Teaching English Language

Teaching English Language

The Effects of Pre-Task Conditions on EFL Learners’ Cognitive Processes and Writing Performance

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 Ph.D. Student of the Department of English; Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran
2 Associate Professor, Department of English, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Department of English, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
10.22132/tel.2024.401334.1477
Abstract
Cognitive-based studies on writing skills are challenging. In the current study, researchers investigated the impact of three pre-task conditions (brainstorming, FonF, and metacognitive strategy instruction) and the cognitive process, including planning, translating, and revising components, and writing performance (fluency, complexity, or accuracy) on the participants’ writings production. The study employed a convergent mixed methods design. One hundred and fifty tertiary learners in three intact classes majoring in the English Language at IAU, Islamshahr Branch, participated in the study. The study lasted four months (16 90-minute sessions), held once a week. Each group experienced a specific type of pre-task: brainstorming, metacognitive strategy instruction, or FonF activities. The researchers used writing pretest and posttest, think-aloud protocol, and semi-structured interview to collect the data. MANOVA and thematic analysis were employed to analyze the data. The results demonstrated that the pre-task conditions have a statistically significant impact on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy of the participants’ writings. The study also showed that the pre-task conditions statistically impact the planning, translating, and revising of Iranian EFL learners’ written production. Implications of the study are discussed.
Keywords

Abdel Latif, M.M.M. (2019). Using think-aloud protocols and interviews in investigating writers’ composing processes: Combining concurrent and retrospective data. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 42(2), 111-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2018.1439003  
Alavi, S.M., Dashtestani, R., & Mellati, M. (2022). Crisis and changes in learning behaviours: Technology-enhanced assessment in language learning contexts. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(4), 461-474. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1985977
Albus, P., Vogt, A., & Seufert, T. (2021). Signaling in virtual reality influences learning outcome and cognitive load. Computers & Education, 166, Article 104154. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104154
Baaijen, V.M., & Galbraith, D. (2018). Discovery through writing: Relationships with writing processes and text quality. Cognition and Instruction, 36(3), 199-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2018.1456431
Barrot, J., & Gabinete, M.K. (2021). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in the argumentative writing of ESL and EFL learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 59(2), 209-232. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/iral-2017-0012
Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 702-726. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818770921
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2013). The psychology of written composition. Routledge.
Chen, Y.S. (2015). Chinese learners’ cognitive processes in writing email requests to faculty. System, 52, 51-62. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.04.020
Chenoweth, N.A., & Hayes, J.R. (2001). Fluency in writing: Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18(1), 80-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088301018001004
Derakhshan, A. (2018). The effect of task-based language teaching instruction on the Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance. International Journal of Instruction11(4), 527-544. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11433a
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2019). Task-based language teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
Etemadi, S.H., & Abbasian, G.-R. (2023). Dynamic assessment and EFL learners’ writing journey: Focus on DA modalities and writing revision types. Teaching English Language, 17(1), 53-79. https://doi.org/10.22132/TEL.2022.162923
Hayes, J. R. (1996a). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C.M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.) In The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 1–27). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hayes, J.R. (1996b). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C.M. Levy, & S. Ransdell (Eds.) The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 1–27). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hayes, J. R. (2012). Evidence from language bursts, revision, and transcription for translation and its relation to other writing processes. Translation of Thought to Written Text While Composing, 31-42. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203141434-9
Hayes, J.R., & Berninger, V.W. (2014). Cognitive processes in writing: A framework. In B. Arfe, J. Dockrell, & V. Berninger (Eds.) Writing development in children with hearing loss, dyslexia, or oral language problems: Implications for assessment and instruction (pp. 3-15). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199827282.003.0001
Hayes, J.R., & Flower, L.S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L.W. Gregg, & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.),  Cognitive processes in writing: An Interdisciplinary Approach  (pp.3-30). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461-473. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp048
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Complexity, accuracy and fluency. Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. John Benjamins.
Kaushik, P. (2023). QEEG characterizations during hyperventilation, writing and reading conditions: A pre–post cognitive-behavioral intervention study on students with learning difficulty. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience, 5(1), 52-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/15500594221147158
Ishikawa, M. (2018). Written languaging, learners’ proficiency levels and L2 grammar learning. System, 74, 50-61. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.02.017
Jagaiah, T., Olinghouse, N.G., & Kearns, D.M. (2020). Syntactic complexity measures: Variation by genre, grade-level, students’ writing abilities, and writing quality. Reading and Writing, 33(10), 2577-2638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10057-x
Johnson, M.D. (2017). Cognitive task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 37, 13-38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.06.001
Kane, M.T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 1-73. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12000
Khezrlou, S. (2021). Effects of timing and availability of isolated FFI on learners’ written accuracy and fluency through task repetition. The Language Learning Journal, 49(5), 568-580. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1656765
Kim, Y. (2013). Effects of pre-task modeling on attention to form and question development. TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 8-35. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.52
Kim, Y., Belcher, D., & Peyton, C. (2023). Comparing monomodal traditional writing and digital multimodal composing in EAP classrooms: Linguistic performance and writing development. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 64, 101247. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101247
Knoch, U. (2011). Rating scales for diagnostic assessment of writing: What should they look like and where should the criteria come from? Assessing Writing, 16(2), 81-96. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.02.003
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2017). Functional adequacy in L2 writing: Towards a new rating scale. Language Testing, 34(3), 321-336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216663991
Lamb, R., Firestone, J., Schmitter-Edgecombe, M., & Hand, B. (2019). A computational model of student cognitive processes while solving a critical thinking problem in science. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(2), 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1514357
Lasauskaite, R., Richter, M., & Cajochen, C. (2023). Lighting color temperature impacts effort-related cardiovascular response to an auditory short-term memory task. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 87, Article 101976. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.101976
Li, D., & Zhang, L. (2023). Exploring EFL learners’ cognitive/emotional dissonance in content-based foreign language instruction: An ecological perspective. System, 114, Article 103019. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103019
Meesong, P.K., & Jaroongkhongdach, W. (2016). Autonomous language learning: Thai undergraduate students’ behaviors. Thai TESOL Journal, 29(2), 156-186.
Mehdiabadi, F., & Arabmofrad, A. (2015). Form-focused instruction and EFL learners’ writing performance: The case of collaborative output task of dictogloss. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 8(1), 58-70.
Mellati, M., Alavi, S.M., & Dashtestani, R. (2022). Reduction of errors in writing assignments: A comparison of the impact of peer, teacher, and mixed feedback Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(4), 152-166.
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2018). Exploring teachers’ assessment literacy: Impact on learners’ writing achievements and implications for teacher development. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online), 43(6), 1-18.
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2019). MOOC-based learning environments: A comparison of conventional, synchronous and flipped classrooms. In J.-B. Son (Ed.), Context-specific computer-assisted language learning (pp. 50-74). APACALL.
Mellati, M., Zangoei, A., & Khademi, M. (2015). Technology integration: EFL learners’ level of anxiety and their performance in writing tests. International Journal of Social Sciences & Education, 5 (2), 240-252.
Mohseni, F., Seifoori, Z., & Ahangari, S. (2020). The impact of metacognitive strategy training and critical thinking awareness-raising on reading comprehension. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1720946. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1720946
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving (Vol. 104). Prentice-Hall.
Payant, C., McDonough, K., Uludag, P., & Lindberg, R. (2019). Predicting integrated writing task performance: Source comprehension, prewriting planning, and individual differences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 40, 87-97. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.06.001
Polio, C., & Shea, M.C. (2014). An investigation into current measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 10-27. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.003
Riazi, A.M., & Candlin, C.N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning: Opportunities, issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 47(2), 135-173. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444813000505
Robinson, P. (2011). Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (Vol. 2). John Benjamins.
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis and second language learning and performance. 45(3), 161-176. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/iral.2007.007
Sabet, M. K., Tahriri, A., & Shirkoohi, S. R. (2018). The effect of two pre-task activities: Pre-taught vocabulary and brainstorming on intermediate EFL learners’ reading comprehension. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 7(1), 86-91. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.1p.86
Saeedi, M. (2023). Effects of repeating tasks of different complexity levels on EFL learners’ oral production. Teaching English Language, 17(2), 391-415. https://10.22132/tel.2024.377408.1418
Sam, A.H., Wilson, R., Westacott, R., Gurnell, M., Melville, C., & Brown, C. A. (2021). Thinking differently – Students' cognitive processes when answering two different formats of written question. Medical Teacher, 43(11), 1278-1285. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2021.1935831
Shi, B., Huang, L., & Lu, X. (2020). Effect of prompt type on test-takers’ writing performance and writing strategy use in the continuation task. Language Testing, 37(3), 361-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220911626
Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
Skehan, P. (2014). Limited attentional capacity, second language performance, and task-based pedagogy. Processing perspectives on task performance, 211, 211-260.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183–205). Cambridge University Press.
Tomazin, L., Lipnevich, A. A., & Lopera-Oquendo, C. (2023). Teacher feedback vs. annotated exemplars: Examining the effects on middle school students’ writing performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 78, Article 101262. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2023.101262
Woymo, T. H., Bachore, M. M., & Jobo, M. M. (2024). The effects of form-focused communicative grammar instruction on students’ pronunciation and grammar in speaking. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 13(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v13n1p61
Xiao, Y. (2007). Applying metacognition in EFL writing instruction in China. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 6(1), 19-33.
Yan, J., Peng, P., Duan, G., Lin, T., & Bai, Y. e. (2021). Multiple analyses of various factors affecting the plantlet regeneration of Picea Mongolia (H.Q.Wu) W.D. Xu from somatic embryos. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 6694. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83948-w
Yoon, H. J., & Abdi Tabari, M. (2023). Authorial voice in source-based and opinion-based argumentative writing: Patterns of voice across task types and proficiency levels. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 62, 101228. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101228
Zabihi, R. (2018). The role of cognitive and affective factors in measures of L2 writing. Written Communication, 35(1), 32-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088317735836
Zare, M., Bagheri, M.S., Sadighi, F., & Rassaei, E. (2021). An investigation of the linguistic complexity of IELTS writing topics based on the levels of discourse representation and the degree of meaning coding. Cogent Education, 8(1), 1868235. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1868235
 
Volume 19, Issue 1
January 2025
Pages 353-387

  • Receive Date 08 June 2023
  • Accept Date 02 September 2024