The Effect of Conventional, Web-based, and Hybrid Teaching of Pre ...

Intl. Res. J. Appl. Basic. Sci. Vol., 4 (2), 393-401, 2013onerous nature of writing has recurrently been acknowledged by experts in the field. For instance, Nunan (1989)maintains “it has been argued that learning to write frequently and expressively is the most difficult of the motorskills for all language users regardless of whether the language in question is a first, second or foreign language”(p. 35). Elsewhere, the same author (1999) contends that "…producing a coherent, fluent, extended piece ofwriting is probably the most difficult thing there is to do in language" (p. 271). Richards and Renandya (2002) takea more unwavering stance in this regard and hold that "[t]here is no doubt that writing is the most difficult skill for L2learners to master" (p. 271).Although applied linguists have come to recognize the importance of writing in its own right as well as itscomplexity, writing remains one of the least well-understood subjects in applied linguistics (Silva & Matsuda, 2002).Richards (1990) also expresses the same idea through the following sentence, “The nature and significance ofwriting has traditionally been underestimated in language teaching” (p. 106).Teaching Writing: Product and Process ApproachesTeaching the preponderant skill of writing, not unlike other language skills, has undergone a dramatic shiftfrom teacher-centered approaches towards learner-centered ones. L2 writing instruction, in its early days (aroundthe mid 1960s), underscored the production of grammatically well-formed sentences. Writing was viewed as a toolfor reinforcing and assessing the knowledge of grammar. The writing instruction included controlled compositionsaimed to give writers practice in selected morpho-syntactic patterns. Still the current product-oriented approachemphasizes the production of connected discourse and arrangement of sentences into paragraphs (Hedgcock,2005).However, process-oriented pedagogies are growingly becoming pervasive in EFL teaching contexts, wherethe process of writing is far more important than the outcome and accuracy is somewhat neglected in favor offluency. Process writing necessitated a concentration on personal writing, student creativity, and fluency (Zamel,1985). This shift in language instruction entailed a shift in responsibilities of both teachers and learners. No longerare teachers the directors of every aspect of the learning process. Learners also are made more responsible forsuccessful language learning. In the wake of this shift and emphasis on the role of language learners, learnervariables came to the forefront of language teaching research.Language Learning Strategies: Definitions and ClassificationsLike other learner variables (motivation, learning styles, attitude, background knowledge, intelligence,aptitude, self-esteem, inhibition, etc.), language learner strategies have received a lot of ink. The term strategy hasbeen variously defined by different authors and there is still no consensus over its definition. However, one of themost comprehensive definitions is the one put forth by Griffiths (2008): "strategies are activities consciously chosenby learners to regulate their language learning." (p. 87).In SLA literature, strategies have been categorized in numerous ways. A distinction is often made betweenthree types of strategies: production, communication, and learning. Tarone (1980, p. 419) considers the first two ofthese as ‘language use strategies’. A production strategy is “an attempt to use one’s linguistic system efficientlyand clearly, within a minimum effort. Examples are simplification, rehearsal, and discourse planning.Communication strategies consist of attempts to deal with problems of communication that have arisen ininteraction. They may include word coinage, circumlocution, code-switching, appeal for assistance, and avoidance,to name a few. A language learning strategy is “an attempt to develop linguistic and sociolinguistic competence inthe target language”. Examples given by Tarone (op. cit.) include memorization, initiation of conversation withnative speakers, and inferencing.Aside from classifying strategies as focusing on the learning or the use of language, there are two othernotable approaches to categorizing strategies. One is to categorize them into one of the four groups according towhether they are cognitive, metacognitive, affective, or social (Chamot, 1987; Oxford, 1990). Cognitive strategiesrefer to the “steps or operations in problem-solving that require direct analysis, transformation, or synthesis oflearning materials” (Rubin, 1987). Among the cognitive strategies listed by Chamot (1987) are repetition, notetaking,and elaboration. Metacognitive strategies make use of knowledge about cognitive processes and constitutean attempt to regulate language learning by means of planning, monitoring and evaluation. Advance preparation,directed attention, and self management are among the examples of metacognitive strategies given by Chamot.Affective strategies serve to regulate emotions, motivation, and attitude (for example, strategies for reduction ofanxiety and for self-encouragement). Social strategies include the actions which learners choose to take in order tointeract with other learners and with native speakers (for example, asking questions to clarify social roles andrelationships, or cooperating with others in order to complete tasks).394