Vertical Grammatical Variability in Writing
Does Scaffolding Make a Difference?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/2178-3640.2023.1.44578Keywords:
IELTS preparatory courses, vertical grammatical variability, scaffolding.Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate the effects of scaffolding techniques on eliminating the grammatical variability in IELTS. 120 IELTS candidates were selected randomly and placed in a control, and three experimental groups. Prior to the course, the candidates and teachers were interviewed regarding the effectiveness of scaffolding techniques. The teachers were also asked to keep a diary and report every session. On the first, 10th, 20th, and 30th sessions, three essay writing topics were given to all the candidates, and their grammatical accuracy and variability were rated by official IELTS Mock examiners to check their vertical grammatical variability. The results were analyzed using SPANOVA procedure. The qualitative data were also content analyzed, coded, and compared with the quantitative results. The findings showed that the distributed scaffolding group was relatively more successful. The qualitative results showed gaps between teachers’ and candidates’ conceptions. The theoretical and pedagogical implications are also discussed.
Downloads
References
Afzali, Z., & Izadpanah, S. (2021). The effect of the flipped classroom model on Iranian English foreign language learners: Engagement and motivation in English language grammar. Cogent Education, 8(1), 1870801. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1870801 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1870801
Ahangari, S., Hejazi, M., & Razmjou, L. (2014). The impact of scaffolding on content retention of Iranian post-elementary EFL learners’ summary writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 83-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.392 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.392
Ahmadi Safa, M., & Rozati, F. (2017). The impact of scaffolding and nonscaffolding strategies on the EFL learners' listening comprehension development. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(5), 447-456. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2015.1118004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2015.1118004
Alake, E. M., & Ogunseemi, O. E. (2013). Effects of scaffolding strategy on learners’ academic achievement integrated science at the junior secondary school level. European Scientific Journal, 9(19), 149-155.
Alshammari, M. M. (2016). IELTS academic reading module test: Validity and reliability. British Journal of English Linguistics, 4(2), 26-37.
Amerian, M., & Mehri, E. (2014). Scaffolding in sociocultural theory: Definition, steps, features, conditions, tools, and effective considerations. Scientific Journal of Review, 3(7), 756-765. http://doi.org/10.14196/sjr.v3i7.1505
Alwahibee, K. M. A. (2019). The Effect of Guided Writing Strategy on Improving the Writing of Saudi English as a Foreign Language Students. CDELT Occasional Papers in the Development of English Education, 66(1), 155-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21608/opde.2019.132723
Baleghizadeh, S., Timcheh Memar, A., & Timcheh Memar, H. (2011). A sociocultural perspective on second language acquisition: The effect of high-structured scaffolding versus low-structured scaffolding on the writing ability of EFL learners. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 10(1), 43-54.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1998). Narrative structure and lexical aspect: Conspiring factors in second language acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(4), 471-508. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198004021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198004021
Beck, S. W., Jones, K., Storm, S., & Smith, H. (2020). Scaffolding students’ writing processes through dialogic assessment. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63(6), 651-660. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1039
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, 209(240), 209-240.
Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Nyström, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2013). How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction, 28, 48-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.002
Ellis, R. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction (Vol. 17). John Benjamins Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.17
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Faraj, A. K. A. (2015). Scaffolding EFL Students' Writing through the Writing Process Approach. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(13), 131-141.
Fernald, A., Marchman, V. A., & Weisleder, A. (2013). SES differences in language processing skill and vocabulary are evident at 18 months. Developmental Science, 16(2), 234-248. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12019
Gholami Pasand, P., & Tahriri, A. (2017). Peer scaffolding in an EFL writing classroom: An investigation of writing accuracy and scaffolding behaviors. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 5(2), 147-166.
Green, A. (2006). Washback to the learner: Learner and teacher perspectives on IELTS preparation course expectations and outcomes. Assessing Writing, 11(2), 113-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2006.07.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2006.07.002
Hammond, J., & Gibbons, P. (2005). Putting scaffolding to work: The contribution of scaffolding in articulating ESL education. Prospect, 20(1), 6-30.
Hanjani, A. M. (2019). Collective peer scaffolding, self-revision, and writing progress of novice EFL learners. International Journal of English Studies, 19(1), 41-57. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.331771 DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.331771
Kaivanpanah, S., Alavi, S. M., & Sepehrinia, S. (2015). Preferences for interactional feedback: differences between learners and teachers. The Language Learning Journal, 43(1), 74-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2012.705571
Krzic, M., Wilson, J., & Hoffman, D. (2018). Scaffolding student learning: Forest floor example. Natural Sciences Education, 47(1), 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.4195/nse2017.11.0023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4195/nse2017.11.0023
Labov, W. (1970). The logic of nonstandard English. In Language and poverty (pp. 153-189). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-754850-0.50014-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-754850-0.50014-3
Larsen–Freeman, D. (2007). Reflecting on the cognitive–social debate in second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 773-787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00668.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00668.x
Long, M. R., Vega-Mendoza, M., Rohde, H., Sorace, A., & Bak, T. H. (2020). Understudied factors contributing to variability in cognitive performance related to language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(4), 801-811. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000749 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000749
Mahvelati, E. H. (2021). Learners’ perceptions and performance under peer versus teacher corrective feedback conditions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 100995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.100995 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.100995
Maximilian, A. (2014). The effectiveness of peer correction to grammatical accuracy in students' writing. Lentera: Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, (2), 1-13.
Mitchell, T. D., & Pessoa, S. (2017). Scaffolding the writing development of the argument genre in history: The case of two novice writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30, 26-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.002
Naghdipour, B. (2016). English writing instruction in Iran: Implications for second language writing curriculum and pedagogy. Journal of Second Language Writing, 32, 81-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.05.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.05.001
Ostovar-Namaghi, S. A., & Safaee, S. E. (2017). Exploring Techniques of Developing Writing Skill in IELTS Preparatory Courses: A Data-Driven Study. English Language Teaching, 10(3), 74-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n3p74
Pearson, W. S. (2019). Critical perspectives on the IELTS test. ELT Journal, 73(2), 197-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccz006
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L. (1989). Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(1), 63-90. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310000783X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310000783X
Rasti, I. (2009). Iranian candidates’ attitudes towards IELTS. Asian EFL Journal, 11(3), 110-155.
Romaine, S. (2003). Variation in language and gender. The Handbook of Language and Gender, 98-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756942.ch4
Ruegg, R. (2015). Differences in the uptake of peer and teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 46(2), 131-145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214562799 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214562799
Tagarelli, K. M., Ruiz, S., Vega, J. L. M., & Rebuschat, P. (2016). Variability in second language learning: The roles of individual differences, learning conditions, and linguistic complexity. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(2), 293-316.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000036 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000036
Tarone, E. (1983). On the variability of interlanguage systems. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 142-164. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.142
Valian, V. (2020). Variability: Definitions of language and language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 48-49.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000609
Van de Pol, J., & Elbers, E. (2013). Scaffolding student learning: A micro-analysis of teacher–student interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(1), 32-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.12.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.12.001
Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., Oort, F., & Beishuizen, J. (2015). The effects of scaffolding in the classroom: support contingency and student independent working time in relation to student achievement, task effort and appreciation of support. Instructional Science, 43(5), 615-641. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9351-z
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & Van Dijk, M. (2008). Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 214-231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00715.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00715.x
Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050608668639 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050608668639
White, L. (1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.1
Zarei, A. A., & Alipour, H. (2020). Shadowing and scaffolding techniques affecting L2 reading comprehension. Applied Research on English Language, 9(1), 53-74. https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2019.117030.1462
Zarei, A. A., & Rezadoust, H. (2020). The effects of Scaffolded and Unscaffolded Feedback on EFL Learners' Speaking Anxiety and Speaking Self-Efficacy. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 7(4), 111-132. https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2020.13464.1655
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright
The submission of originals to BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal as the site of original publication.
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited.
