Teacher-Students Collaboration: Using Guided-Writing Instruction to Assist Learners with Writing Difficulties and Low Motivation to Write

Abstract

Despite the complex nature of writing, many students are hesitant to tackle difficult subjects. To help those facing writing difficulties and increase their motivation, this study examines the effect of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction. A two-group quasi-experimental design was used with a pre-treatment-post-tests format. The participants in this study were 50 11th-grade students (aged 17–24; 28 male and 22 female) from Data Sana Memorial School in Wolaita Sodo City, South Ethiopia. Writing skill tests and questionnaires about writing motivation were used to collect data, which was then analyzed using independent smples t-test analysis to determine the effectiveness of guided-writing on students’ writing improvement and motivation. Although the pre-test results did not show a significant difference between the mean scores of the control and experimental groups, the post-test results of the writing skill tests showed a statistically significant difference between the means of the experimental and control groups. Additionally, the results of the writing motivation questionnaires revealed that the mean score of the experimental group increased significantly in the post-test compared to the pre-test. These findings demonstrate the usefulness of guided-writing instruction in assisting students with writing difficulties and motivation. In conclusion, the findings have implications for teaching writing through guided-writing instruction and it is recommended to help students struggling with writing and a lack of motivation. Moreover, further research into writing instruction through guided-writing in various ecological aspects and grade levels is required.

Keywords

teacher-students instruction guided-writing instruction writing ability writing difficulty writing motivation

Introduction

In the Ethiopian general education syllabuses, the aim of writing skills is to improve students’ communication abilities. The goal is to help them develop their language system, express their thoughts and feelings in writing, and share them with readers, ultimately enhancing their skills (Aryanika, 2016). The general education system in Ethiopia consists of three levels: primary, lower secondary, and higher secondary. Primary school typically lasts for 6 years, lower secondary for 4 years, and upper secondary for 2 years. In rural areas, primary school is often taught in the native language of the community (Eigbiremolen, 2020; Ethiopia Education and Training Roadmap, 2020; Gebremariam & Gedamu, 2022, 2023). In regional and federal cities, as well as some private schools, the medium of instruction may vary depending on the situation and individual preferences. Despite most children in Ethiopia starting school at the age of 5, the country still has a very low literacy rate. This is partly due to limited access to quality education and the widespread belief that education is unnecessary for productivity. Many Ethiopians believe that work experience is sufficient for learning the skills needed for their jobs (Begna, 2017; Ethiopia Education and Training Roadmap, 2020).

Ethiopia’s education system includes both private and public schools. Private education is provided by organizations outside of the government, such as private investors, non-governmental organizations, and religious organizations that operate for profit. Public schools, on the other hand, are government-run and offer free general education to families who cannot afford private school fees (Begna, 2017; Eigbiremolen, 2020). However, studies (such as Bulqiyah et al., 2021; Sahle et al., 2023) have shown that secondary school students face internal writing challenges caused by cognitive and linguistic problems, such as a lack of vocabulary knowledge and a failure to adhere to the proper essay structure. For instance, the writing process includes issues like idea loss and disorganization, as well as language transfer. Rahmat et al. (2022b) list these challenges as not adhering to a writing system, lack of interest or motivation to write, and not knowing where to begin. The majority of secondary school students are afraid of writing, which exacerbates the challenges, especially for those who already lack writing ability and motivation. Additionally, secondary school students struggle with written communication (Ferris, 2003). These problems arise due to external factors that students face while writing, as well as the teaching methods and classroom conditions employed by teachers (Ceylan, 2019). The fact that language teachers mostly use traditional teaching methods in the classroom, with students primarily doing textbook exercises and focusing solely on correcting their results, has influenced students’ writing motivation and skills (Aminatun & Ngadiso, 2018). The teaching method is one of the factors that influence students’ skill development in writing instruction in the classroom (Gebremariam & Asgede, 2023).

Guided-writing instruction is known to help students use the target language and express their ideas in writing. Bulqiyah et al. (2021) found that many secondary school students in Ethiopia struggle with writing skills and lack motivation to write, which negatively affects their overall academic performance (Graham et al., 2016; Shaver et al., 2015; Wondim et al., 2023). Insufficient writing instruction and assessment are identified as key factors influencing students’ writing performance (Sasayama et al., 2021; Wright, 2015). Teachers who provide writing guidelines during practice have a significant impact on students’ writing abilities. Additionally, studies (Klimova, 2014; Sajjad et al., 2021) have shown that many students struggle with writing and communicating through written texts during classroom practice.

The role of guided-writing instruction in improving students’ writing skills and motivation has been studied in various contexts (Graham & Perin, 2007; Hoch et al., 2018; Komang, 2013; Martarini et al., 2020; Nelson, 2007; Ouahidi, 2020; Ryan & Deci, 2000; Sabti et al., 2019). For instance, Ismiati and Fitria (2021) examined the impact of guided-writing instruction on the writing abilities of 60 students with similar abilities. The results of their quasi-experiment’s post-test demonstrated that guided-writing instruction reduced difficulties in students’ writing skills. Rahmat et al. (2022b) discovered that guided-writing instruction focused more on improving writing abilities compared to other skills. Veerabudren et al. (2023) conducted a study in elementary school classrooms, evaluating the effectiveness of guided-writing, and found positive results. Aryanika (2016) also investigated teachers’ guided-writing instruction, students’ motivation to write, and writing ability, as well as students’ writing problems such as difficulty generating ideas, low motivation, and confusion about how to start an essay. However, there is a lack of systematic empirical research on the benefits of guided-writing instruction for enhancing writing abilities and motivation. Future studies should aim to conduct focused experimental research using guided-writing instruction to positively impact students’ writing ability and motivation to write.

In summary, local studies have indicated a decline in the level of writing proficiency among Ethiopian secondary school students over time. Studies conducted outside of Ethiopia have suggested that guided-writing instruction can address issues with students’ motivation and writing ability observed in Ethiopian language education. However, guided-writing instruction has not received much attention in Ethiopian language education. Therefore, this study aims to fill this gap by addressing the following specific questions:

Q1: Does guided-writing instruction help students who struggle with writing?

Q2: Does guided-writing instruction improve students’ low writing motivation?

Review Literature

Writing down thoughts using appropriate language is a fundamental human activity that allows individuals to understand themselves and express their ideas in written form. In today’s digital age, people often rely on texting to communicate with one another (Ferris, 2010; Islam, 2017; Mulyono, 2015; Oyinloye, 2017; Teo et al., 2023; Toba et al., 2019; Wondim et al., 2023). However, students learning a new language often face difficulties in expressing their emotions, lack interest in writing, and struggle to articulate their ideas. To become effective writers, students need to grasp grammar, vocabulary, and the organization and structure of their thoughts (Smith, 2021; Yamanishi et al., 2019). Unfortunately, many secondary school students in Ethiopia do not meet these requirements. Therefore, it is crucial for students to practice writing their thoughts and learn how to organize them systematically. Additionally, they need to have the desire and motivation to write (Abdul-Hakim, 2019). In the following section, we will explore previous theories and contrast them with recent studies.

Teacher-Students Collaboration

Guided-writing instruction is conducted by the teacher in small groups, tailored to the students’ needs, and is based on the social learning theory (Vygotsky, 1978). In this social learning environment, knowledge is constructed through collaboration between the teacher and students (Ahmadi, 2017). Additionally, modeling is a method that allows students to use, engage with, and practice writing (Mohammad et al., 2020; Yamanishi et al., 2019). Ismiati and Fitria (2021) define guided-writing as an instructional approach that enables students to write independently and in small groups by providing them with topics that align with their interests and offering thorough explanations about those topics. With the support of this approach, students can gather data individually and in groups, generate and select ideas, organize those ideas, and then synthesize them into writing. Moreover, Martarini et al. (2020) suggest that teachers introduce various contexts into the classroom and have students practice utilizing them to facilitate the implementation process. After the practice, students write individually and in groups.

Considering the challenges students face in writing and their lack of motivation, it is important to develop an appropriate teaching strategy such as guided-writing. Numerous studies have demonstrated that guided-writing instruction is more effective than the traditional approach to teaching writing (Chaboki & Heidar, 2019; Islam, 2017; Khatri, 2014). This strategy involves collaboration between the teacher and student, with the teacher providing guidance, discussing how to improve writing skills, and offering expert assistance for each student’s work (Ferris, 2003, 2010; Graham & Perin, 2007). Through these discussions, students can identify and evaluate their writing strengths and weaknesses while developing problem-solving skills (Aminatun & Ngadiso, 2018; Smith, 2021). Furthermore, Gibson (2009) found that teacher-student collaboration is the most effective form of group discussion, and Mulyono (2015) also emphasized on collaborative evaluation as a crucial activity in the classroom.

To implement guided-writing, the teacher must interact with students in a small group setting (Elkhayma, 2020). Studies have shown that guided-writing plays a significant role in balancing the current curriculum and helping students develop their writing skills (Suastra & Menggo, 2020; Virgiawan et al., 2020). It has been demonstrated to be particularly effective for students who struggle with writing (Virgiawan et al., 2020; Smith, 2021). This is because it informs students of the type of reader they are writing for, the appropriate format, the ideas they should include, and how to develop them, as well as the established rules of grammar and organization (Salahi & Farahian, 2021). This can inspire students to write both independently and in groups. In this writing instruction, the teacher acts as a scaffolder (Rery & Khoiril, 2020), providing students with resources to help them transition to independent writing (Bailey, 2005). Additionally, guided-writing serves as a bridge between shared and independent writing (Oyinloye, 2017).

Guided-Writing Instruction and Writing Skills

Writing is a skill that students are expected to acquire, as it allows for the systematic expression of ideas, emotions, and attitudes through words, sentences, and paragraphs (Eggen & Kauchak, 2012). This skill is essential for interacting with others and passing along culture, ideas, and messages from one generation to the next (Graham et al., 2014). According to Elkhayma (2020), writing is a complex task that requires clear and accurate expression of ideas, involving harmonizing and balancing content, organizing ideas logically, using proper grammar, writing style, and word choice (Aldabbus & Almansouri, 2022). Writing also serves the purposes of understanding, illuminating, describing, and resolving issues (Aryanika, 2016; Suastra & Menggo, 2020). Therefore, it is crucial for students to develop and improve this skill. Guided-writing is a teaching strategy that allows students to work in small groups on assignments, aiming to help them overcome the psychological and intellectual challenges of the writing process (Rahmat et al., 2022).

Guided-writing serves as a transitional instruction between group and individual writing, helping students transition to independent writing with the guidance of teachers (Oyinloye, 2017; Rasikin, 2021; Sajjad et al., 2021). According to Chaboki and Heidar (2019), this professional support enables students to use a range of strategies, such as reading texts, using model texts, utilizing resources for group writing, working collaboratively, and encouraging individual writing. Teachers’ expert assistance inspires students to write independently (McCormack-Colbert et al., 2018; Mohammad et al., 2020).

The first step in guided-writing is a pre-writing discussion, followed by providing students with a model and boosting their confidence with the help of teachers. Rahmat et al. (2021, 2022a) stated that guided-writing offers several benefits: (1) Students use different strategies in their participation in the writing process as they encounter various genres of writing; (2) Guided-writing allows students to clearly meet their learning objectives and assess their level of proficiency; (3) Peer students and teachers assist in the revision process, providing students at each grade level with opportunities for collaborative writing. Moreover, Rery and Khoiril (2020) distinguish between two categories of guided-writing: presenting pictures and comprehending the essay’s topic and sample text. The first step is to understand the text that came before, with topic suggestions provided at the start of the application process. The goal of the guidelines is to provide students with guidance on what to write. Once students have comprehended the lecture material and practice text, they can begin writing (Eggen & Kauchak, 2012). This implementation allows teachers to introduce students to crucial writing concepts and vocabulary.

The second category of guided-writing is accomplished by displaying images. These pictures are arranged in a way that raises questions to teach the writing skill. The sequential arrangement of the pictures makes it easy for teachers to ask questions and for students to respond. As a result, students gain self-assurance and enjoy writing about the bigger picture. According to Ouahidi (2020), the steps that are left out of creative writing instruction can be used to teach writing in the primary classroom using model paragraphs. Then, instructions for group projects are given. At this level, teachers monitor their students’ actions and participation levels. Students use their own ideas while following the teacher’s instructions to compose an essay. They will ultimately draw inspiration from the text they collectively wrote for their individual writing.

Guided-Writing Instruction and Motivation to Write

Writing performance and motivation in guided-writing instruction are closely correlated (McCormack-Colbert et al., 2018). Motivation is crucial in language education as it fosters students’ drive to learn and develop skills (Salahi & Farahian, 2021). Ryan and Deci (2000) also emphasized the impact of motivation on students’ success or failure in the learning process. Motivation refers to students’ internal drive to express thoughts and feelings and engage with their learning objectives (McCormack-Colbert et al., 2018). It enables them to enjoy writing, improve their abilities, take control of their own destiny, and recognize the benefits of learning. Therefore, fostering positive interactions between students and teachers in the classroom is essential, as it gives students the confidence to take charge of their education and be inspired to focus on the learning objectives.

Participation in small groups (Wright, 2015) motivates students to write and learn (Perumal & Ajit, 2022; Sasayama et al., 2021). The key to successful guided-writing instruction is providing students with opportunities to learn by solving the issues they encounter during the writing process while receiving guidance from the teacher. Sentence structure and general paragraph structure are related to writing proficiency (Salahi & Farahian, 2021). In this implementation phase, students write a text that is similar to or slightly different from the practice text they were given (Katrina, 2012). Hoch et al. (2018) state that the application exercises at this level require students to elaborate and write using specific details to complete story beginnings and write summaries based on the concepts they have read and understood.

Effect of Guided-Writing in Writing Skill and Motivation to Write

Writing ability, writing motivation, and language literacy are all interrelated factors that contribute to students’ academic success. To develop writing skills in the classroom, it is essential to design writing objectives and select various teaching strategies that incorporate different instructional techniques (Ouahidi, 2020; Rasikin, 2021; Sajjad et al., 2021). Studies on writing abilities have demonstrated their importance in effectively developing students’ competence, including collaborative writing, model writing, guided-writing, and narrative writing (Graham, 2019; Rasikin, 2021; Teo et al., 2023). However, traditional teaching instruction focuses on explanation rather than having students follow steps one at a time, thus preventing students from achieving the desired outcomes (Klimova, 2014; Rasikin, 2021). Therefore, teachers must abandon the traditional method of teaching and adopt a participatory teaching approach to effectively apply the writing skill in the classroom (Sajjad et al., 2021). Encouragement and motivation to write can also increase students’ writing output (Perumal & Ajit, 2022).

Research from various eras has shown that secondary school students face a variety of writing-related difficulties, such as issues with the organizational structure of their writing and low test scores (Bailey, 2005; Gebremariam & Gedamu, 2022; Sabti et al., 2019; Veerabudren et al., 2023). Additionally, language instructors in Ethiopia do not use specific writing exercises (such as model writing, collaborative writing, guided-writing, and narrative writing) in their lessons (Komang, 2013; Zahin & Zannat, 2021). Therefore, to address this issue, Rahmat et al. (2022a) suggest that creative teaching is required for teachers to come up with suggestions for students who struggle with writing. If this is the case, students may not be afraid of writing, even though they perceive it as a challenging skill. To this end, language teachers can use guided-writing as one of these writing instructions, which may benefit students who have difficulty writing and lack motivation to do so.

Further research has determined that guided-riting instruction can improve students’ writing skills and motivation to write in the upper secondary school context (Gebremariam & Hiluf, 2023; Sabti et al., 2019; Sajjad et al., 2021; Veerabudren et al., 2023). Rao (2017) concluded that the social construction is preferable in understanding the uniqueness of the writing process during the implementation of guided-riting instruction. Fareed et al. (2016) noted that many students lack motivation to write, despite it being crucial to write properly and often regarded as a difficult and sophisticated skill. Guided-writing instruction is a problem-solving technique, particularly for students who have difficulties with writing and low motivation. Wondim et al. (2023) investigated whether children who are able to produce quality writing with good handwriting in early learning stages can understand the value of writing and successfully practice it. However, high school and undergraduate students are unaware of the importance of writing and regularly receive low scores on their writing achievements (Gebremariam & Asgede, 2023; Rao, 2017). Therefore, further research is needed to understand the writing achievements and motivation to write in these failed writing products. Two things become apparent from previous research traditions. Firstly, there is a misconception regarding the importance of writing skills (Elkhayma, 2020; Gebremariam & Gedamu, 2023). Secondly, a variety of language education instructions and motivation to write have an effect on learning writing (Fareed et al., 2016). In this study, we aim to explore the effects of teacher guided-riting instruction on writing skills and motivation to write (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Conceptual framework of guided-writing instruction in implementing the writing process (adapted from Gebremariam & Hiluf, 2023; Shaver et al., 2015).

The Hypothetical Need to Study

In recent times, researchers have focused on the effectiveness of guided-writing in developing writing skills. However, many of these studies have overlooked the importance of writing motivation, which is a critical issue for secondary school students (Abdul-Hakim, 2019; Rery & Khoiril, 2020). Zahin and Zannat (2021) argue that writing requires a deep understanding of the writing process and motivation. To achieve writing goals, students need to use the target language effectively, present their ideas clearly, and organize their content well. The writing process also plays a crucial role in writing practice (Katrina, 2012). Unfortunately, many studies have not considered students who struggle with writing and lack motivation to write (Aldabbus & Almansouri, 2022; Mohammad et al., 2020). This problem stems from two aspects of teaching and learning: (1) the teacher’s instructional methods and preparation, and (2) the students’ lack of interest in writing. Guided-writing instruction has been used by language teachers to address these challenges and improve writing skills and motivation.

Similarly, there are five sub-skills in student writing: (1) content, (2) organizational structure, (3) grammar, (4) vocabulary, and (5) mechanics (Ferris, 2003; Ghulamuddin et al., 2021; Khoii & Arabsarhangi, 2015). Some studies, such as Bulqiyah et al. (2021) and Rahmat et al. (2021, 2022b), have recommended focusing on each of these sub-skills in writing. However, while guided-writing instruction has been studied, the findings may not be applicable to the specific context of this study. The ecological context of this study does not align with previous research on the use of guided-writing instruction for students with writing difficulties and low motivation in the classroom. In a natural classroom setting, both teachers and students should work together to address students’ writing challenges. Therefore, further research is needed to explore the effectiveness of guided-writing instruction in writing classrooms.

Therefore, this study aims to investigate the effectiveness of teacher-student collaboration through guided-riting instruction for Ethiopian 11th-grade students who have writing difficulties and low motivation to write. While there is little disagreement in the literature about the effectiveness of guided-riting instruction in improving writing difficulties and motivation to write (Aldabbus & Almansouri, 2022; Gebremariam & Hiluf, 2023; Ghulamuddin et al., 2021; Perumal & Ajit, 2022; Sasayama et al., 2021; Veerabudren et al., 2023; Virgiawan et al., 2020), several studies have attempted to demonstrate its role in improving students’ writing difficulties and their motivation to write (Abdul-Hakim, 2019; Chaboki & Heidar, 2019; Gebremariam & Hiluf, 2023; Khatri, 2014; Martarini et al., 2020; Ouahidi, 2020; Sabti et al., 2019; Sahle et al., 2023; Shaver et al., 2015). Based on the previous literature, the current study formulates two hypotheses in a positive manner:

H1: Guided-writing instruction has an effect on the writing difficulties of Ethiopian secondary school students.

H2: Guided-writing instruction has an effect on the low motivation to write of Ethiopian secondary school students.

Method

The current study examined the impact of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction on students with writing difficulties and low motivation to write. To accomplish this, Ethiopian 11th-grade students participated in a two-group quasi-experimental design to investigate the research questions.

Context and Participants

The study took place in Wolaita Sodo, located in the South Ethiopian region. One of the official schools under the Ethiopian Ministry of Education (MoE), specifically under the Education Office of the South Ethiopian region, was chosen as the study site. This region was selected through purposive sampling to focus on improving the writing performance of secondary school students, as previous studies have not given much attention to this context. There were a total of four secondary schools in the study location.

The participants for the study were selected in two steps. Firstly, a simple random sampling technique was used to select 11th-grade students from the four secondary schools (Grades 9 through 12) to participate in the study. These schools consisted of two governmental and two private institutions. During the preliminary study stage, 11 classes with a total of 580 students (an average of 52.7 students per class) were assessed. The researchers observed that the writing abilities of the students were lacking, which led to the selection of 11th-graders for the study. All 11 classes (consisting of 580 students, with 302 male and 278 female students) completed a written questionnaire to gather general information about the students, as well as a story paragraph assignment to pre-select the target group for the intervention. The evaluation standards for this pre-selection were based on the general education pass mark (50+) level of Ethiopia’s new road map syllabus (Eigbiremolen, 2020; Ethiopia Education and Training Roadmap, 2020). The results showed that 64.46% of the total student population did not meet this standard in terms of their writing competency and motivation to write.

Secondly, from the pool of 11th-graders in the four secondary schools, the weaker group of students was selected from Dana Sata Memorial Secondary School. This group consisted of 74% of students who scored between 12 and 62 points (M = 39.12; SD = 11.478). In total, there were 50 participants in the study, with 28 male and 22 female 11th-graders who were native speakers of Wolaithatho and Amharic. These participants were divided into an experimental group and a control group using matched grouping assignments. The experimental group received guided-writing instruction to assist students with writing difficulties and low motivation, while the control group received regular writing instruction from their subject-matter teacher. The intervention schedule was created by the subject-matter teacher after receiving 2 days of training, with each training session lasting 80 min. Finally, post-tests of writing ability and a questionnaire about writing motivation were administered to both groups in the study.

Data Collection Tools

Data was gathered from 11th-grade students who participated in the study. A writing skill test and a written questionnaire were used to assess their motivation to write and answer the research questions. Both groups were required to complete a pre- and post-intervention as part of the study. The experimental group received specific writing instruction for the post-intervention test and completed a written questionnaire afterward. The results were then compared with those of the control group, which received regular writing instruction.

Writing Skill Tests

A writing test was used as a method of data collection in our study. This assessment was given to the participant groups in the target classrooms before and after the intervention. The tests for the experimental and control groups were prepared based on a quasi-experimental design, focusing on the educational material from the common textbook and curriculum/syllabus for the grade level. The purpose was to assess the proficiency of their writing skills. The pre-intervention test aimed to assess the prior knowledge and abilities of the targeted students, as well as determine if there was a significant difference in ability between the two groups.

The students were required to write a paragraph using a model based on a story. For example, they would read a given story, comprehend it, and then write a paragraph either from their own perspective or based on a story they remembered. To measure the impact of the intervention on the students’ behavior, a post-intervention test was also administered. The research was conducted to compare the outcomes of the pre- and post-intervention tests. In this regard, the questions of the pre- and post-tests were prepared on different topics and guides to write a paragraph for each session. Four topics were presented, and students were asked to choose two of the optional topics and write about them. For example, the instructions presented in the pre-test session were: “Write a paragraph using the following topics: What do you believe is the most serious issue at your school?” Students were expected to write at least two of the questions based on the given alternative topics. Each student’s written paper was graded using a rubric, which included content, organization, word choice and use, language use (grammar), and mechanics or writing style. To ensure the accuracy of the pre- and post-tests, three professional teachers checked the tests for validity issues. As a result, each participating student was required to write three essays in each of the essay writing skills tests.

The writing skills test created for the study participants was evaluated by two secondary school teachers who teach at that level, to ensure its validity and appropriateness. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, which scored .838 for the pre-intervention tests and .805 for the post-intervention tests. According to Pallant (2020), these scores indicate high reliability as they are greater than .7.

Writing Motivation Questionnaire

The purpose of this study’s written questionnaire is to assess participants’ motivation to write, both before and after the guided-writing instruction intervention process. The questionnaire for evaluating writing motivation was adapted from Salahi and Farahian (2021), with some modifications. A 5-point Likert scale is used as the evaluation system to rate the constructs of the questionnaire. Participants rate themselves on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) to indicate the extent to which the construct describes their motivation to write. The survey is divided into two sections: the first section gathers information about participants’ general background, while the second section consists of 15 closed-ended questions that align with the objectives of the study. The questionnaire was distributed to each students to complete individually within 30 min. Prior to data collection, the validity of the writing motivation questionnaire was assessed by two researchers and two secondary school teachers. The questionnaire’s reliability, measured by Cronbach’s alpha, was found to be .840 (N = 48). According to Pallant (2020), this indicates that the questionnaire’s reliability is good for implementation, even though it falls slightly below the recommended threshold of .8.

Exeriment Processes

The study was conducted from November 2022 to March 2023. Once the participating schools and participants gave their consent, the formal procedures of the study began. Participants were informed about the study and the handling of their data, which was kept confidential. Before selecting the participants, the school administration granted a written request and obtained written consent, with signatures, from both the parents and the students using a single form. The parents were informed about the benefits and risks of the study and how it could impact their children. They agreed to let their children participate in the study, with the understanding that their normal learning schedule would be shifted. The parents and guardians of the students completed a data privacy agreement form.

To ensure safety, the intervention was scheduled during an alternate shift, and the timing was communicated to the participants, the school, and the teacher. Before the study started, the authorized teacher who conducted the practice task and the study participants from the justice group received training on how to teach writing. A copy of the text was sent to the designated teacher to maintain the integrity of the study. The intervention in the classroom was implemented for 12 consecutive lessons, excluding the pre- and post-intervention sessions. This involved teaching 1 day a week for 120 min, totaling 24 hr. The activities in the textbook were designed to help students improve their essay-writing skills and assess their abilities. The curriculum and syllabus for 11th graders served as the basis for the writing instruction preparation.

Moreover, the intervention employed a balanced literacy approach to teaching writing, as suggested by Khoii and Arabsarhangi (2015). This approach focuses on guided-writing instruction, which helps students generate and organize creative ideas. By utilizing this method, students can improve their writing skills through practice and repetition. The teachers involved in the intervention were knowledgeable about the writing process and had specific strategies to guide students through each stage. This approach not only enhances students’ writing abilities but also teaches them appropriate strategies for writing. The writing process, which includes pre-writing, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing, can be flexible and revisited based on the guided-writing instruction. The more students practice writing through guided-riting instruction, the more proficient they become in expressing themselves through written communication.

Validity and Reliability of Data

There were concerns about the reliability and validity of the tools used in the study. To assess construct validity, student practice papers and written essays were used since psychological and emotional concepts cannot be statistically verified. Inter-rater reliability was employed to ensure consistency of data throughout the study. Three secondary school teachers were chosen as scorers and they assessed the consistency of the students’ written work. First, the written papers were collected and three copies were made for each rater. Each rater then scored the writing skills using the provided rubric analysis. Finally, each grader evaluated the papers of each student, and the results were analyzed using the inter-rater reliability scale.

Before analyzing the quantitative data using independent samples t-test analysis, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted. The maximum likelihood method with varmax rotation was used to analyze the factor structure and correlations between items included in the scale. The construct validity of the data was assessed using The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measures and Bartlett’s test of sphericity. The KMO measure for writing skill was 0.670 and for motivation to write was 0.721, both above the threshold of 0.60, indicating that the sample from which the data were collected was sufficient. Additionally, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was statistically significant for writing skill (χ²(50) = 23.650; p = .001) and motivation to write (χ²(50) = 1,065.042; p = .001), indicating that the data were suitable for factor analysis. Furthermore, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to ensure the accuracy of item grouping in each construct and to identify independent factors and the items that loaded onto these factors.

The extraction communalities for writing skills ranged from 0.813 and for motivation ranged from 0.658 to 0.852. The component matrix for writing skill was 0.902, and the Cronbach’s alpha level of motivation to write was .840 (N = 48). All standardized factor loadings for the items were above 0.50, indicating good convergent validity. The factor analysis confirmed that the data collection instruments were suitable for further analysis in this study.

Analysis of Data

The 11th-grade students from Data Sana Memorial Secondary School participated in this study. They underwent quantitative data collection through pre- and post-intervention writing ability tests and writing motivation questionnaires. Their answers were filtered to ensure accuracy. Both the experimental and control groups were given a pre- and post-intervention writing ability test and motivation questionnaire. The average results were checked to ensure that the criteria were met, confirming consistent distribution and reliable data for analysis. The scores were calculated, and there were no extreme outliers that could have influenced the mean scores for data analysis.

SPSS-23 Software was used to display the variations in test scores between the experimental and control groups, using mean and standard deviation, as well as inferetial statistics. Independent sampling t-test statistics were used to compare the pre- and post-tests on participants’ writing abilities and the writing questionnaire in the experimental group. However, relying solely on mean values could not determine whether there were statistically significant differences in the scores. This was necessary to investigate the effectiveness of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction for students with low motivation and writing difficulties. Therefore, inferential statistical analysis was used to compare the scores. Finally, a significance level of 5% (α = .05) was applied throughout the study.

Findings

The current study investigated the role of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing in helping students with writing difficulties and low motivation to write. In this regard, data were collected through pre- and post-tests on writing ability, as well as a writing motivation questionnaire. These data were analyzed using an independent samples t-test.

The first question of this study examined the role of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing in assisting students with writing difficulties. To confirm this, the data obtained from the writing pre- and post-tests of the 11th-grade students who participated in the study were analyzed using an independent sample t-test analysis of post hoc tests. Descriptive and inferential statistics of the writing achievement of 11th-grade students were used to answer the first question of the study, as indicated in Tables 1.

Table 1.

11^th-Graders Students’ Writing Skill from Pre- Post-test Results.

Session	Group	N	M	SD	T	df	Sig. (two-tailed)	Effect size (Cohen’s d)
Pre-test results	Control group	25	14.18	3.55	0.53	48	.596	0.15
	Experimental group	25	13.70	2.77
Post-test results	Control group	25	14.62	3.21	−5.15	48	.001	1.46
	Experimental group	25	18.86	2.57

Table 1 presents an independent samples t-test analysis of the respondents’ writing skill results from pre- and post-tests in the control and experimental groups. In the writing pre-test, the mean scores for the control and experimental groups were M = 14.18 (SD = 3.55) and M = 13.70 (SD = 2.77), respectively. Similarly, in the post-test of writing skills, the control group had a mean score of M = 14.62 (SD = 3.21), while the experimental group had a mean score of M = 18.86 (SD = 2.57). However, it is not possible to conclude that there is a significant difference based solely on the mean and standard deviation scores, both before and after the intervention of the writing course through guided-writing instruction.

To determine if there is a significant difference in the mean scores of pre- and post-tests of writing skill between the two groups, the results of inferential statistics results were shown in Table 1 as follows: the pre-test results between the experimental and control groups were not statistically significant at t(48) = 0.533, p = .596, while the post-test results showed a statistically significant difference (t(48) = −5.151, p = .001; d = 1.46) between the two intervention groups. Thus, based on the given boundaries of Cohen’s d effect size, this study yields no effect size (d = 0.15; below 0.2) in the pre-test and a large (d = 1.46; above 0.8) effect size in post-test results. The effect size of the post-test implies that there is a significant relationship between the independent (guided-writing instruction) and dependent (writing skill) variables in the study. It can be stated that the effect size of guided-writing on writing skill is 92%. As a result, guided-writing, a strategic type of guided-writing instruction, plays a role in improving students’ writing skill. The null hypothesis of the first question of this study was also accepted.

As shown in Table 2, the study measured the participants’ writing motivation before and after the intervention using guided-writing instruction. The results were presented as a comparison between groups. In the pre-test, the control group had a score (M = 3.90; SD = 0.45), while the experimental group had a score (M = 3.87; SD = 0.30). While, in the post-test, the control group had a score (M = 3.84; SD = 0.23), and the experimental group had a score (M = 4.47; SD = 0.26). While in both groups mean scores seem to be one higher than the other, it is important to analyze the results through independent samples t-test to determine if there is a significant difference between the two groups and the results are shown no statistically significant difference (t(48) = 0.271, p = .788; d = 1.46) in pre-test and a statistically significant difference (t(48) = −8.9, p = .001; d = 2.56) in the post-test results. Thus, the effect size of this study yields no effect size (d = 0.15; below 0.2) in the pre-test and a large (d = 2.56; above 0.8) effect size in post-test results. The effect size of the post-test implies that there is a significant relationship between the guided-writing instruction and motivation to write. This shows guided-writing instruction, plays a role in improving students’ motivation to write. The null hypothesis of the second question of this study was also accepted.

Table 2.

11^th-Graders Students’ Motivation to Write.

Session	Group	N	M	SD	T	df	Sig. (two-tailed)	Effect size (Cohen’s d)
Pre-test results	Control group	25	3.90	0.45	0.271	48	.788	0.07
	Experimental group	25	3.87	0.30
Post-test results	Control group	25	3.84	0.23	−8.9	48	.001	2.56
	Experimental group	25	3.90	0.45

Table 3 presents the results of the paired tests for the two dependent variables. The pre-test and post-test for writing skills (M = 13.94; SD = 3.16) and (M = 16.74; SD = 3.59) respectively. The paired t-test analysis of respondents’ writing skills indicates a statistically significant difference between the pre-test and post-test results (t(49) = −6.713; p = .001) for the respondents. Additionally, the statistical results for motivation to write of pre-test and post test mean and standard deviation scores (M = 3.88; SD = 0.38) and (M = 4.15; SD = 0.40) respectively. The statistical test reveals a significant difference between the pre-test and post-test results (t(49) = −3.736; p = .001). These findings demonstrate significant differences in both dependent variables between the pre-test and post-test results.

Table 3.

11th-Graders Students’ Writing and Motivation Results of Pre- and Post-tests.

Session	Group	N	M	SD	C (Sig.)	t	df	Sig. (two-tailed)
Writing results	Pre-test	50	13.94	3.16	.63 (.001)	−6.713	49	.001
	Post-test	50	16.74	3.59
Motivation results	Pre-test	50	3.88	0.38	.13 (.383)	−3.736	49	.001
	Post-test	50	4.15	0.40

Overall, the data obtained from the post-test writing skills and writing motivation questionnaire, along with their analysis results, indicate a significant difference in both dependent variables between the control and experimental groups. This supports the notion that teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction positively contributes to enhancing students’ writing skills and writing motivation.

Discussion and Limitations

The purpose of this study was to investigate the gaps and niches in assisting Ethiopian secondary school students with writing difficulties and low motivation. However, there is limited empirical data to support the role of guided-writing instruction in improving learners’ writing abilities and increasing their motivation to write (Chaboki & Heidar, 2019; McCormack-Colbert et al., 2018). The goal of this study was to examine the role of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction in assisting students with writing difficulties and low motivation. A quasi-experimental design was used to answer two research questions. Data were collected using pre- and post-tests of writing achievement and a writing questionnaire. The data were analyzed using an independent samples t-test.

The first research question aimed to explore the role of guided-writing instruction in improving the writing achievement of 11th-grade students and motivating them to write. According to Bulqiyah et al. (2021) and Rahmat et al. (2022b), there is a need to address the difficulties students face in writing skills and their lack of motivation to write, as these factors are important in the learning process. Therefore, the purpose of the first question in this study was to address this need. Additionally, the second question in this study focused on the role of motivation in the development of writing skills. Thus, the study examined how teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction can help students who struggle with writing and have low motivation. As writing is the most crucial literacy for communication and the most difficult to master (Graham et al., 2014; Palanisamy & Abdul Aziz, 2021; Rasikin, 2021; Sahle et al., 2023), the current study sought to examine the difficulties encountered by Ethiopian 11th-grade students during writing through guided-writing instruction. The new findings of this study revealed that students’ writing difficulties and low motivation to write can be solved using different pedagogical methods, such as guided-writing instruction.

Regarding the first question of this study, the findings confirmed a significant improvement in minimizing writing difficulties in Ethiopian 11th-grade students’ writing classrooms. This finding is consistent with previous studies (such as Abdul-Hakim, 2019; Mohammad et al., 2020; Palanisamy & Abdul Aziz, 2021; Smith, 2021). According to Chaboki and Heidar (2019), guided-writing is effective when used in teaching writing. Abdul-Hakim (2019) also revealed the role of guided-writing in improving high school students’ writing proficiency. Furthermore, Ismati and Fitria (2011) examined the role of guided-writing in students’ writing difficulties, and the results showed that guided-writing reduced the writing difficulties of students.

Although the findings of the data results for the first research question support and validate previous studies (e.g., Gibson, 2009; Khatri, 2014) and observations about writing difficulties (Ceylan, 2019; Perumal & Ajit, 2022), there is overlap with Chaboki & Heidar’s (2019) study, which explored the effectiveness of guided-writing instruction on the productive skills of 60 homogenous students aged 18 to 28. The post-test results after the intervention showed that guided-writing instruction improved speaking proficiency more than writing proficiency. Bulqiyah et al. (2021), Ceylan (2019), and Toba et al. (2019) have described writing as difficult to master, and students often face writing difficulties starting from the beginning of their schooling. According to Graham and Perin (2007), students are unaware of the benefits of writing abilities and lack practice in learning activities. Additionally, most students experience writing difficulties due to poor concentration during the writing process. Bulqiyah et al. (2021) and Rahmat et al. (2022a) revealed that these difficulties in writing start with the learners’ perception of their writing skills, which may influence their behavior toward writing practice and their overall writing performance.

The second research question of this study focused on the students’ lack of motivation to write. To address this question, data were collected using a writing motivation scale. The results revealed that when teachers and students collaborate through guided-writing, it significantly enhances the motivation of Ethiopian secondary school students to write. According to Graham et al. (2016), motivation plays a crucial role in students’ writing achievement. Komang (2013) also found that guided-writing instruction increases motivation to write. Writing requires a fundamental drive to develop writing skills. In our study, the post-test results confirmed that guided-writing, as opposed to traditional teaching methods, had a positive impact on improving the writing achievement and motivation of 11th-grade students. This finding supports Graham’s (2019) concern about students’ writing thoughts and motivation. Mulyono (2015) also confirmed that teacher-student collaboration in L2 language learning helps enhance students’ motivation to learn. Sabti et al. (2019) concluded that self-efficacy plays a significant role in writing motivation. The students’ belief in their own abilities had a direct relationship with their writing achievement and motivation to write.

Conversely, the findings of the second research question differed from previous studies (Anjomshoa & Sadighi, 2015; Ouahidi, 2020). These studies indicated that guided-writing instruction significantly improved writing achievement, but motivation to write had little influence on students’ actual experience. Ouahidi (2020) found that learners in the classroom were motivated to write by external pressure from the teacher and the desire for good grades, rather than internal motivation. Additionally, Ahmadi (2017) discovered that language learners with lower writing proficiency may struggle to identify motivation issues during writing practice. Nelson (2007) also observed limited collaboration between teachers and students in guided-writing instruction and its impact on writing motivation. These findings underscore the importance of this study in assisting students with low motivation to write.

To summarize, teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing is an instructional approach that writing instructors should use. It can be beneficial for assisting students with writing difficulties and low motivation. Moreover, guided-writing instruction allows for providing students with decision-making and problem-solving techniques. Therefore, teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction has a positive impact on helping students with writing difficulties and low motivation. This demonstrates that writing education can yield better results when given sufficient attention and implemented with proper instructions (Gebremariam & Asgede, 2023; Sahle et al., 2023). Based on the new findings of this study, it can be concluded that there is a need for more attention to the response of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction. However, some issues may affect the effectiveness of the intervention and hinder students’ writing achievements and motivation scores. According to Rahmat et al. (2022a), students’ perception of writing is questionable, as many perceive it as a difficult skill. Additionally, discrepancies and contextual variables may arise during the study intervention, along with problems in teachers’ understanding of the research focus and assessment of writing rubrics. Guided-writing instruction faces several challenges: (1) limited time is a major obstacle since guided-writing instruction consists of multiple stages that require ample time to complete, but the time allocated for writing classes is limited, and (2) the lack of teachers’ and students’ knowledge about the implementation of writing instruction may lead to doubts. As a result, achieving the expected results becomes difficult.

Conclusion and Suggesions for Future Research

This research makes a valuable contribution to the field of writing instruction by recognizing that teaching the writing process alone is not sufficient. It is also important to address the recurring issues students face in their writing and their perception of writing as a challenging skill. To bridge the gap in students’ writing skills and their reluctance to write, a new approach to teacher-student collaboration is needed in writing instruction. Language teachers must employ creativity in the writing classroom to help learners see writing as an approachable skill. Future research could focus on how learners cope with their writing difficulties.

Despite the common struggles and lack of motivation students face in writing, this study reminds us that guided-writing instruction can help tackle this problem. Furthermore, the results of this study encourage further research into the effectiveness of teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction for a diverse range of students. This suggests that students’ previous experiences and perceptions of writing should be examined before implementing guided-writing instruction in the writing classroom. Additionally, future research should be conducted within the context of a longer instructional program with ecologically valid writing skills, where guided-writing instruction serves a clear purpose for L2 learners. Guided-writing instruction proves helpful for students with writing difficulties and low motivation. Understanding the importance of writing and its various components, such as ideas, organization, language use, word choice, and writing style, is crucial for achieving effectiveness.

Furthermore, this study was limited to Ethiopian 11th-grade students with writing difficulties and low motivation to write. Therefore, future research should focus on implementing effective writing instructions that can be recommended to improve students’ writing difficulties and low motivation to write. Additionally, it is advisable to increase the sample size and conduct research over a longer period of time to implement teacher-student collaboration through guided-writing instruction.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank to the respondent students and the writing test evaluators during the data-gathering process.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Hailay Tesfay Gebremariam

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

Abdul-Hakim

M. K.

(2019). Multimedia and critical thinking on arabic guided writing learning. Dinamika Ilmu, 19(2), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.21093/di.v19i2.1568

Ahmadi

M. R.

(2017). The impact of motivation on reading comprehension. International Journal of Research in English Education, 3, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.1.1

Aldabbus

Almansouri

(2022). Academic writing difficulties encountered by university EFL learners. British Journal of English Linguistics, 10(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.37745/bjel.2013/vol10n3111

Aminatun

Ngadiso

S. M.

(2018). Applying PLEASE strategy to teach writing skill to students with different linguistic intelligences. TEKNOSASTIK, 16(1), 34–40. https://doi.org/10.33365/ts.v16i1.120

Anjomshoa

Sadighi

(2015). The importance of motivation in second language acquisition. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 3(2), 126–137.

Aryanika

(2016). The correlation between the students’ writing motivation and the writing ability. English Education: Jurnal Tadris Bahasa Inggris, 9(1), 215–232. https://ejournal.radenintan.ac.id/index.php/ENGEDU

Bailey

K. M.

(2005). Practical English language teaching: Writing. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Begna

T. N.

(2017). Public schools and private schools in Ethiopia: Partners in national development? International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 4(2), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.20431/2349-0381.0402010

Bulqiyah

Mahbub

M. A.

Nugraheni

D. A.

(2021). Investigating writing difficulties in essay writing: Tertiary students’ perspectives. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 4(1), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v4i1.2371

10.

Ceylan

N. O.

(2019). Student perceptions of difficulties in second language writing. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(1), 151–157. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547683

11.

Chaboki

F. S.

Heidar

D. M.

(2019). The impact of guided writing practice on Iranian extroverted/introverted EFL learners’ speaking ability at pre-intermidiate level. International Journal of Research in English Education, 4(2), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.29252/ijree.4.2.61

12.

Eggen

Kauchak

(2012). Strategies and models for lecturers: Teaching content and thingking skills (6th ed.). Pearson Education.

13.

Eigbiremolen

G. O.

(2020). Estimating private school premium for primary school children in Ethiopia: Evidence from individual-level panel data. Progress in Development Studies, 20(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464993419889708

14.

Elkhayma

(2020). Moroccan students’ writing difficulties: Problems of cohesion and coherence Kenitra as a case study. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 8(1), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.Vol8.Iss01.1537

15.

Ethiopia Education and Training Roadmap. (2020). Strategy for transforming education and training in Ethiopia. Education World Forum.

16.

Fareed

Ashraf

Bilal

(2016). ESL learners’ writing skills: Problems, factors, and suggestions. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 4(2), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.20547/jess0421604201

17.

Ferris

D. R.

(2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

18.

Ferris

D. R.

(2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490

19.

Gebremariam

H. T.

Asgede

D. M.

(2023). Effects of students’ self-reflection on improving essay writing achievement among Ethiopian undergraduate students: A counterbalanced design. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-023-00203-7

20.

Gebremariam

H. T.

Gedamu

A. D.

(2022). Assessment for learning strategies: Amharic language teachers’ practice and challenges in Ethiopia. International Journal of Language Education, 6(2), 128–140. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v6i2.20505

21.

Gebremariam

H. T.

Gedamu

A. D.

(2023). Primary school teachers’ assessment for learning practice for students’ learning improvement. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1145195. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1145195

22.

Gebremariam

H. T.

Hiluf

(2023). Using need-based writing instruction through self-reflection to improve students’ writing difficulties: A counterbalanced design. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 5, 100293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100293

23.

Ghulamuddin

N. J. A.

Mohari

S. K. M.

Ariffin

(2021). Discovering writing difficulties of Malay ESL primary school level students. International Journal of Linguistics and Translation Studies, 2(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlts.v2i1.105

24.

Gibson

S. A.

(2009). An effective framework for primary grade guided writing instruction. The Reading Teacher, 62(4), 324–334. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.62.4.5

25.

Graham

(2019). Changing how writing is taught. Review of Research in Education, 43, 277–303. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0091732X18821125

26.

Graham

Bruch

Fitzgerald

Friedrich

Furgeson

Greene

Kim

Lyskawa

Olson

C. B.

Smither Wulsin

(2016). Teaching secondary students to write effectively (NCEE 2017-4002). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://whatworks.ed.gov

27.

Graham

Capizzi

Harris

K. R.

Hebert

Morphy

(2014). Teaching writing to middle school students: A national survey. Reading and Writing, 27, 1015–1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9495-7

28.

Graham

Perin

(2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445

29.

Hoch

M. L.

MCcarty

Gurviti

Sitkoski

(2018). Five key principles: Guided inquire with multimodal text sets. The Reading Teacher, 72(6), 701–710. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1781

30.

Islam

(2017). Strategy instruction in the teaching of writing: Preserves teachers’ self perception of their writing and their practice of teaching writing. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4(3), 1–11. https://www.ijllnet.com/

31.

Ismiati

Fitria

I. L.

(2021). Combining diary and guided strategies for writing difficulties. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 9(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v%vi%i.3096

32.

Katrina

(2012). Prewriting strategies and their effect on student writing (Paper 242, 1–79). Education Masters. https://libguides.sjfc.edu/citations

33.

Khatri

D. K.

(2014). Effectiveness of guided writing in teaching composition. Journal of NELTA. Surkhet, 4, 18–25. https://doi.org/10.3126/jns.v4i0.12856

34.

Khoii

Arabsarhangi

(2015). Developing young EFL learners writing skill in wikis collaborative environment. In Khoii

Arabsarhangi

(Eds.). Handbook of research on individual differences in computer assisted language learning (pp. 344–373). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8519-2.ch015

35.

Klimova

B. F.

(2014). Constraints and difficulties in the process of writing acquisition. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 122, 433–437. https://doi.org.10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1367

36.

Komang

H. A. A.

Nyoman1

Made

R. N.

(2013). The effect of guided writing strategy and students’ achievement motivation on students writing competency. e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, 1, 1–12. 117646-EN-the-effect-of-guided-writing-strategy-an.pdf (neliti.com)

37.

Martarini

N. M. L.

Ayu

N. N.

Sastaparamitha

(2020). The effect of guided writing strategy in writing skill. Journal of English Language Education, 3(2), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.25078/yb.v3i2.1711

38.

McCormack-Colbert

Ware

Jones

(2018). Developing writing skills of learners with persistent literacy difficulties through the explicit teaching of grammar in context. Support for Learning, 33(2), 165–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.12200

39.

Mohammad

A. R.

Al-Mofti

K. W. H.

Hussein

J. Q.

(2020). Difficulties of writing in English encountered by Iraqi EFL learners at university level. Journal of University of Garmian, 7(3), 317–330. https://doi.org/10.24271/garmian.2070322

40.

Mulyono

(2015). Review. Sociocultural theory in second language education: An introduction through narratives (2nd ed.). Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 8(3), 94–98. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.635

41.

Nelson

(2007). Why write? A consideration of rhetorical purpose. In Hidi

Boscolo

(Eds.), Writing and motivation (pp. 17–31). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1572-6304(2006)0000019004

42.

Ouahidi

(2020). On the relationship between writing, motivation, academic achievement, and gender in tertiary education. International journal of English Litrature and Social science, 5(3), 685–692. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijels.53.20

43.

Oyinloye

C. A.

(2017). Effects of context cueing instructional strategy on students’ achievement in and attitude to reading comprehension. Journal of Teaching and Education, 7(1), 383–392.

44.

Palanisamy

Abdul Aziz

(2021). Systematic review: Challenges in teaching writing skills for upper secondary in ESL classrooms and suggestions to overcome them. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 6(4), 262–275. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v6i4.749

45.

Pallant

(2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117452

46.

Perumal

Ajit

(2022). An exploratory study on the difficulties faced by first-generation learners in writing. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 22(1), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v22i1.4972

47.

Rahmat

N. H.

Arepin

Rahman

S. A.

Yunos

E. R. M.

Mohandas

E. S.

Sukimin

I. S.

Razlan

(2022a). Finding a balance in self-imposed and other imposed prophecies for the fear of oral presentations. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(7), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v12-i7/14118

48.

Rahmat

N. H.

Aripin

Razlan

Khairuddin

(2021). The influence of metacognitive scaffolding on learning academic writing online. International Journal of Education, 13(3), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.5296/ije.v13i3.18902

49.

Rahmat

N. H.

Thasrabiab

Taib

S. A.

Jenal

Sukimin

I. S.

Zamani

N. F. M.

Amir

(2022b). Perception of difficulties and learners’ reasons in academic writing: A self-imposed prophecy. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(10), 531–543. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v12-i10/14870

50.

Rao

P. S.

(2017). The characteristics of effective writing skills in English language teaching. Research Journal of English, 2(2), 75–86.

51.

Rasikin

E. L. K.

(2021). The effect of guided writing on students’ writing skills: A study in a public school in pandeglang. Cakrawala Pedagogik, 5(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.51499/cp.v5i1.240

52.

Rery

N. M.

Khoiril

E. N.

(2020). Improving primary teacher education students’ writing performance using flipped classroom. Jurnal Pendidikan, 5(10), 1371–1378. https://doi.org/10.17977/jptpp.v5i10.14063

53.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

54.

Sabti

A. A.

Rashid

S. M.

Nimehchisalem

Darmi

(2019). The impact of writing anxiety, writing achievement motivation, and writing self-efficacy on writing performance: A correlational study of Iraqi tertiary EFL learner. SAGE Open, 9(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2158244019894289

55.

Sahle

Siawk

Y. A.

Gebremariam

H. T.

(2023). Effects of peer-editing on L2 writing achievement among secondary school students in Ethiopia. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2211467, https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2211467

56.

Sajjad

Sarwat

Imran

Shahzad

S. K.

(2021). Examining the academic writing challenges faced by university students in KFUEIT. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 18(10), 1759–1777.

57.

Salahi

Farahian

(2021). Constructing and validating a questionnaire on barriers to EFL learners’ reflective writing. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 6(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-021-00124-3

58.

Sasayama

Garcia

G. P.

Norris

J. M.

(2021). Designing efficient L2 writing assessment tasks for low-proficiency learners of English (TOEFL Research Report No. 97). ETS, Princeton, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12341

59.

Shaver

Wagner

Greene

(2015). Tiered writing intervention models for secondary students: Project findings in brief. SRI International.

60.

Smith

(2021). Guided reflective writing as a teaching strategy to develop nursing student clinical judgment. Nurs Forum, 56, 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12528

61.

Suastra

I. M.

Menggo

(2020). Empowering students’ writing skill through performance assessment. International Journal of Language Education, 4(3), 432–441. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v4i3.15060

62.

Teo

S. C.

Lilian

Koo

A. C.

(2023). Examining the effects of academic motivation and online learning on Malaysian tertiary students’ psychological well-being and perceived learning performance. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2186025, https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2186025

63.

Toba

Noor

W. N.

Sanu

L. O.

(2019). The current issues of Indonesian EFL students’ writing skills: Ability, problem, and reason in writing comparison and contrast essay. Dinamika Ilmu, 19(1), 57–73. https://doi.org/10.21093/di.v19i1.1506

64.

Veerabudren

Kritzinger

Graham

M.A.

Geertsema

Le Roux

(2023). Grade 4 learners with reading and writing difficulties in Mauritius: Oral reading and spelling characteristics. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 13(1), a1200. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v13i1.1200

65.

Virgiawan

Suryani

Sutimin

L. A.

(2020). The effectiveness of guided writing combined with virtual reality video as teaching media on students’ writing achievement. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 3(10), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2020.3.10.5

66.

Vygotsky

L. S.

(1978). Mind in society. The development of higher pyschological processes. Harvard University Press.

67.

Wondim

B. M.

Bishaw

K. S.

Zeleke

Y. T.

Geng

(2023). Effects of teachers’ written corrective feedback on the writing achievement of first-year Ethiopian University students. Education Research International, 2023, 7129978. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/7129978

68.

Wright

W. E.

(2015). Foundations for teaching English language learners: Research, theory, policy, and practice (2nd ed.). Caslon Publishing.

69.

Yamanishi

Ono

Hijikata

(2019). Developing a scoring rubric for L2 summary writing: A hybrid approach combining analytic and holistic assessment. Language Testing in Asia, 9(13), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-019-0087-6

70.

Zahin

C. A.

Zannat

M. M.

(2021). Barriers to teaching English productive skills in online classroom: A study at the private universities in Bangladesh. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4(12), 164–171. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2021.4.12.19