You are on page 1of 33

CHAPTER 1

RESEARCH PROBLEM

1.1

Introduction
In reality, writing has seen to be the most difficult skill learned in school. The
students lack of interest in the English language coupled with the insufficient
environment for the language has made the matter even challenging for them.
Gradually, over the years of English lesson, they will build their own wall of rejection
towards the language when it comes to writing.

Writing requires the students to have an amount of vocabulary, learn and


understand various aspects of the language; sentence structures, grammar as well as the
different types of writing. (Wong, 2000) Without these elements, it is just another uphill
task for the language teachers to teach their students this skill, as a result, it will
gradually limit the learning process.

Other than that, lacking of creativity among students when writing involves will
create stereotype writers. Writing is an expression of thoughts, experiences, opinions
and it is where critical thinking comes in. (Wong, 2000) Ignoring the fact that we want
our students to be able to express their ideas well will be like ignoring the fact that we
want them to learn how to write. The students need to acquire the proper writing skill
so that it will benefit them at the end of the day.

1.2

Background of the Study


Writing is not a magic ability some are born with, but a skill that can be learned.
Many students think that good writers simply sit down and write out a perfect letter,
paragraph, or essay from start to finish. In fact, writing is a process consisting of a
number of steps. It involves three stages of; prewriting, writing and revising and
proofreading for errors.(Evans, 1998)

In general, it is a process that consists of

generating, organizing, and goal-setting.

Therefore every student has to learn and master the writing skill in order to
perform well in their tests and examination. Two most used approaches in teaching
writing by teachers are the product and Process Approach.

Writing skill is a very important skill to be mastered by the second language


learners as it is the stage where the language learners are tested on their ability to
express their ideas and thoughts in written form. It is found to be the most difficult as
most students are lacking of vocabulary and creativity when it comes to writing.(Evans,
1998) As writing involves various levels of processes therefore to make the teaching of
writing effective the Process Approach is seen to be most suitable as it caters the needs
of all the stages needed.

1.3

Statement of the Problem


The teaching and learning of writing in the Malaysian classroom is one of the
most difficult task to be fulfilled by many English teachers in Malaysia. In mastering
writing skill, the students must learn all aspects of the language. (Wong, 2000)They
must be able to formulate their own learning strategies that will help them to
understand the various type of writing through their learning experience. Teachers on
the other hand act as to facilitate the needs and guide their students with an approach
that could help to develop a lasting impact on what writing is all about.

This research had compared the Process Approach and product approach in the
teaching and learning of simple essay and the effectiveness of the approach was
assessed based on the students performance in test, their preferences and attitudes as
well as motivation to study the subject.

1.4

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of the research is shown in Figure 1. The


independent variable in this research study is the preferred methodology comprising of
Process Approach and Product Approach

The dependant variables in this study are the performance, attitude and
motivation of the students while and after the research was carried out.

Process
Approach
Outcomes
Performance
Preferred approach
Attitude and
motivation

Product
Approach

Figure 1 : Conceptual Framework of research


1.5

Purpose of the Research


The main purpose of this research was to identify the effectiveness of Process
Approach in the teaching and learning of writing simple essay. The research objectives,
questions and hypotheses are given in the following section.

Research Objectives
This research intends to meet the following objectives:
a)

To check whether the Process Approach was an effective way, as compared


to the product approach in teaching writing.

b)

To examine whether the Process Approach was the preferred approach


compared to the Product Approach in teaching writing of simple essay.

c)

To find out, whether the Process Approach could motivate the students in
learning the writing skill.

1.5.2

Research Questions
The following research questions were formulated in order to meet the research
objectives.
The questions were:
a)

Could Process Approach be considered as an effective way, as compared to the


Product Approach in teaching writing?

b)

Which approach was preferred by the students in teaching and learning of


writing simple essay?

c)

Could the Process Approach motivate the students in learning the writing
skill?

1.5.1

Research Hypotheses
Four hypotheses were constructed to answer the research questions. They were:
a)

The Process Approach would be more effective in teaching writing; in terms of


ideas, vocabulary, grammar and creativity.

b)

The Process Approach would be preferred in teaching and learning of writing


simple essay.

c)

The Process Approach would help to motivate the students in learning the
writing skill.

1.6

Significance of the Research


Teaching writing in the English Language classroom is an uphill task for the
language teachers. This is due to the lack of vocabulary, grammar, sentence structures,
creativity and motivation among students. It was hopefully that this research would
provide an insight in exploring the effectiveness of Process Approach in teaching and
5

learning writing in the context of the Malaysian classroom. It also would help the
language teachers to design creative activities in their writing class through Process
Approach to make writing more fun and meaningful.

1.7

Limitations of the Research


The scope of the research was confined to one school in the outskirt of Kuching.
Therefore, it might not represent the secondary schools in Sarawak and in Malaysia in
general. The findings might not be applicable in other schools in other parts of
Malaysia. Furthermore, only thirty students were involved in this research.

1.8

Definition of Terms
The following definitions were given to the terms used in this research:
a)

Process Approach
Process Approach is a method of teaching writing where the students are
required to be involved in few stages such as brainstorming for ideas, extending
the ideas into note form, organising the ideas before they write the first draft.
The drafts are compared and feedback from peers will contribute to improve the
exchange drafts. After that, a final draft is written and finally the students are
required to exchange and read others work and they are even allowed to give
responses or replies.

b)

Product Approach
Product approach or known also as the traditional approach is a method of
teaching writing, which requires the students to mimic a model text, and is
usually presented and analysed at an early stage of the writing lesson.

c)

Effectiveness
In the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary (1989), effectiveness means
having an effect, producing the intended result. In this research, the effect or
the intended results refers to the effectiveness of using the Process Approach in
the teaching and learning of writing simple essay.

d)

Motivation
Motivation refers to the internal states that lead to instigation, persistence,
energy, and direction of behaviour- in other words, to the setting of goals and
energizing of goal-directed behaviour. (Corsini, 1984)

1.9

Summary
The present research was an attempt to find out the effectiveness of using
Process Approach in the teaching and learning of writing simple essay in an English
language classroom. The objectives of the research were to determine whether the
approach could be an effective way to teach simple writing and to find out if it was able
to generate motivation among the students towards writing. It was also to find out
whether students who used this approach would be able to produce better writing.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1

Introduction
This chapter will discuss the related literature and related research conducted in
the use of Process Approach in the teaching and learning of writing simple essay in an
English language classroom.

2.2

Problems in Teaching and learning of Writing Essay


Most students find writing difficult. It is the skill where they are least proficient
in. It is quite alarming that most researchers and educators agree that, with rare
expectations, students do not and cannot write well (Amiran & Mann 1982).
One major writing dilemma faced by most students in our country involves
little terms of composition skills and every student produces exactly the same
composition as every other student in his class (Chitravelu, Sithamparam & Teh 1996)
This may be caused by the product approach that has been used over the years by
teachers.
Other than that, most students find writing less interesting as they are lacking
the motivation to really learn the skill because they have little use for it in immediate
present. Adding to that, their limited vocabulary and their inability to master the
language structures has made writing as an almost impossible task to do. (Chitravelu,
Sithamparam & The 1996)

Nevertheless, it is necessary to create writing lesson attractive and much more


meaningful to the students. They need to get an opportunity to learn various processes
that most successful writers use in their writing.

2.3

Definition of Process Approach


The Process Approach can be best defined as an approach that focuses on the
process of writing and not the product. Gardner and Johnson (1997) described it as an
approach that focuses more on the varied classroom activities which promote the
development of language use; brainstorm, group discussion, rewriting. This is further
supported by Allen (2003) that this approach mirrors all the processes writers
experienced before any written task is completed.

Nunan (1999) clearly states that the process approach focuses on the steps
involved in creating a piece of work. Process writing, he added allows for the fact that
no text can be perfect, but that a writer will get closer to perfection by producing,
reflecting on, discussing and reworking successive drafts of a text.

Jordon (1997) acknowledges that process writing evolved as a reaction to the


product approach, in that it met the need to match the writing processes inherent in
writing in ones mother tongue, and consequently allow learners to express themselves
better as individuals. This on the other hand he added that the product has no practical
applications. Indeed, the process approach can still contain elements of product-based
writing. Nunan (1999) reaffirms this by stating that there is no reason why writing
program should not contain elements of both approaches.

2.4

Steps in Process Approach


There are few common steps in process approach. Adam (1998) explains the processes
into different steps :
Pre-writing
In this planning stage students are required to brainstorm on suitable ideas for their
writing. They are encouraged by the teacher to discuss and debate to generate ideas
needed.
Focusing Ideas
During this stage, students write without much concern on the accuracy of writing
mechanics. The most important feature is meaning.

Evaluating, structuring and editing


In this stage, writing is adapted to a readership. Students should focus more on
form and on producing a finished piece of work. The teacher can help with error
correction and give organizational advice.

This approach is seen by some language researchers as the ideal approach that
can generate students interest in writing and further develop their writing skill. Allen
(2003) further added that students who are intimidated by writing find it easier to
begin-and to finish-when the route to the destination is clearly mapped.

10

2.5

Language Theories related to Process Approach


The Process Approach significantly compliments the constructivist teaching and
learning theory. Constructivism according to Kelly, (1991) is a view of learning based
on the belief that learners through an active, mental process of development construct
knowledge; learners are the builders and creators of meaning and knowledge. Applebee
(1993) on the connection of process approach and constructive theory remarks that
rather than emphasizing characteristics of the final products, process-oriented
instruction focuses on the language and problem-solving strategies that students need to
learn in order to generate those products and initially construct their learning
capability. As the students interact with their teacher and with each other as part of
either whole class activities, small group activities, or individual activities, they practise
using language in a variety of contexts developing and horning many different skills as
they do so.

Constructivist teaching is an exceptionally interesting and exciting way to teach


because students are involved in learning activities they appear to enjoy, and much
more student-teacher contact is possible. This is indeed hand in hand with what process
approach is about.

Langer and Applebee (1987) explain that using this approach, the students will
enjoy their learning process as their ideas are allowed to be developed through a series
of related, supportive activities. They have the best chance to focus on the ideas they
are writing about and to develop more complex thinking and reasoning skills.

11

Other than that, negotiation is an important aspect of a constructivist classroom.


Negotiating which clearly exist in process approach according to Cook (1992) is
important as the students will work harder and better, and what they learn will mean
more to them if they are discovering their own ideas, asking their own questions, and
fighting hard to answer the for themselves. Out of negotiation comes a sense of
ownership in them for the work they are to do, and therefore a commitment to it.

2.6

Related Studies
There are a number of researches shows that the Process Approach has benefits
the students in their writing. Holdzkom (1982) says that students who are encouraged to
engage in prewriting experiences evidence greater writing achievement than those who
are forced on their writing without this kind of preparation. Westdorp (1983) agrees to
the statement and adds that this stage helps the students to triggers their self-motivation
as they are allowed to share their ideas with the other students in their group and this
helps to increase their learning level.

2.7

Summary
The review of literature in this chapter highlights the Process Approach as an
approach that caters the learning of writing needs of the students. Past researches
agreed that this approach is effective as the students are allowed to experience the flow
of the writing process and in return, it helps them to improve in all the elements needed
in their writing. The next chapter will focus on the research design and methodology
that will be employed in this study.

12

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1

Introduction
This chapter describes the methodology that is going to be used in this research.
It is divided into five sections. Section 1 is research design, section 2 is population and
sample, section 3 is research instruments, section 4 is procedure for data collection and
section 5 is procedure for data analysis.

3.2

Research Design
In this experimental research, the researcher will use a pre-questionnaire, post
questionnaire, pre-test and post test materials for both the experimental and control
groups.
The framework of the research design is shown in figure 2.

O1

O2

O3

O4

O1

O2

O3

O4

O1 = Pre-Questionnaire

X = Experimental Group

O2 = Pre-Test

C = Control Group

O3 = Post- Questionnaire
O4 = Post-Test

13

3.3

Population and Sample


Thirty mix ability students will be involved in this research. They are the form
two students of SMK Siburan, Kuching. The students in that class will be divided into
two groups. One group is the experimental group (15 respondents) while the second
group (15 respondents) is the control group. They will be selectively chosen based on
the English result from their previous monthly examination.

The selection for both group members will be made based on their level of
proficiency. The students who scored between 40 45 marks will be categorized into
the low level of proficiency, those who scored between 46 - 69 will be categorized as
in the medium level of proficiency and those who scored 70 and above will be
categorized in the high level of proficiency. In forming both groups, five students from
each level of proficiency will be selected to come up with 15 students per group.

3.4

Research Instruments
The instruments that are going to be used in this research are; pre-test and post
test, questionnaire and the lesson plan.
The first research instrument is the sets of questionnaire. The first set consists of
3 questions to gather the subjects background information. The second set with 7
questions focusing on the preferred approach that the subjects choose after the lesson
and to find out some information about the effectiveness of the approach.

14

The second research instrument is the pre-test and the post test. The pre-test will
be given to identify the students knowledge of writing skill and the post-test is to
determine the students knowledge of writing skills after going through the Product and
Process Approach. The lesson plan will be used by the researcher to keep the lesson on
the right track.

3.5

Procedure for Data Collection


At the early stage of the research, the students from both the experimental and
control groups will be asked by the researcher to answer the first set of the
questionnaire (Appendix 1). It will be given a day before the actual research is being
carried out. They will be given 15 minutes to answer all the questions.

Next, the pre-test (Appendix 3) will be given. In this stage, the researcher will
explain to the students what the task is all about. This test will require the students to
write a short essay of 150 words about a boys picnic on one island. This will be given
to all the students involved in the research simultaneously two days before the research
takes place. They will be given 30 minutes to complete the task.

During the lesson, the researcher will use the prepared lesson plan (Appendix
5). The researcher will begin the lesson by grouping the selected students into two
groups with the help of the marks from their previous monthly examination given by
the language teacher. The writing lesson will apply all the stages of the Process
Approach with the experimental group. The control group will be given the similar task
based on the Product Approach. Both approaches will be used for four double periods
15

of 80 minutes. At the end of the fourth week, the post-test (Appendix 4) will be given to
both groups. They will be given 30 minutes to write on a different story.

The last stage of this research study is for the students to answer the second set
of the questionnaire (Appendix 2). It will be given after the research is held to find out
the approach effectiveness.

3.6

Procedure for Data Analysis


The final stage of the research is to gather all the data collected and analyze
them for the findings and final report. All the instruments used to collect the data will
be analyzed based on their categories of information required for the research.
In this stage, the researcher will make sure that all required information from the data
collected is complete and relevant to identify the effectiveness of the approach.
Data collected will be analyzed to answer the stated research question.
a)

Frequencies and percentages describe the profile of the research subjects.

b)

Mean and standard deviations will also be used to determine the responses of the
subjects on the Process Approachs effectiveness in acquiring writing skill.

c)

Frequencies and percentages will be used to identify the subjects preference of the
approach.

d)

Means and standard deviations will be used to identify the performance of the
subjects.

16

3.7

Summary
This chapter explains the methodology to be used such as research design,
population and sample, the research instrument, the procedure for data collection and
procedure for data analysis. It is with great hope that the data collected would highlight
the effectiveness of Process Approach in the teaching and learning of simple essay.

17

CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH RESULTS

4.1

Introduction
This chapter will discuss the result of the research study; the profile of the
respondents, the research findings based on the three objectives of the research set in
the first chapter and the summary section.

4.2

Profile of Respondents

There were thirty students involved in this study from SMK Siburan, Kuching.
They were the form two students with different level proficiency of the English
language. Selection was done based on their previous examination; those who scored
more than 50% marks for the English paper.

Based on table 4.1 (Refer to appendix X), the respondents were then divided
into two groups of fifteen each; the experimental group who were asked to complete
their writing tasks using the Process Approach, and the other group who applied the
traditional approach for the similar writing tasks given. They were divided according to
race gender, frequency, percentages of respondents

Both groups were divided equally with eight male respondents and seven female
respondents from three main races; five Bidayuh students, five Chinese students
another five Iban students. The selection of the students were made based on the latest
monthly examination result.
18

4. 3

Research Findings

4.3.1

The Pre-Test Result


In the beginning, both groups were given pre-test (Refer to Appendix 0) to
identify their proficiency level of the English Language. For the experimental group,
There were 59.8% passed the test and 40.2% failed. One student scored 73% marks
with the percentage of 6.70%. One student scored 67%. Two of them scored 60% with
another two more scored 58%. Three more students scored between 56% and 52%. Six
students scored below the passing marks of the test. Two only managed to score 47%,
three scored 40% and the lowest mark was 33% scored by one student. (Refer to
Appendix 0)

The control group on the other hand only had 53.1% who passed with another
46.9% failed in the test. The highest mark was 67% scored by three students with the
percentage of 20.00%. Five students scored between 53% to 60% marks with the
percentage of 6.70% marks each. Seven of them who failed the test with the percentage
of 46.9% scored from 48% to 30%.

This pre-test had proven that the selection of the respondents for the research
was equal on their knowledge of the language. The score obtained by the students from
both groups during the test was very close with six failures in the experimental group
and seven in the control group. Evidence was that the contrast of total score between
both groups was only at 18 % marks. This also shown that their proficiency level was
average as the researcher had set the passing marks to be 50% for the task.

19

The mean scored by the experimental group in the test was at 52.33% and the control
group on the other hand had scored slightly higher with 51.13%.

4.3.2

The Treatment Lessons


In the next three lessons after the pre-test, the experimental group was treated
with the Process Approach in their writing task. They were first divided into three
smaller groups of five. There were no problems while they did their group discussions
during the three lessons..

The first lesson (Refer to Appendix ), the students were instructed to write an
essay entitled My Mother. Each group was required to write down the ideas from
their discussion before they wrote down their first draft. During the pre writing stage,
the researcher showed a picture of a woman to the students and asked them to answer
three questions pertaining the picture. They were motivated in answering the questions.
Later, they were asked to discuss in their own small groups of five about the contain
that they should put inside their writing for their first draft. As they brainstormed, the
good students were seen to voluntarily help their other peers on the proper vocabulary
and sentence structures. At this stage, the accuracy of writing mechanics was not much
focused on, as they need to generate ideas for their essay. The researcher found that
most students were motivated in discussing the topic with their peers. Despite the
limitation of vocabulary that they had, they were able to give interesting and creative
ideas when it came to brainstorming. They participated actively and generally enjoyed
the writing sessions. Their enthusiasm about the writing task given can be seen through
20

the mind mapping and the first draft that they had produced (Refer to Appendix 2 and
3)

In the second lesson, the researcher started the lesson by asking the students
some information that they had acquired in the previous lesson. Most of them were very
eager to answer and give comments on the topic. The good students brought up some
personal experiences that they had with their own mother. This was a good sign to show
that they were able to connect the topic with their own everyday life. It made the lesson
more meaningful to them. In the later stage, when the students were required to edit
their friends first draft, some students even proposed their ideas to their friends to write
a better essay. Much of these involved the sentence structures and choice of words to be
used.

During this session, they were then asked to rewrite their essays after the peer
editing was done. The students who were more proficient felt very challenged while
those who were less proficient felt the need to try their level best so as to be able to
keep up with their peers. They had produced better essay in their second draft, as less
grammatical and sentences structures errors could be seen after the process of peer
editing. (Refer to Appendix 4)

The last lesson required the students to proofread their friends second draft of
the essay before they wrote the final product. Before they did the activity, the
researcher started a short discussion on their opinion of the previous editing process.
Most of them agreed that it had helped them to clarify the errors and unnecessary points
that they have in their previous draft. Some weak students somehow stated that they
21

were a bit confused at first on the aspects of writing that they were supposed to edit but
initially their friends and the researcher had managed to help them.

Before they started the proofreading stage, the researcher highlighted the
specific aspects of the draft that they should be checking; subject verb agreement,
spelling etc. The researcher also helped the students who required help especially in
spelling and grammar. The students were very motivated and some who were more
proficient even gave their comments on their friends style of elaborating their ideas.
This had shown that the students had gradually gained their self-confidence in
expressing what was needed in fulfilling the task. (Refer to Appendix 5)

The control group on the other hand, was asked to complete the similar
writing task on their own using the traditional approach. They were asked to complete
their essay within the three lessons. Most of the students in this group seemed to have
most difficulties in generating their ideas. It took them almost two lessons to complete
the first draft.

They were then asked to edit their own first draft before they rewrote the second draft.
In the final lesson, when they were asked to produce the final product, most of them did
not bother to proofread what they have written in the earlier draft.
(Refer to Appendix 6)

After the final products were collected from both groups, it was clearly shown
that the experimental groups managed to produce better planning and end product for
the task. (Refer to Appendix 5 and 6 )
22

4.3.3

The Effectiveness of the Process Approach


4.3.3.1

Mean Score from the Pre-Test and Post Test


The mean scored by the experimental group was 64.40% with the increment of

17.07% from their previous pre-test. The mean scored by the control group was at
61.06% with 9.93% increment. Both groups had shown some improvement in their
writing but this also shows that the experimental group had the highest increment as
compared to the later group. This is a positive sign to proof that there was effectiveness
in the Process Approach. (Refer to Appendix O)

4.3.3.2

Standard Deviation for the Pre-Test and the Post Test


The experimental group figured 11.10 for the standard deviation for the pre-test

which was equivalent to 21.2%. They scored 14.03, equivalent to 20.2% in the post test.
The control group managed to score 11.50 for the pre-test; equivalent to 22.49% in the
first test and 11.90; equivalent to 22.59%. (Refer to Appendix 0)

Based on the difference score in their standard deviation for both tests, it had
shown that the experimental group had managed to perform better in completing the
tasks given.

23

4.3.4

Approach Preference
Based on the data collected from the questionnaires on their preference of the
approach, the experimental group responded positively towards the Process Approach.
All of them agreed that the approach had helped them to write better. 93.2% of them
agreed that writing using the approach was interesting and the group discussion was
indeed useful in generating their ideas in completing the task given. Given the question
whether editing and proof reading on their friends work peer is useful, 86.6% agreed.
(Refer to Appendix M)

The control group on the other hand responded negatively towards the product
approach administered to them. 93.30% of them did not prefer the approach for
the writing lesson. There were only 13.40% who thought that the approach was
interesting and enabled them to write fluently, while 86.60% disagreed.
(Refer to Appendix N)
It was clear to say that the Process Approach had gained its popularity as the
most preferred approach in the teaching of writing simple essay. It is also interesting to
note the feedback from the experimental group that the approach had helped them in
their writing.

24

4.3.5

Approach Motivation
All the students from the experimental group agreed that they were highly
motivated by their group members in completing the task using the Process Approach.
93.30% of them satisfied doing the writing task given in groups. They also agreed that
good discussion helped them to generate ideas for the task. (Refer to Appendix P)

It was a contradicting score by the control group. All of them agreed that the
Traditional approach did not motivate them at all in their writing task. Only 13.40%
agreed that learning writing individually interest them, while 86.60% disagreed.
(Refer to Appendix Q)

These figures show that the Process Approach does motivate the students to
their best performance in the teaching and learning of writing simple essay.

4.3.6

Summary
This chapter explains the research result of the data collected from the research.
The data was analyzed based on the min, standard deviation, frequency (%) of the score
gained through the tests and the sets of questionnaire. Evidence from the result had
clearly answered the three questions of the research on the effectiveness of the Process
Approach, the preference and the students motivation in the writing lessons.

25

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS


5.1

Introduction
This chapter will discuss the research summary, discussion of research findings
as well as the conclusion of it. It will also discuss the implications of the research
findings coupled with the recommendations for further research and also the summary.

5.2

Research Summary

The present research was an attempt to find out the effectiveness of using
Process Approach in the teaching and learning of writing simple essay in an English
language classroom. The objectives of the research were to determine whether the
approach could be an effective way to teach simple writing and to find out if it was able
to generate motivation among the students towards writing. It was also to find out
whether students who used this approach would be able to produce better writing.

There were thirty students involved in this study from SMK Siburan, Kuching.
They were the form two students with different level proficiency of the English
language. Selection was done based on their previous examination; those who scored
more than 50% marks for the English paper.

26

In carrying out the study, the respondents were divided into two groups of
fifteen each; the experimental group whom using the Process Approach, and the other
group who applied the traditional approach for the similar writing tasks given.

The dependant variables in this study based on the students performance in the
pre-test, post-test, their preferences and attitudes as well as motivation to study the
subject. It sets to answer the following questions;

a)

Could Process Approach be considered as an effective way, as compared to the


Product Approach in teaching writing?

b)

Which approach was preferred by the students in teaching and learning of


writing simple essay?

c)

Could the Process Approach motivate the students in learning the writing
skill?

The findings obtained from the pre-test, posts-test and the set of questionnaires
were used to determine the possible answer for the above questions. To get the result of
frequencies and percentages of all the thirty respondents the data was then analyzed.

27

5.3

Discussion of the Findings


The research findings had managed to highlight the constructive theory
mentioned by Applebee (1993) on the connection of process approach and constructive
theory remarks that rather than emphasizing characteristics of the final products,
process-oriented instruction focuses on the language and problem-solving strategies
that students need to learn in order to generate those products and initially construct
their learning capability. The experimental students treated with the Process Approach
gradually learned to find the main points; the proper structures and vocabulary needed
for their writing at a much better pace as compared to the other group who used the
traditional approach. Their interaction with their teacher and with each other as part of
either whole class activities, small group activities, or individual activities had also
allowed them to practise using language in a variety of contexts developing and horning
many different skills; listening and speaking in the contrary.
The findings also discovered the effectiveness of the Process Approach in
teaching of writing simple essay. As Evans, 1988 states that writing involves various
levels of processes therefore to make the teaching of writing effective the Process
Approach is seen to be most suitable as it caters the needs of all the stages needed. The
research finding identified the increment of marks scored in the experimental students
writing. They managed to score 64.04% in their post test, with the increment of 17.07%
from the pre-test with the score of 52.33%. When compared with the score of both tests
for the control group, it was discovered that the experimental group managed to do
better after the treatment of the approach was used.

28

Apart from that, the three lessons of writing had boosted the experimental
groups motivation in completing the task. The activities carried out throughout the
lessons did support Gardner and Johnson (1997) who described it as an approach that
focuses more on the varied classroom activities which promote the development of
language use; brainstorm, group discussion, rewriting. In this matter, the experimental
students had remarkably developed in the language they used in completing their tasks.
What important was that they enjoyed the discussion and initially the usual dry writing
session was filled with constructive comments, information sharing on proper spelling
and sentence construction for the task given. This showed the existence of motivation
among them which further supported Langer and Applebee (1987) who explain that
using this approach, the students will enjoy their learning process as their ideas are
allowed to be developed through a series of related, supportive activities.

Finally, the existence of consistencies with the previous researches on the


effectiveness of Process Approach in teaching writing could also be seen in the
findings. The students of the experimental group did engage in their prewriting as what
Holdzkom (1982) in his research discovered. It also approved Westdorps research
(1983) who found that it triggered the students self-motivation when they were allowed
to share their ideas with the other students in their group supported this and this helps to
increase their learning level.

29

5.4

Conclusions of the Findings


The teaching and learning of writing in the Malaysian classroom is one of the
most difficult tasks to be fulfilled by many English teachers in Malaysia. In mastering
writing skill, the students must learn all aspects of the language. (Wong, 2000)They
must be able to formulate their own learning strategies that will help them to
understand the various type of writing through their learning experience.

The research findings therefore had identified that;


i.

The Process Approach is effective to teach writing simple essay as


compared to the traditional approach.

ii.

The experimental students did prefer the Process Approach in their


writing lessons.

iii.

The experimental students were motivated in completing their writing


tasks when the Process Approach used.

This concludes that the Process Approach is effective in the teaching of writing
to a form two group. The experimental students were able to learn all aspects of the
language; listening, speaking and reading in their writing lessons. Another striking
finding that developed during the research was the level of support and teamwork
between each group members of the experimental students and the existence of critical
thinking used when they edited and proofread their peers writing. This shows another
positive side of the research, which indeed can change the students mindset that
writing lessons can be as fun as learning any other language skills.

30

5.5

Implication of the Findings


This research findings has further developed the constructive theory whereby
the process writing stages that the students have to go through is as important as the
product of the writing itself. It was proven that in the teaching of writing, the students
drive to learn and produce better result was based on how the lesson is conducted and
by all means the suitable approach that can help them in comprehending language as a
whole.

It is therefore, important for any other researchers as well as language teachers


who want to make the same research to consider the main objective of the writing
lesson. It should focus on the students ability to explore with their ideas, to express
their thoughts and to be able to see that the teaching of vocabulary and grammar should
be taught in context of the types of writing that they are supposed to do.

It is also hope that this research could benefit any language teachers who faced
difficulties in teaching writing. This research has proven that Process Approach might
be the solution to attract the students to participate and enjoy themselves at the same
during the writing lessons. The teachers involved could apply the Process Approach
stages in any other language skills with the help of some creativity.

31

5.6

Recommendations for Further Research


This approach to help students write simple essays can be used to teach the
writing component in any proficiency course. It can be modified by the teacher to suit
her or his classroom situation, depending on the level of proficiency of the students, the
type of materials available and the number of hours allotted for the subject.
Although the student has gained the courage to write, the initial attempt at the
final essay will be scary and some students may make mistakes. Because of these
mistakes, it is possible for the student to revert to fossilized methods previously
learned. What the teacher must look for at this stage are the good sentences scattered
throughout the paper, an easy flow of ideas or clear signs or organization. These
positive aspects of the paper are what must be stressed to the student and a comparison
must be made between the initial writing and the final essay to show where
improvement is evident.
Motivation is a key concern for both teachers and students. Yet while teachers
hope to motivate our students and enhance their learning, professionally we must be
very clear not to manipulate them in the process, recognising that ultimately learning is
the student's responsibility. If our teaching is appropriate and learner-centred, we will
not manipulate our students as we encourage them to develop and use their own
language skills. Instead, we will take learners' motivations and learning styles into
account as we teach in order for them to improve.

32

5.7

Summary
This chapter explains the conclusions, implications and recommendations of the
research. It summarizes the whole report of the research paper.

33

You might also like