Regarding the three main features of scaffolding, namely, contingency, fading, and the transfer of responsibility, contingency entails the assistance adjusted to a learner’s existing level of understanding. The present study investigated the effect of the model of contingent teaching on improving Iranian English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ overall writing performance (opinion essays), and in terms of writing components; namely, task response, coherence and cohesion, lexical resource, and grammatical range and accuracy. Moreover, the study aimed at investigating which component was mostly affected by the model. Based on convenience sampling, 60 female EFL learners of English in a language school between the ages of 20 and 30 were chosen from four intact classes. After conducting the Oxford placement test to ensure the homogeneity of the learners, the participants were then randomly assigned to one of two groups: experimental or control. The findings of the MANCOVA test revealed that the model of contingent teaching fostered EFL learners’ opinion essay writing performance. Besides, the model of contingent teaching improved task response and the lexical resource more significantly. The study offers some practical implications for teacher trainers, teachers, and EFL learners which are discussed.
AbbaspourE.AtaiM.R.MaftoonP. (2021). Exploring the impact of scaffolded written corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ writing quality: A sociocultural theory study. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 8, 53–84.
2.
AhangariS.HejaziM.RazmjouL. (2014). The impact of scaffolding on content retention of Iranian post-elementary EFL learners’ summary writing. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 83–89.
3.
AljaafrehA.LantolfJ.P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 465–483.
4.
AyatollahiM.A.TaghinezhadA.AzadikhahM. (2017). Interactive versus collaborative writing instruction: An experimental study. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 4, 1–18.
5.
BaradaranA.SarfaraziB. (2011). The Impact of scaffolding on the Iranian EFL learners English academic writing. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5, 2265–2273.
6.
DamanhouriM. (2021). The effectiveness of scaffolding as a teaching strategy in enhancing English language learners’ motivation in writing: A case study. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 10, 49–58.
7.
DerakhshanA.Karimian ShirejiniR. (2020). An investigation of the Iranian EFL learners’ perceptions towards the most common writing problems. SAGE Open, 10.
8.
DuJ. (2020). Non-native English-speaking engineers’ writing at the workplace. Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press / Springer.
9.
FareedM.AshrafA.BilalM. (2016). ESL learners’ writing skills: Problems, factors, and suggestions. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 4, 81–92.
10.
GallimoreR.TharpR. (1990). Teaching mind in society: Teaching, schooling, and literate discourse. In MollL. (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 175–205). Cambridge University Press.
11.
GashayeS.MuchieB. (2021). The effect of teacher scaffolding on students’ paragraph writing skills in EFL classroom: The case of grade nine students in Meneguzer Secondary School, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 12, 892–898.
12.
GholaminejadR.MoinzadehA.YouhanaeeM.GhobadiradH. (2013). Writing attitudes of Iranian EFL students: A qualitative study. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 4, 1138–1145.
13.
GholamipasandP.TahririA. (2017). Peer scaffolding in an EFL writing classroom: An investigation of writing accuracy and scaffolding behaviors. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 5, 147–166
14.
GordonḤ. (1990). Naguib Mahfouz’s Egypt: Existential themes in his writings (Vol. 38). Greenwood Publishing.
15.
HemmatiF.MortazaviM. (2017). The effect of different types of written scaffolds on EFL learners’ perception of writing self-regulatory skills. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 33, 71–81.
16.
JabaliO. (2018). Students’ attitudes towards EFL university writing: A case study at An-Najah National University, Palestine. Heliyon, 4, 1–25.
17.
LiD.ZhangL. (2021). Contextualizing feedback in L2 writing: The role of teacher scaffolding. Language Awareness. Epub ahead of print 2 June 2021. DOI: 10.1080/09658416.2021.1931261.
18.
LongM. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.
19.
LucantonioD. (2011). The role of contingency in the scaffolding process. Bulletin of The University of Electro-Communications, 23, 11–15.
20.
McDonoughK.De VleeschauwerJ.CrawfordW. (2018). Comparing the quality of collaborative writing, collaborative prewriting, and individual texts in a Thai EFL context. System, 74, 109–120.
21.
Memari HanjaniA. (2018). Novice Iranian EFL writers’ reactions to collective peer Scaffolding incorporation into their paragraph writing course. Applied Research on English Language, 7, 273–292.
22.
Memari HanjaniA. (2019). Collective peer scaffolding, self-revision, and writing progress of novice EFL learners. International Journal of English Studies, 19, 41–57.
23.
NiuR.JiangL.DengY. (2018). Effect of proficiency pairing on L2 learners’ language learning and scaffolding in collaborative writing. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27, 187–195.
24.
ObeiahS.F.BatainehR.F. (2016). The effect of portfolio-based assessment on Jordanian EFL learners’ writing performance. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 9, 32–46.
25.
PiamsaiCh. (2020). The effect of scaffolding on non-proficient EFL learners’ performance in an academic writing class. Language Education and Acquisition Research Network Journal, 13, 288–305.
26.
RazaghiM.BagheriM.S.YaminiM. (2019). The impact of cognitive scaffolding on Iranian EFL learners’ speaking skill. International Journal of Instruction, 12, 95–112.
27.
RiaziM.RezaeiM. (2011). Teacher- and peer-scaffolding behaviors: Effects on EFL students’ writing improvement. In FeryokA. (Eds.), CLESOL 2010: Proceedings of the 12th National Conference for Community Languages and ESOL (pp. 55–63). TESOLANZ.
28.
RichardsJ.C.RenandyaW.A. (Eds.) (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge University Press.
29.
SetiawanA.MulyadiD. (2021). The portfolio assessment to teach writing of opinion essay. Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, 15, 329–336.
30.
SilvaT.MatsudaP.K. (Eds.). (2010). Practicing theory in second language writing. Parlor Press.
31.
TaheriP.NazmiR. (2021). Improving EFL learners’ argumentative writing ability: Teacher vs. peer scaffolding. Teaching English Language, 15, 299–333.
32.
TaiH.C.ChenC.M.TsaiY.H.LeeB.O.Setiya DewiY. (2021). Is instructional scaffolding a better strategy for teaching writing to EFL learners? A functional MRI study in healthy young adults. Brain Sciences, 11, 1378.
33.
TillemaM. (2012). LOT dissertation series: Writing in first and second language: Empirical studies on text quality and writing processes. LOT Publications.
34.
Van de PolJ.MercerN.VolmanM. (2019). Scaffolding student understanding in small-group work: Students’ uptake of teacher support in subsequent small-group interaction. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(2), 206–239.
35.
Van de PolJ.VolmanM.BeishuizenJ. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 271–297.
36.
Van de PolJ.VolmanM.BeishuizenJ. (2011). Patterns of contingent teaching in teacher–student interaction. Learning and Instruction, 21, 46–57.
37.
Van de PolJ.VolmanM.ElbersE.BeishuizenJ. (2012). Measuring scaffolding in teacher small-group interactions. In GilliesR.M. (Ed.), Pedagogy: New developments in the learning sciences (pp. 151–188). Nova Science.
38.
Van de PolJ.VolmanM.OortF.BeishuizenJ. (2014). Teacher scaffolding in small-group work: An intervention study. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23, 600–650.
39.
Van de PolJ.VolmanM.OortF.BeishuizenJ. (2015). The effects of scaffolding in the classroom: support contingency and student independent working time in relation to student achievement, task effort, and appreciation of support. Instructional Science, 43, 615–641.
40.
VeerappanV.A.SuanW.H.SulaimanT. (2011). The effect of the scaffolding technique in journal writing among the second language learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2, 934–940.
41.
VygotskyL. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In GauvainM.ColeM. (Eds.), Readings on the development of children (pp. 29–36). W.H. Freeman.
42.
WebbN.M.FrankeM.L.DeT.ChanA.G.FreundD.SheinP.MelkonianD.K. (2009). ‘Explain to your partner’: Teachers’ instructional practices and students’ dialogue in small groups. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39, 49–70.
43.
WoodD.BrunerJ. S.RossG. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines.
44.
WoodD.WoodH.MiddletonD. (1978). An experimental evaluation of four face-to-face teaching strategies. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 1, 131–147.
