effect of Computer-Assisted and Paper-and-Pencil Concept Mapping on Learning Motivation and Achievement. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 5(9), 668-671.
• Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(4), 367–383.
• Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9(1), 12–20.
• Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(1), 59–84.
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistic using SPSS. London: SAGE Publications.
• Flower, L., & Hayes, J.R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387.
• Jacobs. H. L., Zinkgraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
• Johnson, M. D. (2014). Does planning really help?: Effectiveness of planning in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Teaching and Research, 3(1), 107-118.
• Johnson, M. D., Mercado, L., & Acevedo, A. (2012). The effect of pre-task planning sub-processes on L2 writing fluency, grammatical complexity, and lexical complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 264-282.
• Lee, Y. J. (2013). Collaborative concept mapping as a pre-writing strategy for L2 learning: A Korean application. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 3(2), 254-258.
• Liu, P. L. (2011). A study on the use of computerized concept mapping to assist ESL learners’ writing. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2548–2558.
• Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(1), 83–108.
• Neumann, H., & McDonough, K. (2015). Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 84–104.
• Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them (Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008). Pensacola, FL: Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. 1-36.
• Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B., (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Ojima, M. (2006). Concept mapping a pre-task planning: A case study of three Japanese ESL writers. System, 34(4), 566-585.
• Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(1), 109–148.
• Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F.L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878-912.
• Reader, W., & Hammond, N. (1994). Computer-based tools to support learning from hypertext: Concept mapping tools and beyond. Computers & Education, 12(1-2), 99–106.
• Schoonen, R., Snellings, P., Stevenson, M., & van Gelderen, A. (2009). Toward a blueprint of the foreign language writer: The linguistic and cognitive demands of foreign language writing. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts (pp. 77–101). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Schultz, M. (1991). Mapping and cognitive development in the teaching of foreign language writing. The French Review, 64(6), 978–988.
• Shi, L. (1998). Effects of prewriting discussions on adult ESL students’ compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 319–345.
• Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 185–211.
• Sokolik, M. (2003). Writing. In D. Nunan (ed.) Practical English language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Sturm, J., & Rankin-Erickson, J. (2002). Effects of hand-drawn and computer generated concept mapping on the expository writing of middle school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 17(2), 124–139.
• Zaid, M. A. (2011). Effects of web-based pre-writing activities on college EFL students’ writing performance and their writing apprehension. Journal of King Saud University – Languages and Translation, 23(2), 77-85.
• Zhang, Y. (2018). A contrastive study on the application of mind maps in argumentative writing instruction for EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 11(12), 93-100.