INDONESIAN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON INSTRUCTOR-INITIATED WRITING ACTIVITIES
The recent literature of writing studies suggests that there is a possibility of different perception between instructor and university students on what causes students’ writing reluctance which leads to ineffective writing teaching activities initiated by the instructor. Such ineffective teaching has, then, become the main cause of students’ disengagement in writing classes at university. This paper is aimed at exploring the perception from students’ side as the targeted individuals within the teaching process itself. In order to describe such perception, a critical literary review of previous studies from the relevant area is employed. It is argued that students’ perception on instructor-initiated writing activities are influenced by pedagogical consequences, learner’s linguistic competence, and their original perceptions of the English writing skill. This investigation has found that it is very crucial for instructors to design activities that engage students in three dimensions: cognitive, behavioural, and emotional. The study also finds that instructors' selection of teaching strategies influences students' motivation extrinsically in the form of reinforcement, or in contrast, degradation of their motivation. Finally, this study confirms it is possible for students to respond pedagogical activities differently from the expectation of the instructors.
Adams, R., & Newton, J. (2009). TBLT in Asia: Constraints and opportunities. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 19(1), 1-17. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/35396964/01.
Asadifard, A., & Koosha, M. (2013). EFL instructors and student writers' perceptions of academic writing reluctance. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(9), 1572-1578. doi:10.4304/tpls.3.9.1572-1578.
Beattie, A. (2007). Exploring the value of dialogue in improving boys' writing. Changing English, 14(2), 161-174. doi: 10.1080/13586840701442976.
Borg, M. O., & Shapiro, S. L. (1996). Personality type and student performance in principles of economics. The Journal of Economic Education, 27(1), 3-25. doi: 10.1080/00220485.1996.10844890.
Buis, K. (2007). Reclaiming reluctant writers: How to encourage students to face their fears and master the essential traits of good writing. Pembroke Publishers Limited.
Canilao, M. L. E. N. (2009). Mission possible: How to make writing more meaningful and fun for learners. ELT World Online, 1, 1-8.
Cohen, A. D., & Dörnyei, Z. (2002). Focus on the language learner: Motivation, styles, and strategies. An introduction to applied linguistics, 14, 170-190. doi: 10.1111/1467-9922.53222.
Daly, J. A., & Miller, M. D. (1975). The empirical development of an instrument to measure writing apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 9(3), 242-249. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40170632.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
Hasan, J., & Marzuki, M. (2017). An analysis of student's ability in writing at Riau University Pekanbaru-Indonesia. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(5), 380-388. doi: 10.17507/tpls.0705.08.
Hawthorne, S. (2008). Students' beliefs about barriers to engagement with writing in secondary school English: A focus group study. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 31(1), 30-43. doi: 10.1.1.465.4887.
Huskin, P. R. (2016). Engagement strategies for increasing student writing success. Education, 136(3), 283-290. Retrieved from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A447178151/AONE?u=monash&sid=AONE&xid=de2b5157.
Jeon, E. H., & Yamashita, J. (2014). L2 reading comprehension and its correlates: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 64(1), 160-212. doi: 10.1111/lang.12034.
Lam, S. F., & Law, Y. K. (2007). The roles of instructional practices and motivation in writing performance. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75(2), 145-164. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.75.2.
McClintic, S. V. (1989). Motivational factors related to writing instruction in classrooms using process and product oriented approaches. Francisco: CA. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED308522.pdf.
Meiketo, T. A., & Tessema, K. A. (2012). Reluctance to write among students in the context of an academic writing course in an Ethiopian university. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 14(142), 142-175 Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/33109939/Asia_EFL.pdf.
Moody, R. (1988). Personality preferences and foreign language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 72(4), 389-401. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1988.tb04198.
Murad, T. M., & Smadi, O. (2009). The effect of task-based language teaching on developing speaking skills among the Palestinian secondary EFL students in Israel and their attitudes towards English (Master thesis). The Asian EFL Journal. Retrieved from http://asian-efl-journal.com/Thesis/Thesis-Murad.pdf.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139-158. doi: 10.1080/10573560308222.
Rodliyah, R. S. (2016). Using a Facebook closed group to improve EFL students’ writing. TEFLIN Journal, 27(1), 82-100. doi: 10.15639/teflinjournal.v27i1/82-100.
Rosenholtz, S. J., & Simpson, C. (1984). Classroom organization and student stratification. The Elementary School Journal, 85(1), 21-37. doi: 10.1086/461389.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.
Sabet, M. K., & Tahriri, A. (2014). The impact of task-based approach on Iranian EFL learners' motivation in writing research abstracts. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 5(4), 953-962. doi:10.4304/jltr.5.4.953-962.
Swan, M. (2005). Legislation by hypothesis: The case of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 376-401. doi: 10.1093/applin/ami013.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1015.
Article StatisticAbstract view : 118 times
PDF views : 86 times
The PDF file you selected should load here if your Web browser has a PDF reader plug-in installed (for example, a recent version of Adobe Acrobat Reader).
If you would like more information about how to print, save, and work with PDFs, Highwire Press provides a helpful Frequently Asked Questions about PDFs.
Alternatively, you can download the PDF file directly to your computer, from where it can be opened using a PDF reader. To download the PDF, click the Download link above.
How To Cite This :
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2019 IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature