The results of the feedback questionnaire are shown in the section. The feedback questionnaire consisted of three questions: (1) How do they think about the eight-week writing instruction, (2) According to their self-evaluation, what aspects do they think they make the most progress?, and (3) based on their self-evaluation, what aspects do they want to improve in the future? The answers of the three questions were summarized, categorized, and shown as percentage to present the tendency of the three instructional groups.
Table 9
Participants’ opinions about the eight-week writing instruction
Opinions PI TBI Eclectic
Find writing not as difficult 17.3% 30.3% 26.0%
More confident about writing 65.2% 73.9% 82.6%
Though there are only about twenty to thirty percent of the participants from each of the three groups thought that writing in English to them was not as difficult as they has thought.
However, the majority of the participants especially the ones from the eclectic group (82.6%) mentioned that they were more confident about writing in English than before. It seems that the eight-week writing instruction providing the participants with both writing instruction and opportunities to write decreases the participants’ fear about writing in English. Some
illustrative responses to the question include:
“After the eight-week writing instruction, I learned a lot of writing skills and check points. I
think they are useful and I am not afraid of writing in English now.” (Salina)
“I seldom write in English before. My writing was sucks at first but I learned a lot and
improve little by little during the eight weeks. I got a sense of achievement from it.” (Eva)
“The eight-week writing instruction helped a lot to my writing ability and now I am not afraid
of the GEPT writing test.” (Jessie)
Table 10
The aspects improved most from participants’ self-evaluation
Writing aspects PI TBI Eclectic
Content 39.1% 86.8% 52.0%
Organization 52.1% 56.5% 47.8%
Accuracy 82.6% 65.2% 60.8%
Complexity 26.0% 21.7% 30.3%
The higher percentage of accuracy in PI group (82.6%) and the higher percentage of content in TBI group (86.8%) are consistent with the hypotheses of the study and the statistical results of the writing test. However, the eclectic group did not show higher percentage in any specific aspects but had more averaged performance in the four writing aspects instead. It is possible that the participants of the eclectic group indeed noticed the more complete writing instruction during the eight weeks. The participants of the three groups all had lower percentages in complexity and the reason for this may be the vague concept of complexity which the participants could not easily find out their improvement. Some illustrative responses to the question include:
“At first, I usually translated my ideas directly from Chinese to English so there were lots of
red lines and correction on the work sheet. Now I had better idea about how to write correct English sentences.” (Linda in PI group)
writing, I could write with richer content and more organized.” (Annie in TBI group)
“During the eight-week writing instruction, I learned how write a more complete, organized
English writing and with higher accuracy step by step and I found I could do it.” (Julie in eclectic group)
Table 11
The aspects wished to improve in the future from participants’ self-evaluation
Writing aspects PI TBI Eclectic
Grammar 34.7% (8/23) 56.5% (13/23) 43.4% (10/23)
Vocabulary 43.4% (10/23) 21.7% (5/23) 34.7% (8/23)
The majority of the participants expressed strong desire for improving in grammar and vocabulary in the future learning. For grammar, the percentage of TBI and the eclectic group are higher than PI group. For vocabulary, the percentage of PI group is higher than TBI and the eclectic group. The above are consistent with the hypotheses of the study. Some
illustrative responses to the question include:
“I would often feel confused about the usages of grammar so I want to learn more about the
grammar usage in the future.” (Sandy in TBI group)
“When I was writing in English, my writing would often be limited by the words I didn’t
know. I want to learn and memorize more vocabulary in the future.” (Nina in PI group)
concerned with how to improve learners’ writing ability from different scopes. In the first research question, the study examined the effectiveness of PI, TBI, and eclectic instruction.
The result showed that all the three instructions were useful in helping learners improve their writing ability. In the second research question, the study discussed the relative contribution of the three instructions. The results suggested that TBI and eclectic instruction outperformed PI, while eclectic instruction had a similar effect to TBI. In the third research question, the study further explored if the three instructions could benefit learners’ writing ability in specific aspects. Based on the results, TBI and eclectic instruction helped learners improve in fluency more than PI while the three instructions seemed to have similar effects in accuracy and complexity. The reasons for the results will be discussed in the next chapter.
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This chapter consists of four sections. The major findings of the current study are summarized and discussed in the first section. In the second section, some pedagogical implications are presented. In the third section, the limitations of the study are proposed, followed by some suggestions for future studies. Conclusions of the study are presented in the fourth section.