Document Type : scientific-research
Authors
Department of English Language, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
Abstract
Determining a qualified teaching method in writing has always been a controversial issue as a multitude of researchers have debated its effectiveness in improving Learners’ accuracy in writing. This study examines the background of this debate and looked at previous major studies on this issue. Due to the limitations and pitfalls of sheltered and reciprocal teaching procedures, this study was to inquire whether the integration of reciprocal and sheltered teaching approaches would influence students’ performance in writing and find out if the approach could impress the learners’ self-efficacy as well. Three groups of pre-intermediate EFL students took part in this research. 68 male and female participants in one experimental and two control groups established the subjects of the study. The experimental group worked on the integration of reciprocal and sheltered approaches in writing and self-efficacy. The results reveal the positive effect of integration of reciprocal and sheltered approaches on the writing performance of the subjects in the EG. Moreover, the selected procedures could lead to learners’ self-efficacy development. Finally, the achievements of this study contributed to an understanding of the type of teaching approach which is most appropriate for pre-intermediate students.
Keywords
Article Title [Persian]
تلفیق دیدگاههای حمایتی و متقابل:دیدگاه فراشناختی بر مهارت نوشتاری و خود کار آمدی فراگیران زبان دوم
Authors [Persian]
- مسعود تاج الدینی
- سمیرا محفوظی فرد
- ندا فاطمی راد
Abstract [Persian]
اجرای یک روش آموزشی مفید در مهارت نوشتاری ،همواره مسئله چالش برانگیزی بوده است زیرا محققان زیادی تاثیر آن را بر کمک به صحت مهارت نوشتاری فراگیران مورد بحث قرار داده اند.این تحقیق،پیش زمینه این مسئله را بررسی میکند و تحقیقات مرتبط با این موضوع را مورد بحث قرار میدهد.به دلیل محدودیت ها ی دیدگاه متقابل و شلترد، این تحقیق به بررسی ترکیب دیدگاه متقابل و شلترد میپردازد که در واقع عملکرد واقعی دانش آموزان را در مهارت نوشتاری وهمچنین خودکارآمدی تحت تاثیر قرار میدهد.سه گروه از دانش آموزان سطح انگلیسی پیش ازمتوسط ایرانی در این تحقیق شرکت کردند.68 زن و مرد در گروه آزمایش و دو گروه دانش آموزان را تشکیل میدهند.گروه آزمایشی بر ترکیب روش متقابل و شلترد در مهارت نوشتاری و خودکار آمدی کار کرده است.نتایج تاثیر مثبت ترکیب دیدگاه های متقابل و شلترد بر عملکرد دانش آموزان در گروه آزمایشی را نشان میدهد. علاوه بر این،فرآیندهای انتخاب شده میتوانند منجر به رشد خودباوری شوند. در نهایت،دستاوردهای این تحقیق به فهم نوع دیدگاه تدریس که برای سطح پیش از متوسط بسیار مناسب است می انجامد.
Keywords [Persian]
- روش متقابل
- روش حمایتی(شلترد)
- خودکارآمدی
[1] Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering
and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
[2] Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research.
Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530.
[3] Hadley, A. O. (2003). Teaching language in context. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
[4] Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice.
54 Iranian Distance Education Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, (New Series) Winter-Spring 2021
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[5] Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1985). Reciprocal teaching: Activities to promote
reading with your mind. In T. L. Harris & E. J. Cooper (Eds.), Reading, thinking and
concept development: Strategies for the classroom, (147-159 ). New York: The College
Board.
[6] Spörer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Kieschke, U. (2009). Improving students' reading
comprehension skills: Effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning
and Instruction, 19(3), 272-286.
[7] Grabe, W. (2003). Reading and writing relations: Second language perspectives on
research and practice. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring dynamics of 2nd language writing
(pp.442-462). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[8] Komariah, C. (2015). Potency and development strategies. IJSBAR. 23(2): 260-270.
[9] Krashen, S. D. (1995). Bilingual Education and Second Language Acquisition Theory. In
B.E. Office (Ed.), Schooling and Language Minority Students: A theoretical Framework.
(pp. 47-75). Dissemination and Assessment Center: California State University.
[10] Echevarria, J. & Graves, A. (1998). Sheltered Content Instruction: Teaching Students
with Diverse Abilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
[11] Cameron, L.(2005). Teaching languages to young learnes. Cambridge University Press.
[12] Elley, W. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research
Quarterly, 24, 174-187. [13] Agudelo,L.(2010).Application of reciprocal approach and
sheltered approach.(pp.7-50).
[14] Trochim, W. M. K. (2006). The Qualitative Debate. Research Methods Knowledge Base.
[15] Yavuz-Erkan, D. (2004). Efficacy of cross-cultural e-mail exchange for enhancing EFL
writing: A perspective for tertiary-level Turkish EFL learners. Unpublished Dissertation.
Çukurova University, The Institute of Social Sciences English Language Teaching.
Adana/Turkey.
[16] Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman
and Company. [17] Heaton, J. B. (1988). Writing English Language Tests: Longman
Handbook for Language Teachers (New Edition). London: Longman Group UK Ltd.
[18] Flower, L. and Hayes, J.R. (1981) A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College
Composition and Communication,32, 365-387.
[19] Hadley, O.( 1993). Research in language learning principles, processes, and prospects
(ACTFL Foreign Language Education Series).
[20] Cohen, A. D., & Macaro, E. (2007). LLS and the future: Resolving the issues. Andrew D.
Cohen and Ernesto Macaro( Eds), Language learner strategies (pp.274-284). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
[21] Chen, Y. (2007). Learning to learn: The impact of strategy training. ELT Journal,
61(1),20-29.
[22] Therein,A. Zaitoun, H. (2003) Strategies of teaching: A modern view of learning/teaching
methods. Cairo, Alam Al-Kotob.
[23] Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf, &
G. Appel (Eds.), Vygostkian approaches to second language research (pp. 33-
56). New Jersey: Ablex.
[24] Vygotsky, L.S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In J.V. Wertsch (ed.) The
Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology (pp.144−188). Armonk, NY: M.E.
Sharp
[25] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), The History
of the Development of Higher Mental Functions (1-17). Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Masoud Tajadini and Samira Mahfoozi Fard, Neda Fatehi Rad 3: An Integration of … 55
University Press.
[26] Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1995b). Student stances during peer response in writing. In M. L.
Tickoo (Ed.), Reading and writing: Theory into practice (pp. 118–132).
SEAMEO Regioanl Language Centre: RELC.
)