##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Writing instructions have become one of the most regarded topics in the field of language teaching and learning when scholars found that SL/FL writing is believed to be a challenge for learners. To draw a fuller picture of the writing approach, writing instructions and its effects on EFL learners’ writing performance, this research was conducted to illustrate the areas of concern researchers have focused on regarding scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction. This research aimed to determine the effects of scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction on EFL learners’ writing performance. The second aim was to determine EFL learners’ attitudes toward using scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction on their writing test. This was an experimental study with one group of 34 participants. In this study, a combination of quantitative and qualitative data was utilized. The outcomes of the pre-test and post-test revealed that incorporating scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction significantly impacted EFL learners’ writing proficiency. Additionally, students responded to the writing instructions with a good attitude and greater confidence (M = 4.20). The study’s findings contributed to the present literature on scaffolding studies and genre-based writing instruction.

Introduction

The English language is significant to Vietnam’s economic growth and is frequently considered a viable means of communication. The focus of English Language Teaching (ELT) has now shifted towards developing communicative competence. In Vietnam, one of the English education projects aimed at university/college students being competent in using a foreign language in communication, study, and work. In other words, the project aims to train university/college graduates to listen, speak, read, and write well in a foreign language. Writing skills are considered productive skills that learners must possess in that process. However, most students’ ability to practice English is still considered low despite learning English for six years in high school. These students’ writing proficiency and weaknesses are affected by the educational programs assessing their coursework samples or final exams. In addition, the majority of EFL teachers in Vietnam perceive teaching writing to be a challenging ability, which, in some way, influences the learning outcomes of the learners (Nguyen, 2009).

Teachers aim to find the most effective ways to instruct writing in literacy classrooms to attain the curriculum’s educational objectives. The genre approach to writing emphasizes the development of writing proficiency by teaching language qualities and acceptable rhetorical patterns recognized in the target society. This approach is particularly relevant in teaching writing that emphasizes communicative purpose. Students can communicate their ideas more clearly in linguistic aspects. By exploring the social and cultural context of different writing styles, the genre-based approach can assist students in understanding how to write effectively for different situations. A variety of studies, including those by Chen and Su (2012), Luu (2011), Tuyenet al. (2016), Yasuda (2011), Wang (2013), Watanabe (2016), and Viriya and Wasanasomsithi (2017), report on the development of writing skills among students as they write summaries, recounts, research papers, e-mails, apology letters, and exposition essays, among other genres. These studies show that most learners can control the essential elements of the target genre concerning societal goals, linguistic traits, and organizational structure.

Genre-based instruction was first implemented in the teaching-learning cycle, proposed by Callaghan and Rothery (1988). The three stages of this process include Deconstruction, Joint Construction, and Independent Construction. However, it was later improved upon by Derewianka (1990) and Hammond (1992) to include four recursive phases: (1) Building knowledge of the text, (2) modelling of text, (3) joint text construction, and (4) independent text construction. Later, Nunan and Lamb (1996) explained the four recursive phases of the process, which are as follows. In the initial stage, learners are provided with the necessary foundational knowledge related to the tasks and goals they will be working on. The second stage involves exposure to models with the whole language in context. The teacher emphasizes the modelled text’s purpose, structure, and linguistic features to promote an understanding of language style and social function within the genre. During the third stage, the teacher and students collaborate to produce a text miming the model. In the final stage, students compose their texts independently and at their own pace. As per Chaisiri’s (2010) proposal, the genre-based approach to teaching and learning can be divided into three stages: (a) modelling a text, (b) joint construction of a text, and (c) independent construction of a text.

Regarding genre-based writing classes, the teacher’s role is crucial for effective learning. Whether through direct or indirect participation, the teacher must provide students with the necessary support to help them succeed. The teacher may give students direct instruction or point out errors in their writing. Teachers could consider offering students the opportunity to delve into a specific text, allowing them to gain a deeper understanding of the material they need to learn. Teachers provide varying levels of intervention in students’ writing process depending on their individual needs. This learning process involves the teacher offering systemic assistance, commonly called scaffolding or explicit support, to aid student learning. According to Vernon (2002), assisting learners throughout the writing process is crucial, from generating ideas to completing the final version. Incorporating scaffolding techniques is crucial in teaching writing as it enables teachers to systematically organize writing activities to meet students’ individual needs.

Many researchers propose using scaffolding techniques as the teaching technique that can be implemented through the process writing approach. In the study of Faraj (2015), which was carried out at a university in Iraq, a significant improvement was observed in the students’ results on the final evaluation when compared to their initial assessment. Implementing the writing process approach for scaffolding students’ writing needs in EFL writing was compelling, improving their writing skills. This was particularly beneficial for students who had challenges with fundamental writing elements such as grammar. Additionally, learners could confidently express their thoughts and ideas in their writing.

In light of investigating how scaffolding can be used to improve students’ writing skills, a study was conducted by Ikawati (2020). This study showed that scaffolding can be used as a teacher’s strategy to improve students’ writing skills by integrating the writing process in the genre-based approach representing the scaffolding. The teacher gradually withdraws their help once students have gained enough experience to complete the task independently. This process, known as scaffolding, allows students to learn the strategy behind the task rather than just completing it. As a result, students become autonomous and successful writers. In a study conducted by Veerappanet al. (2011), the effectiveness of scaffolding strategy in journal writing was evaluated among L2 undergraduate university college students. The scaffolding technique used in the study helped address the students’ challenges and further enhanced their skills in journal writing. With the teacher’s intervention, the students could progress from their current developmental level to a more advanced one.

Furthermore, the students could use appropriate time tenses, verbs, and adjectives. As journal writing requires reflection and recall of past events, they could document their progress in written form. Additionally, the findings of Padmadewi and Artini’s (2019) study showed that scaffolding techniques resulted in noticeable enhancements in both writing proficiency and students’ attitudes and enthusiasm. The study implied that the quality of the scaffolding played a significant role in improving students’ writing skills.

Ahn (2012) investigated the effects of teaching L2 primary school students how to write using a genre-based approach. According to his research, the teacher’s active scaffolding procedures during the early stage of the cycle positively impacted students. This was because it helped them understand how texts are organized for various communicative purposes. Additionally, students responded to the writing instruction with a good attitude and greater confidence.

To take into account the effect of genre-based writing instructions on learners’ writing performance, Changpueng (2012) also deployed an experimental study to examine the writing achievement of 28 fourth-year Thai engineering students receiving writing instruction through the explicit genre-based approach, or GBA (SFL genre), and their attitudes toward this method of teaching. The study’s results revealed clear improvement in the student’s writing ability after the intervention of GBWI. When examining the students’ attitudes, their responses to the questionnaire, interview questions, and journals were all crosschecked. It was determined that the students held a positive view towards GBWI. In a similar context, Ueasiriphan and Tangkiengsirisin (2019) showed that genre-based writing instructions significantly affected Thai engineers’ technical writing performance. It also enhances the teacher’s comprehension of the genre, thus equipping the teacher to provide concise instructions to the students. It was determined that the students held a positive view towards GBWI. Kuiperet al. (2017) conducted a research project to investigate the effectiveness of GBWI in supporting students’ writing skills and their ability to utilize the distinctive characteristics of the ‘event proposal’ genre. Thirteen students in a first-year class received a subject-specific writing intervention that was designed and implemented over five weeks. Over time, the student’s writing performance showed improvement with the help of scaffolding. Analyzing students’ pre- and post-tests using an analytic scoring method revealed a statistically significant improvement in using common genre characteristics.

Furthermore, Truong (2017) conducted a preliminary investigation on using a genre-based method for instructing a writing course that emphasizes composing letters for freshman English majors at a Vietnamese university. The study aimed to comprehend students’ perception of a genre-based approach to learning letters and the benefits they derived from it. The findings unequivocally demonstrate that this approach markedly enhanced students’ awareness and comprehension of the various features of letter types. Moreover, even low-level learners could refine their organization of ideas, context awareness, and paralinguistic skills through this approach. Nonetheless, the study concludes that developing linguistic resources such as grammar and vocabulary necessitates more focused attention and time.

Pham and Bui’s (2021) study thoroughly examined the teaching and learning of the genre-based writing approach at a Vietnamese university. Their study unequivocally demonstrated genre-based instruction’s immense significance and impact on writing. The findings inferred that the students face some challenges in writing from a genre-based approach to writing an essay.

Hermanssonet al. (2019) state that the Sydney School’s genre pedagogical model emphasizes the crucial role of joint construction, which has proven to generate significant effects. Teachers and students work together throughout the stage of joint building to co-organize texts. According to the findings, the quality of the student’s narrative writing and the length of their writing were not significantly affected by the joint construction stage.

As compared to process-based and product-based approaches, genre-based instruction is relatively new. In Vietnam, there is a need to increase research knowledge on the impact of writing instructions, especially genre-based writing instructions. To draw a fuller picture of the writing approach, writing instructions, and their effects on EFL learners’ writing performance, this research is conducted to illustrate the areas of concern researchers have focused on about scaffolding in genre-based writing instructions. The objective of this study is to investigate how the use of scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction impacts the writing proficiency of EFL learners. Based on that, this research attempts to answer these questions:

  1. 1) What are the effects of scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction on EFL learners’ writing performance?
  2. 2) What are EFL learners’ attitudes towards scaffolding in genre-based writing instructions on their writing performance?

Methodology

Research Design

This is an experimental study with one group of participants. The study assessed the efficacy of Genre-based Instructions in teaching writing through three sessions employing a pre-test and post-test design with one group. The participants’ writing abilities were assessed before the course, and they were taught how to write an e-mail during the seventh week of the course. Their progress was then evaluated in Week 10. The study comprises 34 second-year students from a public college in the Mekong Delta who are not pursuing English as their major. They may come from diverse non-English majors, such as Business Administration, Tourism and Hospitality Management, and Construction Administration.

Data Collection Instruments

Pre-Test and Post-Test

For collecting quantitative data, two tests were considered a quantitative method to answer the research question. Two writing tests are used in this research: Pre-test and Post-test. The pre-test checks the participants’ writing competence, and the Post-test tests the learners’ writing achievement after the treatment. In other words, it tests the achievement of study objectives within a certain period. The genres of the tests are (1) Writing a note and (2) writing an e-mail or a letter. The tests were taken from the test bank and assessed by the Foreign Language Centre professional group at the college where the study is conducted to guarantee validity. The tests were also checked by running the reliability test in SPSS to ensure reliability. The topics and themes of the tests are modified following the format of the VSTEP A2 test. The pre-test and post-test will be marked by two markers from the School of Foreign Language where the study is conducted. The tests were designed based on the ten-point assessment scale, which contains five dimensions: Task fulfillment, organization, language use, and mechanics/spelling.

Questionnaire

The questionnaire consisted of 26 items, designed based on the theoretical framework of the teaching-learning cycle by Hyland (2003, as cited in Dirgeyasa, 2016), presented in the literature review. Therefore, the questionnaire could focus on three main clusters: (1) activities in the modeling phase, (2) activities in the joint negotiation phase, and (3) activities in the independent construction of text phase. The items are commonly used in the questionnaire, including scaled items on a 5-point Likert scale: (1) Strongly disagree, (2) Disagree, (3) Neutral, (4) Agree, and (5) Strongly agree.

Because the participants are non-majored English learners at a mix-level of English competence, the questionnaire is designed in both English and Vietnamese. The questionnaire was piloted with 20 students to check the reliability. The results indicated the instrument’s reliability (α = 0.92). Accordingly, it was then employed to collect the official data. After taking the post-test, the questionnaire was sent to 34 students via Google Forms and in a printed document. After two weeks, 31 responses had been received, which equates to a response rate of approximately 91.2%.

Interview

In terms of the qualitative data, a semi-structured interview involved six students recruited according to their scores in the pre-test and post-test. Therefore, interview data are supplementary to answer research question 2. Interview questions were piloted on five students with similar characteristics to the target participants to guarantee the questions were comprehensible and well responded to by the participants. Students are interviewed directly via face-to-face meetings or online platforms such as Zalo and Zoom. The length of time for each interview ranged from 20 to 30 minutes. In order to ensure the trustworthiness of the qualitative data, the interviews were carried out in Vietnamese to prevent any misinterpretations and to encourage the interviewees to convey their thoughts quickly, thoroughly, and precisely. The participants’ responses were recorded, and their notes were taken with consent. Subsequently, the researcher meticulously re-read and critically analyzed the transcriptions. Finally, the data was interpreted and analyzed based on themes and the literature review framework and presented in the research.

Intervention Design

The intervention, called Genre-based Writing Instructions, is designed around the teaching, and learning cycle and takes inspiration from the concept of scaffolding. The intervention was tailored to fit the specific educational context, and it spanned over ten weeks, with one lesson every two weeks (lasting around four periods each). The lesson plan comprises four class periods, following four stages: Building knowledge of the text, Modelling of text, Joint text construction, and Independent text construction (Hammond, 1992). In the first class period, the teacher must facilitate the initial stage of the writing process. This involves building contextual knowledge, which can be achieved through videos or pictures to present activities that focus on the topics and genres the students will be writing about. It is imperative that the teacher assertively takes control of this process to ensure the success of their students in the writing task. During the second class period, the second and third stages must be combined, as text modeling in the second stage and collaborative text construction in the third stage are inextricably linked. Students must focus on identifying the rhetorical pattern of texts and comprehending sentence structures and vocabulary, which are essential skills for rewriting target texts. The fourth stage, however, cannot be completed in a single class period since students begin their writing. The third and fourth class periods cover the fourth and fifth stages of the writing process, in which students must work together to create their writing and then revise it based on feedback from peers and teachers. Pair-work and group-work activities are encouraged throughout these stages, with ample support from teachers and peers.

Results

Research Question 1: Effects of Scaffolding in Genre-Based Writing Instruction on EFL Learners’ Writing Performance

The reliability tests for the scale are performed to observe the internal consistency of the pre-test and the post-test. The results showed that the pre-test (α = 0.93) and post-test (α = 0.80) were reliable enough for data collection.

Then, the descriptive statistics were conducted to examine the minimum and maximum scores, the average mean score, and standard deviations of the pre-test and post-test, which reveal the students’ level of writing performance. The results of the tests are shown in Table I.

Tests N Min Max Mean Std. dev.
Pre-test 34 0.0 8.5 4.62 2.27
Post-test 34 4.0 9.5 7.81 1.01
Table I. Participants’ Writing Performance Before and After the Intervention

As can be seen from Table I, the total mean score of participants’ writing performance before the treatment is below the average (M = 4.70) and, after the treatment, is above the average (M = 7.81). The maximum score of the post-test is also higher than the pre-test’s. It means that participants’ writing performance was improved after the treatment. The scaffolding genre-based instructions had a positive effect on participants’ writing performance.

A GLM for repeated measures test was run to compare the mean score of the pre-test (M = 4.62, SD = 2.27) and that of the post-test (M = 7.81, SD = 1.01). The results showed a significant difference between the two means (p < 0.001). The use of scaffolding genre-based writing instructions positively affected participants’ ability to write.

Then, the paired sample t-tests are computed to see what aspects of writing performed are improved after the implementation. The results are shown in Table II.

Mean Mean difference (MD) t Sig. (2-tailed)
Pre_content 2.2059 −0.74 −5.18 <0.001
Post_content 2.9412
Pre_organization 1.7647 −1.12 −11.03 <0.001
Post_organization 2.8824
Pre_language use 1.6765 −0.91 −7.06 <0.001
Post_language use 2.5882
Pre_mechanic 1.8529 −0.82 −4.98 <0.001
Post_mechanic 2.6691
Table II. Participants’ Writing Performance in Four Aspects Before and After the Intervention

The results showed that there were significant changes in the participants’ writing performance in all four aspects (content, organization, language use, and mechanics), whereas most improved in the organization of the text (MD = −1.12).

The Pearson Correlations test was employed to find a correlation between students whose marks are high on the pre-test and a correlation in which students whose marks are low on the pre-test can get low marks on the post-test.

The findings presented in Table III indicate a correlation between the pretest-pretest and posttest-posttest scores (r = 1, p = 0.047). This suggests that students who performed well in the pre-test also performed well in the post-test, while those who scored poorly in the pre-test did not necessarily receive low scores in the post-test. It was also found that there was no significant correlation between the pre-test and post-test scores, indicating a guarantee that the intervention program benefited a group of low-achieved level participants.

Pre-test Post-test
Pre-test 1 0.343*
Post-test 0.343* 1
Table III. Correlation Table for Pre-Test and Post-Test Scores

Research Question 2: Effects of EFL Learners’ Attitude towards Scaffolding in Genre-based Writing Instructions on Their Writing Performance

First, a scale test was employed to check the reliability of the questionnaire. The result showed that the questionnaire is reliable for data collection (α = 0.90).

Then, a descriptive statistics test was run to examine the average mean score of the questionnaire and each cluster. The results show that the mean score of the questionnaire was high (M = 4.20). These results indicated that students had a positive attitude toward the scaffolding in GBWI. Table IV presents the results from the descriptive statistics.

Cluster Min Max Mean SD
Students’ attitude towards scaffolding in GBWI 3.42 5.00 4.18 0.41
Students’ attitude towards the benefits of scaffolding in GBWI 3.29 5.00 4.27 0.43
Students’ attitude towards the effects of teacher’s scaffolding in GBWI on their writing performance 3.29 5.00 4.18 0.45
Total 3.38 5.00 4.20 0.39
Table IV. Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Attitude toward the Scaffolding in GBWI (n = 31)

The mean score of participants’ attitudes was high (M = 4.20). Then, a one-sample t-test was run to check whether there was a significant difference between the mean score of 4.20 and the test value of 4.21, the accepted mean score for a very high level (Hett, 1993). The results of this test showed that there was no difference between the two means (t = −0.13, p > 0.05). It can be concluded that participants’ attitude toward Scaffolding in GBWI on their writing performance was very high.

Table IV also indicates that the highest mean score belongs to cluster 2, the students’ attitude toward the benefit of scaffolding in GBWI. However, a paired-samples t-test was performed to compare participants’ attitudes toward each cluster. The result revealed that participants’ reaction to the teacher’s scaffolding in GBWI was the same as that of towards the benefit of scaffolding in GBWI (t = −1.94; p > 0.05) and the effects of scaffolding in GBWI on their writing performance (t = 0.042, p > 0.05). Participants’ reactions to scaffolding in GBWI, the benefits of it, and the effects of this technique on their writing performance were the same, with higher value to benefits of scaffolding in GBWI (M = 4.27).

Additionally, an independent sample t-test was utilized to investigate potential variations between male and female participants regarding their views on the scaffolding in GBWI and how it affected their writing performance in each cluster. The results revealed that male and female participants perceived the course similarly (t = −1.42, p > 0.05). There was no difference between male and female participants’ reactions to the scaffolding technique in GBWI (p > 0.05, t = −1.42), to the benefits of scaffolding in GBWI (p > 0.05, t = −0.55) and the effects of scaffolding in GBWI on their writing performance (t = −1.60, p > 0.05).

In the interview results, all six participants showed a positive attitude toward scaffolding in GBWT after the intervention. They stated that they like this technique because it helped them to overcome challenges in writing English, such as grammatical knowledge and word choice, which are patterns that make them feel nervous when they write English. The participants expressed the following:

“I like how teacher supported us during the writing class. The teaching and learning are different from previous courses, in which we only copy and paste from the model texts. Moreover, the teacher provided us the synonyms of words. So, I can use variety range of words in my writing work.” (Participant A).

“The teaching approach of teacher was different from previous courses. The teacher supported and did not emphasize too much on grammar. The teacher taught us forms, words, and structures which are related and useful for the writing e-mail or note.” (Participant B).

“I think the teaching approach was interesting and useful to me. The activities that were implemented before we write helped us to generate ideas, to know how to write and what we write about. Moreover, watching sample texts helped me to learn many new vocabulary, forms, and structures.” (Participant D).

Besides, two participants said they liked the GBWI because it focused on practical purposes. It means that this approach has a social purpose relevant to students’ learning objectives: communicative English. They stated that:

“So far, I have found learning to be more meaningful, because it allowed my classmates and me to focus on what we are going to use in life and work” (Participant A).

“Before we wrote, the teacher clearly explained the contextual uses of e-mail or note. It helped me gain more interest and motivated me to write more. I feel this approach is new to us but useful because we can apply it later when we are going to work.” (Participant B).

The findings from interviews also claimed that the GBWI helped learners to be more independent when they write. Because this approach is student-centered, the teacher is the one who supports them in completing their writing tasks independently. One participant said:

“This teaching approach made me feel more responsible and independent because I planned the outline, develop ideas, choose forms, words to write by myself.” (Participant D).

In addition, students preferred pair-work and group-work activities in GBWI. They claimed they had to listen, discuss, and share ideas with their group mates. Then, they chose the most appropriate ideas, forms, and structure for their writing work. The participants expressed the following:

“I like the group work activity because it helped me get ideas to write when I did not have any idea on writing tasks. Moreover, when I got linguistic errors, my teammate, who is at higher level than me, corrected it for me. Thus, I could accomplish my writing task.” (Participant C).

“I found that the group work activity while writing stage is interesting and rational. Because I am not a good writer, I met difficulties in word choice. Thanks to this activity, I could get more words from my friends and put it into my writing.” (Participant D).

“Besides the support from the teacher, I like the mutual interaction in group work activity. It helped us not only on task completion, but also in developing our group-work skill, which are crucial for my working life in the future.” (Participant F).

Participants also pointed out their positive attitude toward teachers’ Scaffolding during the teaching-learning process. They said:

“I was impressed with the support of the teacher from the very first activity to the end of the class. When I did not have idea on selecting words or structures, teacher immediately guided me to figure out.”

“…Even in group-work activity, when we met difficult, teacher assisted us very timely. Especially, in the stage of planning the outline for the writing task, the teacher guided us very clearly. In previous time, I did not do the outline before writing. But from now, after teacher’s guidance, I will do it because I think it helps me write effectively.”

Most students agreed that Scaffolding in GBWI positively affected their writing performance. They explained that this approach gave a free and comfortable learning environment. The interaction between teacher and students and among students reduced the anxiety when learning writing and English.

“Before this course, I was afraid of writing because I did not know how to write, and I thought I could not write because lacking of grammatical knowledge and ideas. But after learning with this approach, I gained confidence and passion for writing. I believed I can write thought I do not have good grammatical knowledge and have spelling errors.”

“I have learnt many new structures, forms through this approach. My vocabulary bank is getting more abundant. I also learnt much from correcting my friends’ writing work. From their mistake, I can avoid those mistakes when I write.”

“This approach helped improving my writing ability much. With the teacher’s and classmates’ support, I felt satisfied with my writing performance. After getting feedback from friends and teachers, I could re-write my assignment at home. I felt happy as I got higher mark on the exam.”

Additionally, students stated that the GBWI helped them improve their writing skills and three other aspects of English: listening, reading, and speaking. They had a chance to practice and use English through activities during the writing class. One student said:

“In the pre-writing activities, we had to read the model texts and answer the questions or do assignments. It helped me to develop my reading skill.”

“In group work activity, I had to use English to share ideas, discuss with my friends so I think my English speaking had been improved a lot.”

The interview also pointed out some challenges encountered during the intervention time. One participant said that he met difficulty when working in a group:

“My group had many opinions because we are at different levels of competence. Sometimes we could not decide which ideas would be used to fulfill the tasks. Moreover, a few members did not anticipate to the work because he/she is at lower level of competence.”

Another student expressed that the limited time for one session of writing class is one of biggest challenges when they encounter this approach. He claimed:

“The activities in one session of learning writing is arranged suitable. However, a length time of 45 minutes is too short and was not enough for a low-achieved student be able to assist the task. The teacher did not have time to give feedback in detail to students.”

Another student added:

“The time is too short. I wanted to write my individual writing after getting feedback from teacher and friends but I could not. It is harder to write at home without the teacher’s and friends’ support.”

Discussion

The data shows that scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction substantially improves students’ writing skills after the intervention program. According to the post-test results, the students’ mean scores for writing performance increased significantly after the research, indicating a notable difference. This can be attributed to the participants’ improved writing ability and the 8-week intervention period, which provided adequate time for the teacher’s scaffolding to enhance all aspects of their writing performance. Besides that, scaffolding in genre-based writing instructions focused on improving organization and language use.

In this study, we explored the effects of the Scaffolding technique on teaching writing for non-majored English learners. The results of this study confirmed what Faraj (2015), Ikawati (2020), and Padmadewi and Artini (2019) found. In addition, the findings of this study, which investigated the effects of genre-based writing instructions on EFL students’ writing performance, were in line with previous studies by Ahn (2012), Changpueng (2012), and Ueasiriphan and Tangkiengsirisin (2019). On the other hand, the intervention had more effect on low-proficiency students’ writing performance, which seemed to be in accord with what has been found in Nagao’s (2022) study. It could be explained because Genre-based writing instructions focus on a specific genre in which language is functional, and the context, purpose, and audience determine the choice of language and grammar. In this study, the intervention was to teach learners to write informal e-mails and short e-mails. According to Nunan’s (1999) observations, genres are characterized by specific grammatical features that serve their communicative aims. Therefore, each genre requires a distinct language and grammar resource to convey its intended message. The genre-based approach emphasizes the unique grammatical patterns of each genre rather than general grammar rules. As Hyland (2007) noted, the GBA helps students to utilize the expressive potential of societal discourse structures rather than being passive recipients of them (p. 150). The results align with previous studies conducted by Vonnaet al. (2015) and Kuiperet al. (2017). Vonna et al. found that teacher scaffolding can lead to notable improvements in students’ writing achievement. At the same time, Kuiper et al. explored scaffolding strategies to enhance genre-based writing in tertiary students. This study confirms the assertion made by Hasan (2001, as cited in Hasan & Rezaul Karim, 2019) that utilizing scaffolding techniques in writing instruction can foster a supportive environment that nurtures students while also helping them improve their writing skills. Through the division of the writing process into more manageable steps, offering input on concepts and advancement, and endorsing peer feedback, scaffolding techniques provide valuable learning opportunities for students. As De Guerrero and Villamil (2000) stated, most scaffolding behaviors while peers assisted their partners in revising their writing. Therefore, with guidance from the teacher and other students, the students overcame challenges in language use to write more effectively.

The findings were different when comparing the current study with Hermanssonet al. (2019), which explored the Joint Construction stage in GBWI and did not significantly impact the students’ writing quality. One possible explanation for this finding is the difference in the proficiency level of participants and the research design. Additionally, the length of the intervention could be one of the factors that influenced the results. In theory, the longer the implementation time, the better a participant can perform. The length of intervention in this study is enough for a group of mixed proficiency levels to achieve the pedagogical approach.

The results gained from the questionnaire and interviews proved that students had a positive attitude towards teacher scaffolding in GBWI on their writing performance. Their optimistic outlook stems from their exceptional progress and achievements in writing. Based on the survey feedback, the implementation of scaffolding GBWI proved to be a highly effective method in generating ideas, consolidating vocabulary, enhancing structure retention, and utilizing grammar points with greater precision. This finding was consistent with the study of Changpueng and Ahn (2012), who claimed that students had a positive attitude towards GBWI on their writing ability as Cheung (2014) concluded that an instructional program that provides vital support and clear guidance in GBA could boost the confidence, skills, and genre-specific knowledge of students who struggle with English proficiency. Moreover, as Bhatia (1993, as cited in Kim & Kim, 2005) recommended, to help students understand how and why linguistic rules are used for specific rhetorical effects, writing teachers must connect a language’s formal and functional features.

Additionally, the results of the questionnaire showed that teachers were seen as providing temporary support through scaffolding to encourage student learning through teacher-student interaction. Scaffolding should be utilized as a temporary method between teachers and students until they can complete the work on their own, according to Enyew and Yigzaw (2015). Thus, teachers recognize the value of their help and are ready to provide prompt and adequate assistance to students throughout writing classes. Furthermore, Williams and Burden (1997) state that the nature of the social interaction for the more knowledgeable, notably teachers and peers, tends to help students move into the next layer of knowledge. It also helps students feel more motivated and increases their willingness to write. They may not feel scared of being mistaken any longer and be able to write more often. Practice makes them better, and as a result, their writing performance will be improved, and they will feel more satisfied with their writing ability.

The data from the interview also pointed out challenges encountered in implementing scaffolding GBWI. Students met difficulties in peer work activities, as well as the constrained time in each writing session. Truong (2017) argued that there were still issues with linguistic resources, such as grammar and vocabulary. However, this contrasts with the findings of Pham and Bui’s study (2021), which highlighted that students needed help adhering to a fixed move-step structure and faced challenges with lexico-grammatical usage when writing expository pieces. The challenges that participants in this study met could come from the objective factors of curriculum, which need further time to adjust and change. Time constraints do not enable teachers to give support and feedback to all students and correct all the errors they make in class.

Conclusion

Results gained from the two tests proved the hypothesis that scaffolding in genre-based writing instruction would help students improve their writing performance after the intervention program. The results showed significant changes in the participants’ writing performance in all four aspects, namely content, organization, language use, and mechanics, whereas most improved the organization of the text (MD = −1.12). Furthermore, the results also claimed that the intervention program benefited a group of low-achieved level participants more. The results gained from the questionnaire and interviews proved that students had a positive attitude toward teacher scaffolding in GBWI. Besides, the data from the interview also pointed out challenges encountered in implementing scaffolding GBWI and learning writing in general. Students met difficulties in peer work activities and constrained time in each writing session. In short, scaffolding in Genre-based Writing Instructions had a good impact on EFL Learners’ writing performance, and they had positive attitudes towards scaffolding in genre-based writing instructions.

The major findings from this present study provide insights into the teachers’ perception of using scaffolding strategy and genre-based approach in teaching writing. Despite the positive findings of the study, which claim the effects of scaffolding in GBWI on learners’ writing performance, this study has some limitations. First, the intervention was implemented with a small size and only one group of participants. With a limited number of 34 participants and within one group design, the results demonstrate the instruction’s application in a specific context where it had not been used previously and did not make any generalizations beyond the study’s scope. Therefore, future research could be conducted across a larger population with both experimental and control groups, the results of which may ensure the validity and satisfy the qualification of the study. Furthermore, the research centered on the micro-genres of writing, specifically the e-mail and short note genres, which the students were introduced to during their initial writing courses at college. Thus, further research should be conducted with macro-genres of writing to get representative and more sufficient results on the effects of this teaching approach.

References

  1. Ahn, H. (2012). Teaching writing skills based on a genre approach to L2 primary school students: An action research. English Language Teaching, 5(2), 2-16.
     Google Scholar
  2. Bhatia, V. (1993). Analyzing genre: language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
     Google Scholar
  3. Callaghan, M., & Rothery, J. (1988). Teaching factual writing: A genre-based approach. Report of the disadvantaged schools program literacy project. Sydney Metropolitan East Region, NSW Department of Education.
     Google Scholar
  4. Chaisiri, T. (2010). Implementing a genre pedagogy to the teaching of writing in a university context in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, IDP Education).
     Google Scholar
  5. Changpueng, P. (2012). The effects of the genre-based approach on engineering students’. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 5, 1-18.
     Google Scholar
  6. Chen, Y. S., & Su, S. W. (2012). A genre-based approach to teaching EFL summary writing. ELT Journal, 66(2), 184-192.
     Google Scholar
  7. Cheung, C. L. (2014). Application of scaffolds in genre-informed approach to second language (L2) writing instruction: A case-study of EFL students with low proficiency. The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Hong Kong).
     Google Scholar
  8. De Guerrero, M. C., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 51-68.
     Google Scholar
  9. Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts work. (No Title).
     Google Scholar
  10. Dirgeyasa, I. W. (2016). Genre-based approach: What and how to teach and to learn writing. English Language Teaching, 9(9), 45-51.
     Google Scholar
  11. Enyew, C., & Yigzaw, A. (2015). Effects of teacher scaffolding on students’ reading comprehension. Science, Technology and Arts Research Journal, 4(2), 263-271.
     Google Scholar
  12. Faraj, A. K. A. (2015). Scaffolding EFL Students’ Writing through the Writing Process Approach. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(13), 131-141.
     Google Scholar
  13. Hammond, J. (1992). English for social purposes: A handbook for teachers of adult literacy. Macquarie University.
     Google Scholar
  14. Hasan, M., & Rezaul Karim, M. (2019). Scaffolding Effects on Writing Acquisition Skills in EFL Context. Arab World English Journal, 10(4), 288-298.
     Google Scholar
  15. Hermansson, C., Jonsson, B., Levlin, M., Lindhé, A., Lundgren, B., & Norlund Shaswar, A. (2019). The (non) effect of joint construction in a genre-based approach to teaching writing. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(4), 483-494.
     Google Scholar
  16. Hett, E. J. (1993). The development of an instrument to measure global-mindedness (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of San Diego.
     Google Scholar
  17. Hyland, K. (2003). Writing and teaching writing. Second Language Writing, 1-30.
     Google Scholar
  18. Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148-164.
     Google Scholar
  19. Ikawati, L. (2020). Scaffolding in teaching writing. AL-TARBIYAH: Jurnal Pendidikan (The Educational Journal), 30(1), 48-58.
     Google Scholar
  20. Kim, Y., & Kim, J. (2005). Teaching Korean university writing class. Asian EFL, 7(2), 1-15.
     Google Scholar
  21. Kuiper, C., Smit, J., De Wachter, L., & Elen, J. (2017). Scaffolding tertiary students’ writing in a genre-based writing intervention. Journal of Writing Research, 9(1), 27-59.
     Google Scholar
  22. Luu, T. T. (2011). Teaching writing through genre-based approach. Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 2(1), 121-136.
     Google Scholar
  23. Nagao, A. (2022). A genre-based approach to teaching descriptive report writing to Japanese EFL university students. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 26(3), 1-28.
     Google Scholar
  24. Nguyen, H. H. T. (2009). Teaching EFL writing in Vietnam: Problems and solutions-a discussion from the outlook of applied linguistics. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 25(1).
     Google Scholar
  25. Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning. Heinle & Heinle Publishers, 7625 Empire Dr., Florence, KY 41042-2978.
     Google Scholar
  26. Nunan, D., & Lamb, C. (1996). ‘Monitoring and evaluation’, the self-directed teacher: Managing the learning process: Cambridge University Press.
     Google Scholar
  27. Padmadewi, N. N., & Artini, L. P. (2019, January). Using scaffolding strategies in teaching writing for improving student literacy in primary school. In 1st International Conference on Innovation in Education (ICoIE 2018) (pp. 156-160). Atlantis Press.
     Google Scholar
  28. Pham, V. P. H., & Bui, T. K. L. (2021). Genre-based Approach to Writing in EFL Contexts. World Journal of English Language, 11(2), 95-106.
     Google Scholar
  29. Truong, T. N. T. (2017). Teaching writing using genre-based approach: A study at a Vietnamese university. Language Education in Asia, 8(2), 192-212.
     Google Scholar
  30. Tuyen, K., Osman, S., Ahmad, N., Cong Dan, T., & Kiumarsi, S. (2016). The effects of process genre approach on upper secondary students’ writing ability: A case study in a specialized upper secondary school in Vietnam. International Journal of English Language, Literature and Translation Studies, 3(3), 282-289.
     Google Scholar
  31. Ueasiriphan, T., & Tangkiengsirisin, S. (2019). The effects of genre-based teaching on enhancement of Thai engineers’ technical writing ability. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 723-738.
     Google Scholar
  32. Veerappan, V. A., Suan, W. H., & Sulaiman, T. (2011). The effect of scaffolding technique in journal writing among the second language learners. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 2(4).
     Google Scholar
  33. Vernon, L. (2002). The writing process: A scaffolding approach.
     Google Scholar
  34. Viriya, C., & Wasanasomsithi, P. (2017). The effect of the genre awareness approach on development of writing ability. International Forum of Teaching and Studies, 13(1), 11-22.
     Google Scholar
  35. Vonna, Y., Mukminatien, N., & Laksmi, E. D. (2015). The effect of scaffolding techniques on students’ writing achievement. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 3(3), 227-233.
     Google Scholar
  36. Wang, C. (2013). A study of genre approach in EFL writing. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 3(11), 2128-2135.
     Google Scholar
  37. Watanabe, H. (2016). Genre analysis of writing tasks in Japanese university entrance examinations. Language Testing in Asia, 6(1), 1-14.
     Google Scholar
  38. Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach (Vol. 5). Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
     Google Scholar
  39. Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writers’ genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 111-133.
     Google Scholar