The Uses of Group Discussion to Improve the Teaching and Learning of Academic Writing

Tran Nho Huong; Pham Linh Chi

doi:10.18535/sshj.v9i05.1839

Abstract

This study investigates how the utilization of group discussions improves students' academic writing skills, focusing on both quantitative and qualitative outcomes. A total of 147 university students participated in pre-test and post-test assessments to measure their writing performance before and after engaging in group discussions. The pre-test results revealed that students’ writing skills were rated between “fair” and “good,” with a mean score of 2.41 and a high degree of variability (SD = 0.985). After the intervention, the post-test showed a significant improvement, with the mean score rising to 3.40, indicating writing abilities between “good” and “very good.” The standard deviation decreased to 0.657, suggesting a more consistent performance among students.

Qualitative data collected from focus group discussions further illuminated the benefits of group discussions in enhancing writing skills. Students reported that collaborative idea generation, peer feedback, and exposure to diverse perspectives played a crucial role in improving their writing, particularly in terms of argumentation, coherence, and structure. Group discussions also boosted students' confidence and motivation. However, some students identified time management challenges, indicating the need for better facilitation.

Keywords

Group discussionsacademic writingpeer feedbackcollaborative learningwriting skills improvementargumentationcoherence

References

Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination: (In) Four Essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; M. Holquist, Trans.). University of Texas Press.Google Scholar ↗
Berg, E. C. (1999). The Effects of Trained Peer Response on ESL Students' Revision Types and Writing Quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215–241.Google Scholar ↗
Braine, G. (2001). Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy. Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar ↗
Brown, H. D., & Larson, A. (2016). Collaborative Learning in Higher Education: Group Discussions as a Learning Tool. Education Journal.Google Scholar ↗
Bruffee, K. A. (1999). Collaborative Learning: Higher Education, Interdependence, and the Authority of Knowledge. Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar ↗
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student Revision with Peer and Expert Reviewers: From Symbiosis to Work Time Management. Instructional Science, 38(2), 173–198.Google Scholar ↗
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications.Google Scholar ↗
Harris, M. (1992). Three Ways to Improve Student Peer Response Sessions. College Composition and Communication, 43(1), 51–65.Google Scholar ↗
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.Google Scholar ↗
Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 22-30.Google Scholar ↗
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar ↗
Lee, H., & Lee, J. (2020). Exploring the Role of Collaborative Learning in Enhancing Writing Skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(4), 590-605.Google Scholar ↗
Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(2), 203-218.Google Scholar ↗
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). Completely different worlds: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 39-69.Google Scholar ↗
Lopatovska, I., & Chakraborty, S. (2016). Peer Feedback in Learning English Writing: Advantages and Disadvantages. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 466–472.Google Scholar ↗
Liu, Y., & Hansen, J. (2021). Peer Response in L2 Writing Classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 52, 100735.Google Scholar ↗
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2020). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. Routledge.Google Scholar ↗
Matsuda, P. K., & Silva, T. (2005). Culture and Writing: A Review of the Literature. ERIC Digest.Google Scholar ↗
Mercer, N. (2000). Words and Minds: How We Use Language to Think Together. Routledge.Google Scholar ↗
Palmer, P. J. (2007). The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher's Life. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar ↗
Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the Dialogic Processes of Teaching and Learning: The Value and Potential of Sociocultural Theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12-21.Google Scholar ↗
Prior, P. (1998). Writing/Disciplinarity: A Sociohistoric Account of Literate Activity in the Academy. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar ↗
Smith, B. L., & MacGregor, J. T. (2017). Enhancing Academic Writing through Peer Interaction. Journal of Higher Education Studies.Google Scholar ↗
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153-173.Google Scholar ↗
Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20-27.Google Scholar ↗
Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). The Impact of Peer Feedback on Writing Performance. System, 28(2), 217–239.Google Scholar ↗
Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and Composition, 21(2), 217-235.Google Scholar ↗
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar ↗
Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic Education and Technology: Expanding the Space of Learning. Springer.Google Scholar ↗
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar ↗
Wolfe, J. L. (2003). Interacting with peers in small groups: Costs, benefits, and implications for writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(1), 3-24.Google Scholar ↗
Wolfe, J. L. (2016). Peer response in the composition classroom: Theory and practice. Bedford/St. Martin's.Google Scholar ↗
Zhou, M. (2018). Collaborative Writing and Critical Thinking: A Case Study. Journal of Writing Research, 10(3), 479-503.Google Scholar ↗
Zhu, W. (2021). Exploring the Impact of Group Discussions on EFL Learners’ Writing Skills. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 120-140.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-1] Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination: (In) Four Essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; M. Holquist, Trans.). University of Texas Press.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-2] Berg, E. C. (1999). The Effects of Trained Peer Response on ESL Students' Revision Types and Writing Quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215–241.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-3] Braine, G. (2001). Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy. Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-4] Brown, H. D., & Larson, A. (2016). Collaborative Learning in Higher Education: Group Discussions as a Learning Tool. Education Journal.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-5] Bruffee, K. A. (1999). Collaborative Learning: Higher Education, Interdependence, and the Authority of Knowledge. Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar ↗

[refR-6] Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student Revision with Peer and Expert Reviewers: From Symbiosis to Work Time Management. Instructional Science, 38(2), 173–198.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-7] Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-8] Harris, M. (1992). Three Ways to Improve Student Peer Response Sessions. College Composition and Communication, 43(1), 51–65.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-9] Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-10] Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 22-30.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-11] Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-12] Lee, H., & Lee, J. (2020). Exploring the Role of Collaborative Learning in Enhancing Writing Skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(4), 590-605.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-13] Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(2), 203-218.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-14] Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). Completely different worlds: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 39-69.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-15] Lopatovska, I., & Chakraborty, S. (2016). Peer Feedback in Learning English Writing: Advantages and Disadvantages. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 466–472.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-16] Liu, Y., & Hansen, J. (2021). Peer Response in L2 Writing Classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 52, 100735.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-17] Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2020). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. Routledge.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-18] Matsuda, P. K., & Silva, T. (2005). Culture and Writing: A Review of the Literature. ERIC Digest.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-19] Mercer, N. (2000). Words and Minds: How We Use Language to Think Together. Routledge.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-20] Palmer, P. J. (2007). The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher's Life. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-21] Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the Dialogic Processes of Teaching and Learning: The Value and Potential of Sociocultural Theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12-21.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-22] Prior, P. (1998). Writing/Disciplinarity: A Sociohistoric Account of Literate Activity in the Academy. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-23] Smith, B. L., & MacGregor, J. T. (2017). Enhancing Academic Writing through Peer Interaction. Journal of Higher Education Studies.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-24] Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153-173.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-25] Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20-27.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-26] Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). The Impact of Peer Feedback on Writing Performance. System, 28(2), 217–239.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-27] Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and Composition, 21(2), 217-235.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-28] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-29] Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic Education and Technology: Expanding the Space of Learning. Springer.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-30] Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-31] Wolfe, J. L. (2003). Interacting with peers in small groups: Costs, benefits, and implications for writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(1), 3-24.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-32] Wolfe, J. L. (2016). Peer response in the composition classroom: Theory and practice. Bedford/St. Martin's.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-33] Zhou, M. (2018). Collaborative Writing and Critical Thinking: A Case Study. Journal of Writing Research, 10(3), 479-503.Google Scholar ↗

[refR-34] Zhu, W. (2021). Exploring the Impact of Group Discussions on EFL Learners’ Writing Skills. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 120-140.Google Scholar ↗