Using writing process-oriented approach to improve 12th graders' writing skill at Quang Xuong 1 high school = Áp dụng đường hướng viết như một quá trình để nâng

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
*********************


LÊ THỊ YẾN



USING WRITING PROCESS-ORIENTED APPROACH TO IMPVOVE 12
th

GRADERS’ WRITING SKILL AT QUẢNG XƯƠNG 1 HIGH SCHOOL

ÁP DỤNG ĐƢỜNG HƢỚNG VIẾT NHƢ MỘT QUÁ TRÌNH ĐỂ NÂNG CAO
KĨ NĂNG VIẾT CHO HỌC SINH LỚP 12 TRƢỜNG THPT QUẢNG XƢƠNG 1


M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS


FIELD: ENGLISH TEACHING METHODOLOGY
CODE: 60140111

Hanoi, 2014
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
*********************


LÊ THỊ YẾN



USING WRITING PROCESS-ORIENTED APPROACH TO IMPVOVE 12
th

GRADERS’ WRITING SKILL AT QUẢNG XƯƠNG 1 HIGH SCHOOL

ÁP DỤNG ĐƢỜNG HƢỚNG VIẾT NHƢ MỘT QUÁ TRÌNH ĐỂ NÂNG CAO
KĨ NĂNG VIẾT CHO HỌC SINH LỚP 12 TRƢỜNG THPT QUẢNG XƢƠNG 1


M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS


FIELD: ENGLISH TEACHING METHODOLOGY
CODE: 60140111
SUPERVISOR: Dr. NGUYỄN HUY KỶ

Hanoi, 2014


i
DECLARATION

I hereby certify that I am the sole author of this study. This study is
submitted in partial fulfillment for the Degree of Master of Arts at the
University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National
University, Hanoi and that this thesis has not been submitted elsewhere in any
other form for the fulfillment of any other degree or qualification.

Hanoi, August 2014
Signature


Lê Thị Yến

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to express my special thanks to my supervisor, Dr.
Nguyễn Huy Kỷ for his invaluable guidance and instructive comments, without
which this thesis would not have been successfully completed. I should also record
a debt to the 12
th
grade students at Quảng Xương 1 secondary school who kindly
participated in my study. Thanks are due next to lecturers and the staff of the
Faculty of Post-graduate Studies, University of Languages and International
Studies - VNU, Hanoi for their academic and administrative assistance. Finally,
many thanks are for my family, whose support has been very important to me. This
thesis would not have been successfully conducted without their support and
encouragement.



iii
ABSTRACT

This study looks into the effectiveness of using process writing to improve 12
th

graders‘ writing skill in English classrooms at Quảng Xƣơng 1 secondary school.
The study investigates students‘ participation in process writing, their improvement
in writing ability, together with useful implications to the teaching of writing skill at
secondary schools. Twenty students of 12
th
grade class participated in the study.
The findings show that the implementation of process writing in teaching writing
can improve students‘ writing quality. Students made many errors in the first drafts.
Nonetheless, after receiving the teacher‘s feedback and rewriting the drafts, students
made significant improvements in their writing. The study concludes by
recommendations of using process writing in teaching composition at high schools.

iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS


Codes/symbols
Meaning
1
W.Ch.
The words are inapplicable with sentences/ meaning
2
W.PREP.
Wrong preposition
3
V.T.
Verb tense or GR = more general grammar problems
Wrong tense/ use another tense
4
W.SP.
Wrong spelling
5
Art.
Use article ―a”, “ an” or “the” for singular noun
6
^
There is a missing word needed to insert
7
N.P.
New paragraph
8
S/V A.

Subject and verb do not agree
9
W.O.
The words in this sentence are in the wrong order
10
W.f.
Wrong word form
11
S.
Subject needed
12
V.
Verb needed
13
Pl.
Plural
14
U.W.
Unnecessary word
15
W.Conj.
Wrong conjunction
16
W.P.
Wrong punctuation

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
ABSTRACT iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
PART A: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Rationale 1
2. Objectives of the Study 2
3. Research Questions 2
4. Methods of the study 2
5. Significance of the study 2
6. Scope of the Study 2
7. Organization of the Study 2
PART B: DEVELOPMENT 4
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 4
1.1. Review of previous studies 4
1.2. Theoretical background 6
1.2.1. Writing and the role of writing 6
1.2.2. Principles of teaching writing 8
1.2.3. Approaches to teaching writing 9
1.2.4. The process of writing 11

1.2.5. Providing feedback to students‘ writing 15
1.2.6. Evaluation of student writing 20
1.3. Summary 21
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 22
2.1. Research setting 22
2.1.1. An overview of research site 22


vi
2.1.2. The teachers and the students 22
2.1.3. Learning materials 23
2.2. Participants 23
2.3. Data collection instrument. 24
2.4. Procedures of data collection 24
2.5. Procedures of data analysis 25
CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSIONS 26
3.1. Findings of the study 26
3.1.1. Overall improvement of students‘ writing 26
3.1.2. Number of the errors in content and organization aspects 29
3.1.3. Number of the errors in vocabulary and language use aspect 29
3.1.4. Number of mechanical errors 31
3.2. The results 31
3.2.1. Students‘ writing achievement in content and organization aspect 31
3.2.2. Students‘ writing achievement in vocabulary and language use aspect 32
3.2.3. Students‘ writing achievement in mechanical aspect 33
3.3. Discussions 33
3.4. Summary 38
PART C: CONCLUSIONS 39
1. Recapitulation of major findings 39
2. Conclusions 40

3. Limitations of the study 41
4. Teaching implications 41
5. Suggestions for the further studies 42
REFERENCES I
APPENDICES IV





1
PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
English is a required subject for high school students in Vietnam nowadays.
Theoretically, the curricula and teaching philosophy are communicatively oriented
with four skills equally developed. In practice, writing is a largely ignored area
due to the washback of examinations. Most of important tests including graduation
and university entrance exams do not have a writing component. As a result,
students only focus on learning grammar and vocabulary. They have considerable
difficulty in learning the writing skill.
Writing was traditionally considered as a product, which means that students
write a composition and the teacher provides comments and gives correction and
the students do not have to rewrite the draft. The present trend regards writing as a
process. That is, students write multiple drafts before the completing final draft. The
ability to write well is not a naturally acquired skill; it must be practiced and learned
through experience. Writing is a complex combination of skills that is best taught
by breaking down the process. The writing process involves a series of steps to
follow in producing a finished piece of writing. By breaking down writing step-by-
step, the mystery is removed and writer‘s block is reduced. Most importantly,
students discover the benefits of constructive feedback on their writing, and they

progressively master, and even enjoy writing. Although this idea is not new in
theory, how to apply it in practice is not easy. Being a teacher of English at a
secondary school, I see the reality of teaching writing skill in my setting. I have,
therefore, decided to conduct a study on this area to improve the teaching practice in
my school.
The study deals with the use of writing process to improve 12
th
graders‘
writing skill at Quảng Xƣơng 1 high school. It focuses on the students‘ revising and
editing the drafts after they receive feedback from the teacher and the changes made
to each paper between the first and final drafts. The text type was descriptive.




2
2. Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study are:
- To investigate the impact of process writing on 12
th
graders‘ composition skill.
- To find out effective methods of teaching English writing skill to 12
th
graders.
3. Research Questions
In order to meet the objectives set forth, the study focuses on the following
research questions:
1. To what extent does writing process help to improve the 12
th
graders‘ writing

skill?
2. What are the effective methods for teaching the writing skill to 12
th
graders at
Quảng Xƣơng 1 secondary school?
4. Methods of the study
The study employs a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. It
involves the analysis of students‘ writing, interviews, reflective journals, and
statistical data. Multiple drafts approach is used for error treatment and content
development. Interviews and reflective journals provide in-depth information that
supplements the analysis of writing drafts.
5. Significance of the study
The study looks into students‘ writing and their common problems. The
findings can help practitioners improve their teaching quality. The process writing
approach itself is not new; nonetheless, its application in local schools may require
adaption. The study is an attempt to find out how to apply the writing process in
practice effectively and to discover the benefits of constructive feedback on their
writing. The research results can make theoretical and practical contributions to
English language education.
6. Scope of the Study
The study deals with the use of writing process to improve 12
th
graders‘
writing skill at Quảng Xƣơng 1 high school.
7. Organization of the Study
Besides the abstract, references, and appendices, the study is organized as follows.


3
Part A: Introduction provides an introduction and an overview of the

research. It presents the rationale for the research, defines the objectives, research
questions, methods, significance, scope and organization of the study.
Part B: Development
Chapter 1: Theoretical background discusses previous related research
and presents the theoretical background for the study. It deals with the writing skill,
writing process and feedback on students‘ writing. This part also provides
description, summary, and critical evaluation of each work quoted.
Chapter 2: Methodology presents the detailed procedure of the study: the
methodology, population selection, data collection and analysis.
Chapter 3: Data analysis and discussion deals with the major findings
drawn out from the research. It includes further discussion of the themes that arise
from the data analysis and a response to the research questions based on the
literature and the study.
Part C: Conclusions
Main points and contents of the study will be concluded based on the results
of the study. The implications of the study and the recommendation for further
research will be presented.

4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter covers the theoretical issues related to the study. It reviews the
works of foreign and Vietnamese scholars and researchers, and discusses theoretical
issues to lay the foundation for the data analysis and implication chapters.
1.1. Review of previous studies
The process writing approach has been dominant in EFL/ESL composition
classes for over two decades now (Brown, 2001; Gordon, 1996; Johnston, 1996;
Muncie, 1999). Central to the method is the role of teacher feedback which helps
students to improve their writing through several stages of composing. Although a
multitude of research projects concerning the issue have been done, the findings still
seem to be inconclusive (Chandler, 2004; Ferris & Robert, 2001; Ferris, 2004;
Guenette, 2007; Muncie, 2000). This literature review is an attempt to shed light on
the different views on the writing process, and to investigate what aspects of writing
are most influenced by teacher‘s feedback.
Muncie (2002) investigated students‘ vocabulary development in process
writing. Using the Lexical Frequency Profile (LFP), she analyzed four drafts,
including a timed composition which aimed to measure the students‘ normal
vocabulary range, the first and the final timed drafts, and the mid-draft (no timing)
of a composition written through process writing. She found that there was no
significant difference between LFPs among the three timed compositions. However,
the participants used a higher percentage of more sophisticated vocabulary in the
(no timing) free revisions between the first and the final draft. She contends that
process writing (even without teacher feedback) can be a good way to help students
extend vocabulary. Her research result seems to be supported by Ferris and Roberts
(2001), who also found that the control group (no teacher feedback) was more
successful in editing word choice errors than other categories, including verbs, noun
endings, articles and sentence structure (although it was outperformed by the

experiment groups, which receive teacher feedback). In terms of grammar, Young
and Cameron‘s (2005) research revealed that the group which received no feedback


5
also had some improvements in the use of past tense and the definite article. It is
therefore evident that process writing can, to some extent, help students self-edit
their rewrites.
In related studies, a heated debate of corrective feedback was raised by
Truscott (1996), who claims that feedback on forms should be abandoned since it
does more harm than good (as cited in Ferris, 2004). This view, however, is
challenged by many subsequent publications. Lyster, Lightbown and Spada (1999)
refer to different studies to point out Truscott‘s weaknesses in his reasoning.
Nevertheless, teacher mid-draft feedback as mentioned above is criticized by
Muncie (2000), who claims that if the teacher gives mid-draft feedback, it hinders
students‘ creativeness since they tend to strictly follow what the teacher suggests.
She argues that such feedback does not have long-term benefits. In order to avoid
what she calls ―overshadowing role of evaluator‖, she recommends using peer mid-
draft feedback so that the writer has total choice over which recommendations to
use. To support her claim, she administered a questionnaire to 29 upper-
intermediate students at a Japanese university so as to elicit students‘ attitude to
types of feedback. She suggests that the teacher should give final-draft feedback and
students should write a summary with the title ―How I can improve future
compositions‖. This summary will keep reminding them to refer back to the
directions while writing the next compositions.
Ashwell (2000) conducted a study with 50 Japanese students. They were
asked to write a 500-word composition with two drafts before the final version.
Four different patterns of teacher feedback were given: (1) content-focused
feedback on draft 1, then form-focused feedback on draft 2, (2) the reverse direction
(3) both types given simultaneously, and (4) no feedback at all. The form feedback

included circling or underlining grammatical, lexical and mechanical errors. The
content feedback mainly focused on multiple sentence level issue, organization,
cohesion and relevance. The compositions were assessed by English native-speaker
scorers. He found that pattern 1, content feedback followed by form feedback, was
not superior to the reverse pattern or the mixed pattern. In addition, content quality


6
was not significantly influenced by feedback. His post-hoc analysis showed that
students tended to heavily attend to form feedback and pay less attention to content.
These findings almost completely concur with Fathman and Whalley‘s (1990).
In Vietnam, there have been a few attempts to investigate the issue. Đào Thị
Thu Hƣơng (2008) studied the process approach to writing at FPT university. Her
subjects of the study were 144 second year students. The effectiveness of the
programme was investigated through post- interviews and the comparison of a pre-
and post-questionnaire, a pre-test and a post-test, and pre- and post- observations of
the strategies used by the students in both their pretests and post-tests. She found
that the programme brought about positive results across all classes and in both the
upper and lower levels, though the results in each classroom differed slightly. The
process approach seems to be an effective approach even to students at elementary
level of English. Process writing seems to be a feasible solution to heightening the
writing abilities and confidence of students, especially those who have higher
English proficiency.
In search of documents for the study, I have not found any research on the
application of process writing at high school in my region. This is the reason why I
have decided to study it in Quảng Xƣơng 1 high school where I am currently
teaching.
1.2. Theoretical background
1.2.1. Writing and the role of writing
Writing is one of the four skills in language acquisition. It has been defined

in many ways, which show different viewpoints of the authors. According to
―Oxford Advanced Learner‘s Dictionary‖ (1989), writing is to ―make letters or
other symbols on a surface (usually paper), especially with a pen or pencil‖.
Writing, for Crystal (1995: 257), is ‗‗… a way of communicating which uses a
system of visual marks made on some kind of surface’’. Hedge (2000:302) contends
that writing is ―a complex process which is neither easy nor spontaneous for many
second language learners”. This proposition concurs with Ur‘s point of view
(1996: 161) ―Most people acquire the spoken language (at least their own mother


7
tongue) intuitively, whereas the written form is in most cases deliberately taught
and learned‖.
Writing has a number of functions. It is used to facilitate communication as letters,
newspapers, advertisements; each of them carries out a specific purpose. According
to Nunan (1991: 84), writing serves four main functions. Firstly, it is used primarily
for action such as the public signs on roads and stations, product labels and
instructions on food or tools, recipes, maps, bills, etc. Secondly, it is for social
contact as letters, postcards, greeting cards and personal correspondence. Thirdly,
writing provides the readers with information as newspapers and magazines, non-
fiction books (textbooks, public notices, guidebooks, etc). Finally, written language
entertains the readers with comic strips, fiction books, poetry and drama.
In educational settings, teaching and learning writing also play an important
role in developing students‘ compositional ability. White (1981) indicates a number
of reasons why writing occupies a place in the language syllabus. The first reason is
that writing is the commonest way of examining students‘ performance in English.
Consequently, students‘ writing ability is a key to examination success. Second, in
the eyes of both parents and students, writing helps them see what has been done
and what has been achieved during the process of learning. Furthermore, in
classroom, writing may be used as one technique to help the lesson interesting. In

addition, teachers may use writing as a testing device to provide feedback on what
students have learned. Students‘ writing can be the useful evidence of successes or
failures in learning. The last reason is that our writing will be judged by the readers
in parts of style, content and logic. This requires the writers to spend a great deal of
care and thought on the process of writing.
For that reason, writing also helps students learn (Rames, 1983). Writing
reinforces the grammatical structures, idioms and vocabulary that students have
learned. Moreover, when students write, they have chances to go beyond what they
have just learned to say. They can discover the language. Finally, in the process of
writing, students necessarily become involved with new language and the effort to
express ideas. The constant use of eye, hand and brain helps reinforce learning.


8
With all the roles mentioned above, we can see that writing is an important skill in
teaching and learning languages at any levels.
1.2.2. Principles of teaching writing
Teaching how to write effectively is one of the crucial life-long skills that
instructors impart to their students. It is a matter of prescribing a set of
predetermined tasks or exercises to the students. When teaching a writing course,
instructors not only teach about how to develop ideas in writing, but also pay proper
attention to how to write English sentences grammatically and systematically. The
effectiveness of writing instruction depends on both teaching compositions and
assessment. Self-evaluation is an essential component that must be imbedded in the
process. In assessing students‘ compositions, teachers should respond to their writing
based on criteria that have been communicated and taught to students and responses
to errors. To respond the error the teacher can use a feedback that contains specific
criteria.
According to Graham and Perin (2007), a set of recommended approaches for
teaching writing to adolescent students include the 11 instructional methods below:

1. Writing strategies involves teaching students strategies for planning,
revising, and editing their compositions.
2. Summarization involves explicitly and systematically teaching students
how to summarize texts.
3. Collaborative writing uses instructional arrangements in which adolescents
work together to plan, draft, revise, and edit their compositions
4. Specific product goals is a method in which students are assigned specific,
reachable goals for their writing.
5. Word processing uses computers and word-processors as instructional
supports for writing assignments.
6. Sentence combining involves teaching students to construct more
complex, sophisticated sentences.
7. Prewriting engages students in activities designed to help them generate or
organize ideas for their composition.


9
8. Inquiry activities engage students in analyzing immediate, concrete data to
help them develop ideas and content for a particular writing task.
9. The process writing approach interweaves a number of writing
instructional activities in a workshop environment that stresses extended writing
opportunities, writing for authentic audiences, personalized instruction, and cycles
of writing
10. Study of models provides students with opportunities to read, analyze,
and emulate models of good writing.
11. Writing for content learning uses writing as a tool for learning content material.
1.2.3. Approaches to teaching writing
Various methods of teaching composition have been employed in language
teaching. They can be categorized into two major approaches, namely the process
and the product approach.

1.2.3.1. The product approach
The product oriented approach focuses on the end result of the learning
process, what is expected from the learner is to do as fluent and competent user of
the language (Nunan, 1991: 86). This is a traditional approach, in which students
focus on the study of model texts. Priority is given to accuracy and conversations
are taken from the model.
The product approach aims at making the students competent in the language
when they write relevant and coherent pieces of writing. It focuses on the final
product of the writers and the texts written by the students are based on models
provided by the teacher. Brown (2001) notes that significant attention was paid to
―model‖ compositions that students would emulate and on how well a student‘s
final product measured up against a list of criteria that included content,
organization, vocabulary use, grammatical use, and mechanical considerations such
as spelling and punctuation.
1.2.3.2. The process approach
Writing in process approaches is seen as predominantly to do with linguistic
skills, such as planning and drafting, and there is much less emphasis on linguistic


10
knowledge, such as knowledge about grammar and text structure. There are
different views on the stages that writers go through in producing a piece of writing,
but a typical model identifies four stages: prewriting; composing/drafting; revising;
and editing (Tribble 1996: 39). This is a cyclical process in which writers may
return to pre-writing activities, for example, after doing some editing or revising. A
typical prewriting activity in the process approach would be for learners to
brainstorm on the topic of houses. At the composing/drafting stage they would
select and structure the result of the brainstorming session to provide a plan of a
description of a house. This would guide the first draft of a description of a
particular house. After discussion, learners might revise the first draft working

individually or in groups. Finally, the learners would edit or proof-read the text. In
process approaches, the teacher primarily facilitates the learners‘ writing, and
providing input or stimulus is considered to be less important. Like babies and
young children who develop, rather than learn, their mother tongue, second
language learners develop, rather than consciously learn, writing skills. Teachers
draw out the learners‘ potential. Process approaches have a somewhat monolithic
view of writing. The process of writing is seen as the same regardless of what is
being written and who is writing. So while the amount of pre-writing in producing a
postcard to a friend and in writing an academic essay are different (Tribble 1996:
104), this is not reflected in much process teaching.
1.2.3.3. Process approach versus product approach
There are certain differences between the two approaches to teaching
composition. The product approach pays much attention to the study of the model
text provided by the teacher. The result of the learning process depends on the final
product. The process approach, in contrast, focuses on the writing process rather
than the final product. It argues that the final draft of the writer is the result of many
stages. In the process approach, students have time to write and rewrite the
composition before handing the final. In the process of composing the writing, they
can change, rearrange, add or delete any word or sentence that make their thoughts
more clearly, more effectively and in a more interesting way.


11
The main differences between two approaches are outlined by Steele (2007)
in the table below:
Table 2.1: Comparison of Process approach and Product Approach
Process writing
Product writing
 text as a resource for comparison
 ideas as starting point

 more than one draft
 more global, focus on purpose, theme, text
type, i.e., reader is emphasized
 collaborative
 emphasis on creative process
 imitate model text
 organization of ideas more important than
ideas themselves
 one draft
 features highlighted including controlled
practice of those features
 individual
 emphasis on end product
It should be noted that certain genres may lend themselves more favorably to
one approach than the other. Formal letters or postcards, for instance, in which the
features are very fixed, would be perhaps more suited to a product-driven approach,
in which focus on the layout, style, organization and grammar could greatly help
students in dealing with this type of writing task. Other genres, such as descriptive
and narrative essays, may be more suitable with process-driven approaches, which
focus on a process of idea generation. Writing multiple drafts before an effective
product is created and exchanging of texts help the students to direct their writing to
their reader, therefore making a more successful text.
1.2.4. The process of writing
The process of writing comes through several stages before reaching the final
draft. It is a process that involves six distinct steps: prewriting, drafting, responding,
revising, editing and publishing. It is known as a recursive process. While writers
are revising, they might have to return to the prewriting step to develop and expand
their ideas. The following is a figure illustrating recursive nature of writing and the
stages of writing process.

12

Figure 2.1: Stages in Writing Process (Hyland, 2003)
1.2.4.1. Prewriting
In this stage, students involve the activities such as reading, brainstorming,
mind mapping, discussing, fast writing, questioning, interviewing, which encourage
them to generate ideas before they write their sentences in the first draft. Then,
students try to order their data and arrange them according to their priorities that
mean which idea is going to be the first, which is the second, and so on.
The prewriting stage is divided into three steps. The first step is to put the
ideas into subsists according to the main idea and eliminate all the irrelevant ones.
The second step relies on putting a topic sentence to each of the subsists made in the
first step and the topic sentence must reflect the whole subsist, that is when the
reader reads the topic sentence, he can infer what is coming. The last step in the first
stage is to order the submists according to what the writer thinks is appropriate to be
the first, second and so on.
1.2.4.2. Drafting
Drafting is to start writing according to the ideas planned before. The result of
brainstorming session provides a plan of description of topic. Oshima and Hogue
(2002; 28) call this stage as writing and revising drafts. They argue that no piece of
writing is perfect the first time and the writer has to write and revise several drafts
until he/she produces the final draft. In the first step, the composition might be written


13
without considering to grammar, punctuation, or spelling and no importance to the
structure. Students may add new information in the drafting stage; there is no matter
to hesitate because the focus is on ideas, purpose, coherence and relevance, unity,

sufficient supporting ideas and concluding sentences. As a last step in the drafting
stage, the student checks the grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes.
1.2.4.3. Reviewing
Revising is the stage where the writer comes through his/her final draft and
tries to define the different lapses and corrects them in a second draft. All good
writers go through several steps of the revision because they want to make their
writing the best it can. At this point, they consider what they have written, get
feedback from others, and then make changes. They can scratch out unnecessary or
irrelevant information, squeeze ideas that they want to add into the margin, and
even cut up and re-paste the paper to change the order or make addition. According
to Oshima and Hogue (2002; 29), during the first revision we should concern
mainly with content and organization. This is how to proceed:
 Read over the paragraph carefully for a general overview. Focus on the
general aspects of the paper and make notes in the margin.
 Check to see that you have achieved your stated purpose.
 Check for general logic and coherence.
 Check to make sure that the paragraph has a topic and that the topic
sentence has a central (main) focus.
 Check for unity. Cross any sentence that does not support the topic
sentence.
 Check to make sure that the topic sentence is developed with sufficient
supporting details. Be certain that each paragraph gives the readers enough
information to understand the main idea.
 Check the use of transitional signals.
 Finally, does your paragraph have or need a concluding sentence? If you
wrote a final comment, is it on the topic?
The next revision is to check for grammar, sentence structure, spelling, and


14

punctuation. This checking is specific as following: (Oshima and Hogue, ibid.).
 Check over each sentence for correctness and completeness: no fragments
and no choppy or run-on sentences.
 Check over each sentence for a subject and a verb, subject- verb
agreement, correct tenses, etc.
 Check the mechanics:punctuation, spelling, capitalization, tying errors,…
 Change vocabulary words as necessary.
In this stage, the students review a draft to check errors based on the
feedback from himself or herself and teacher or peers. The writers need to make
changes to another draft before having someone else read it and offer further
feedback and suggestions. Thus, drafting and revising could theoretically be
completed and repeated indefinitely.
1.2.4.4. Editing
Editing is important step because it helps moving from the stage of revising
where there are many incomplete ideas, incorrect spelling and unstructured
sentences to the stage of correcting all the final draft. Once revisions are made and
changes to major traits of a writing project are complete, editing must take place as
―a diamond is polished after being shaped‖. Whereas revisions are easily guided by
any peer reviewer, editing changes may require the assistance of someone who is
knowledgeable about grammar. This is where the role of teacher in giving direct
and indirect feedback will be applied.
According to Trimbur (1999: 680), the reason that the writers must learn to edit
their work is not simply to avoid grammatical errors, misspellings, and poor style as if
writing were a matter of abiding by the law. There are two further reasons for editing
that are important to understand. The first reason is that the correctness of writing
influences readers. The sentence errors, punctuation mistakes, misspelling words, and
stylistic lapses can distract readers and undermine a writer‘s credibility. The second
reason is that sentences are basic units of meaning that express the relationship among
ideas. Writers edit their work not just to make sure the grammatical correctness of
sentences but also to clarify what they are trying to say. For these reasons, editing

15
involves working with sentences to make a piece of writing persuasive to readers.
1.2.4.5. Publication
This stage takes place when a product of the writing process is shared with
its intended audience. Publication can occur in a variety of forums as well as
numerous times for a single product. The rewards of the writing process are often
revealed at the publication stage, when readers of a product express that the purpose
of a written project has been fulfilled. The writers realize the payments of their hard
work at the publication stage.
1.2.5. Providing feedback to students’ writing
1.2.5.1. Feedback
In language teaching, feedback is information conveyed to the learner about
his or her performance of the learning task, usually with the objective of improving
their performance (Ur, 1996: 242). It is seen by Larsen-Freeman (2003: 123) as
―evaluative information available to learners concerning their linguistic
performance.‖ In writing, feedback is the comments that the teacher gives the
students about their writing. Feedback plays a central role in writing development.
It helps the students realize what their strengths and weakness are.
The most important aspect while giving feedback is adopting a positive
attitude to students‘ writing. It takes a lot of time and effort to write, so it is only
fair that student writing is responded suitably. Positive comments can help build
student confidence and create good feeling for the next writing class. If the student
receives only negative feedback, he may easily be discouraged from trying to form
complex structures and using new vocabulary. However, feedback sessions can be a
beneficial experience for the student if the teacher shows the strong points as well.
Furthermore, teacher should consider the students‘ mistakes on part of language use
and content and organization equally. Ur (1996: 171) notes that mistake correction
is part of the language teaching, but overuse of correction can be discouraging and

distract teachers‘ attention from the equally important aspects of content and
organization.
Feedback on writing is most valuable to students‘ writing development when


16
students can use the feedback to revise and edit their writing. Based on the given
feedback, students can improve their writings, besides they will learn how to
evaluate their self. Consequently, this helps them feel more confident on their
performance.
1.2.5.2. Strategies for providing corrective feedback
There are six strategies for providing corrective feedback (adapted from Rod Ellis,
2007).
- Direct corrective feedback
With the direct corrective feedback, the teacher provides the student with the
correct form of the errors. This can use the form of crossing out an unnecessary
word, phrase, or morpheme, inserting a missing word, or writing the correct form
above or near to the wrong form. The following example illustrates the direct
correction.
a a the
A dog stole ^ bone from ^ butcher. He escaped with having ^ bone. When
over a a saw a
the dog was going through^ bridge over the river he found ^dog in the river.
Example 1 (from Ellis, 2007: 99)
- Indirect corrective feedback
Indirect corrective feedback involves indicating the location of the error but
without providing the correct form. This can take the form of underlining or circling
the errors, using cursors to show omissions in the student‘s text or placing a cross in
the margin next to the line containing the error. This strategy guides students to
learn by providing problem solving and encouraging them to self-correct their

writing.
A dog stole X bone from X butcher. He escaped with X having X X bone. When the
dog was going X through X X bridge over X the X river he found X dog in the river.
X = missing word
X __X = wrong word
- Metalinguistic corrective feedback
Metalinguistic corrective feedback involves providing learners with some


17
form of explicit comment about the errors they have made. The explicit comment
can take two forms: using error codes or providing metalinguistic explanations of
the errors. In the first form, the teacher writes codes above the location of the error
or in the margin. In the second form, teacher numbers the errors in text and writes a
grammatical description for each numbered error at the bottom of the text.
Art. Art. WW Art.
A dog stole ^ bone from ^ butcher. He escaped with having bone. When the dog
Prep. Art. Art.
Was going through bridge over the river he found ^ dog in the river.
Example 3 (from Ellis, 2007: 101)
Art. x 3;WW A dog stole bone from butcher. He escaped with having bone.
Prep.; art. When the dog was going through bridge over the river he
Art. found dog in the river.
Example 4 (from Ellis, 2007: 101)
(1) (2) (3)
A dog stole bone from butcher. He escaped with having bone. When the dog
(4) (5) (6)
was going through bridge over the river he found dog in the river.
(1), (2), (5), and (6)—you need ‗a‘ before the noun when a person or thing is mentioned
for the first time.

(3)—you need ‗the‘ before the noun when the person or thing has been mentioned
previously.
(4)—you need ‗over‘ when you go across the surface of something; you use ‗through‘
when you go inside something (e.g. ‗go through the forest‘).
Example 5 (from Ellis, 2007: 102)

Correction codes/symbols seem to be the most popular way to deal with
learners' written work. They involve placing little symbols beside the problem that
there is in the piece and letting the student try to work out what the correct version
might be. The useful correction codes are shown in the table below.