Volume 5, Issue 2 (June 2023)                   IEEPJ 2023, 5(2): 25-40 | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Shahhoseini H, Rezvani R, Yazdani S, Behrouzi M, Molaei A. (2023). Flipping Blended Writing Instruction: Iranian EFL Learners’ Learning of Linking Words in Focus. IEEPJ. 5(2), 25-40. doi:10.61186/ieepj.5.2.25
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-641-en.html
1- PhD Student, Department of Foreign Languages, Bushehr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Department of English Languages, Yasouj University/ Department of Foregin Languages, Bushehr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr, Iran (Corresponding Author) , rezvanireza@gmail.com
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Foreign Languages, Bushehr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr, Iran
4- Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Bushehr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr, Iran
5- Assistant Professor, Department of English Language, Farhangian University/ Department of Foregin Languages, Bushehr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr, Iran
Abstract:   (606 Views)
Linking words, an essential tool in creating a coherent relationship between units and paragraphs in written texts, was one of several aspects of the English language that was challenging for many foreign language learners in the writing process. The current study investigated the impacts of flipped blended instruction on Iranian EFL learners’ use of English-linking words in writing. To this end, 40 EFL learners from one institute were selected for this study. To collect the data, an Oxford Placement Test (OPT) was used to ensure the homogeneity of the participants. They were randomly divided into the flipped blended (n=20)  and conventional ( n=20)  groups. Then, a pre-test was given to both groups of learners to examine their ability in using linking words.  Moreover, the flipped blended group received instruction in an online context, while the conventional group received instruction in a traditional learning context. After the treatment, a post-test was given to both the flipped blended and conventional groups. The results of the independent sample t-test demonstrated that there was a statistically significant difference between flipped blended and Conventional groups in terms of choosing linking words. It was observed that the flipped blended method had a  significant effect on improving EFL learners' linking words knowledge. The study discusses the implications of the finding for EFL learners and teachers.
Full-Text [PDF 366 kb]   (199 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original | Subject: Educational Psychology
Received: 2022/10/15 | Accepted: 2023/02/23 | Published: 2023/06/1

References
1. Abedi, P., Namaziandost, E., & Akbari, S. (2019). The impact of flipped classroom instruction on Iranian upper-intermediate EFL learners' writing skills. English Literature and Language Review, 5(9), 164-172. [DOI:10.32861/ellr.59.164.172]
2. Ahmed, M. (2016). The effect of a flipping classroom on writing skills in English as a foreign language and students' attitude towards flipping. US-China Foreign Language, 14(2), 98-114. [DOI:10.17265/1539-8080/2016.02.003]
3. Al Mughrabi, F. M. (2017). Arab learners of English and the use of discourse markers in writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(4), 715. [DOI:10.17507/jltr.0804.10]
4. Ally, M. (2004). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. Theory and practice of online learning, 2, 15-44.
5. Alsalhi, N. R., Al-Qatawneh, S., Eltahir, M., & Aqel, K. (2021). Does blended learning improve the academic achievement of undergraduate students in the mathematics course?: A case study in higher education. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(4), em1951. [DOI:10.29333/ejmste/10781]
6. Alsamadani, H. A. (2010). The relationship between Saudi EFL students' writing competence, L1 writing proficiency, and self-regulation. European Journal of Social Sciences, 16(1), 53-63.
7. Bataineh, R., & Baniabdelrahman, A. (2006). Jordanian EFL students' perceptions of their computer literacy. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 2(2), 35-50.
8. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International society for technology in education.
9. Bersin, J. (2004). The blended learning book: Best practices, proven methodologies, and lessons learned. John Wiley & Sons.
10. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). EBOOK: Teaching for Quality Learning at University. McGraw-hill education (UK).
11. Billings, E. S., & Mathison, C. (2012). I get to use an iPod in school? Using technology-based advance organizers to support the academic success of English learners. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 494-503. [DOI:10.1007/s10956-011-9341-0]
12. Burns, M. (2013). Success, failure or no significant difference: Charting a course for successful educational technology integration. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 8(1). [DOI:10.3991/ijet.v8i1.2376]
13. Cahyono, B. Y. (2009). Techniques in teaching EFL writing: Practical Guides for English Teachers of SMP/MTs in State University of Malang Press.
14. Chen, Y., Wang, Y., & Chen, N.-S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Computers & Education, 79, 16-27. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.004]
15. Cleveland-Innes, M., & Wilton, D. (2018). Guide to blended learning. Nigeria Open Schooling Project. http://hdl.handle.net/11599/3095 [DOI:10.56059/11599/3095]
16. Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. S. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication, 10(1), 39-71. [DOI:10.1177/0741088393010001002]
17. Crossley, S. A., Kyle, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). The development and use of cohesive devices in L2 writing and their relations to judgments of essay quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 32, 1-16. [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.003]
18. Crossley, S. A., Roscoe, R., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). What is successful writing? An investigation into the multiple ways writers can write successful essays. Written Communication, 31(2), 184-214. [DOI:10.1177/0741088314526354]
19. Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2008). Florida's EETT leveraging laptops initiative and its impact on teaching practices. Journal of Research on technology in Education, 41(2), 143-159. [DOI:10.1080/15391523.2008.10782526]
20. Dousti, M., Amirian, Z., & Nejadansari, D. (2021). Application of WebQuest-based Instruction in Higher Education Context: EFL Students' Achievement in Writing Skill. Two Quarterly Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning University of Tabriz, 13(27), 113-136.
21. Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J. L., & Mehaffy, G. L. (2013). Blending it all together. In Blended Learning (pp. 325-337). Routledge.
22. Ekmekci, E. (2017). The flipped writing classroom in Turkish EFL context: A comparative study on a new model. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 151-167. [DOI:10.17718/tojde.306566]
23. Erben, T., Ban, R., & Castaneda, M. (2008). Teaching English language learners through technology. Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203894422]
24. Fisher, T., Higgins, C., & Loveless, A. (2006). Futurelab-teachers learning with digital technologies: A review of research and projects.
25. Fukushima, S., & Sato, T. (1989). The effectiveness of teaching transition words in EFL composition class. The bulletin of the Kanto-koshin-etsu English Language Education Society, 3, 29-39.
26. Geiser, S., & Studley, w. R. (2002). UC and the SAT: Predictive validity and differential impact of the SAT I and SAT II at the University of California. Educational Assessment, 8(1), 1-26. [DOI:10.1207/S15326977EA0801_01]
27. Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English: Longman group Ltd. In: London.
28. Harris, P., Connolly, J., & Feeney, L. (2009). Blended learning: Overview and recommendations for successful implementation. Industrial and commercial training. [DOI:10.1108/00197850910950961]
29. Hassanein, H. (2021). Using a Web quest Strategy to develop Writing Skills of Second Year Secondary School Students. Journal of Research in Education and Psychology, 36(3), 203-230.
30. He, Z. (2020). Cohesion in academic writing: A comparison of essays in English written by L1 and L2 university students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(7), 761-770. [DOI:10.17507/tpls.1007.06]
31. Hinkel, E. (2011). What research on second language writing tells us and what it doesn't. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 523-538). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203836507]
32. Kaakinen, J. K., Salonen, J., Venäläinen, P., & Hyönä, J. (2011). Influence of text cohesion on the persuasive power of expository text. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 52(3), 201-208. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2010.00863.x]
33. Khodabandeh, F., & Tharirian, M. H. (2020). Exploring the Impact of Blended, Flipped, and Traditional Teaching Strategies for Teaching Grammar on Iranian EFL Learners''''through English Newspaper Articles. Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills), 39(3.1), 89-129.
34. Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2005). Learners and learning in the twenty‐first century: what do we know about students' attitudes towards and experiences of information and communication technologies that will help us design courses? Studies in higher education, 30(3), 257-274. [DOI:10.1080/03075070500095689]
35. Klimova, V., Posokhov, A., Strelkova Ya, A., & Shimokhina, M. (2013). The use of hippotherapeutic and hippopedagogical ideas in physical rehabilitation. Theory and Practice of Physical Culture(1), 9-11.
36. Knapp, P., & Watkins, M. (2005). Genre, text, grammar: Technologies for teaching and assessing writing. unsw Press.
37. Lam, R. (2015). Understanding EFL Students' Development of Self‐Regulated Learning in a Process‐Oriented Writing Course. TESOL Journal, 6(3), 527-553. [DOI:10.1002/tesj.179]
38. Lee, S.-y. (2003). Teaching EFL writing in the university: Related issues, insights, and implications. Journal of National Taipei Teachers College, 16(1), 111-136.
39. Lin, H.-C., & Hwang, G.-J. (2019). Research trends of flipped classroom studies for medical courses: A review of journal publications from 2008 to 2017 based on the technology-enhanced learning model. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1011-1027. [DOI:10.1080/10494820.2018.1467462]
40. Longo, B. (1994). The role of metadiscourse in persuasion. Technical communication, 41(2), 348-352.
41. Mahendra, M. W., & Dewi, N. P. R. P. (2017). The use of transition signals in EFL academic writing context: a corpus study. Jurnal Bahasa Lingua Scientia, 9(1), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.21274/ls.2017.9.1.85-98 [DOI:10.21274/ls.2017.9.1.87-100]
42. Martins, E. R., & Gouveia, L. (2018). Flipped classroom applied to high school with WhatsApp aid. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 8(10), 136-141. [DOI:10.30845/ijhss.v8n10p15]
43. McNamara, D., Crossley, S., Roscoe, R., Allen, L., & Dai, J. (2015). Natural language processing in a writing strategy tutoring system: Hierarchical classification approach to automated essay scoring. Manuscript submitted to Assessing Writing. [DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2014.09.002]
44. McNamara, D. S., Crossley, S. A., & Roscoe, R. (2013). Natural language processing in an intelligent writing strategy tutoring system. Behavior research methods, 45, 499-515. [DOI:10.3758/s13428-012-0258-1]
45. Nasser, A. N. A. (2016). Teaching the writing skill to Yemeni EFL learners: The importance and challenge. South-Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies (SAJMS), 3(6), 191-203.
46. Nourinezhad, S., Hadipourfard, E., & Bavali, M. (2022). The effect of flipped learning on English writing performance and self-efficacy of Iranian medical students. Journal of Language Horizons, 6(1), 161-182.
47. Nurawalia, A. (2021). EFFECTIVENESS OF USING CALL FOR TEACHING WRITING. Premise: Journal of English Education and Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 101-122.
48. Oliver, R., Harper, B., & Wills, S. (2007). Describing ICT-based learning designs that promote quality learning outcomes. In Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 84-100). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203961681-15]
49. Powell, P. R. (2009). Retention and writing instruction: Implications for access and pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, 664-682.
50. Qader, R. O., & Yalcin Arslan, F. (2019). The Effect of Flipped Classroom Instruction in Writing: A Case Study with Iraqi EFL Learners. Teaching English with Technology, 19(1), 36-55.
51. Rahim, M. N. (2019). The use of blended learning approach in EFL education. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 8(5), 1165-1168. [DOI:10.35940/ijeat.E1163.0585C19]
52. Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge university press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511667190]
53. Roy, A. (2019). Technology in teaching and learning. International Journal of Innovation Education and Research, 7(4), 414-422. [DOI:10.31686/ijier.vol7.iss4.1433]
54. Sadighi, F., & Heydari, P. (2012). Cohesion analysis of L2 writing: The case of Iranian undergraduate EFL learners. Mediterranean journal of social sciences, 3(2), 557-573.
55. Sanders, T. J., & Noordman, L. G. (2000). The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse processes, 29(1), 37-60. [DOI:10.1207/S15326950dp2901_3]
56. Seibert Hanson, A. E., & Brown, C. M. (2020). Enhancing L2 learning through a mobile assisted spaced-repetition tool: an effective but bitter pill? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(1-2), 133-155. [DOI:10.1080/09588221.2018.1552975]
57. Şentürk, C. (2021). Effects of the blended learning model on preservice teachers' academic achievements and twenty-first century skills. Education and Information Technologies, 26(1), 35-48. [DOI:10.1007/s10639-020-10340-y]
58. Serin, H. (2019). Flipped classrooms in teaching method courses at universities. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 9(1), 573-585. [DOI:10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i1/5459]
59. Solihati, N., & Mulyono, H. (2017). A Hybrid Classroom Instruction in Second Language Teacher Education (SLTE): A Critical Reflection of Teacher Educators. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 12(5). [DOI:10.3991/ijet.v12i05.6989]
60. Soltanpour, F., & Valizadeh, M. (2018). A flipped writing classroom: Effects on EFL learners' argumentative essays. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(1), 5-13. [DOI:10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.1p.5]
61. Spycher, P. (2007). Academic writing of adolescent English learners: Learning to use "although". Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 238-254. [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.001]
62. Sulasti, Y. (2003). The structure of the paragraphs written. Universitas Bengkulu.
63. Test, Q. P. (2001). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64. Turmudi, D. (2020). Utilizing a web-based technology in blended EFL academic writing classes for university students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, [DOI:10.1088/1742-6596/1517/1/012063]
65. Weimer, M. (2013). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. John Wiley & Sons.
66. Wu, H., & Zhang, L. J. (2017). Effects of different language environments on Chinese graduate students' perceptions of English writing and their writing performance. System, 65, 164-173. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2017.02.001]
67. Zhang, W., & Zhu, C. (2018). Comparing learning outcomes of blended learning and traditional face-to-face learning of university students in ESL courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 17(2), 251-273.
68. Zufferey, S., Mak, W., Degand, L., & Sanders, T. (2015). Advanced learners' comprehension of discourse connectives: The role of L1 transfer across on-line and off-line tasks. Second Language Research, 31(3), 389-411. [DOI:10.1177/0267658315573349]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.