درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

This study compared the efficacy of explicit and implicit instruction of requestive strategies on upper-intermediate female English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ email writing development. Sixty-two participants in four intact classes were randomly assigned to two explicit and implicit groups. In this quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design study two email evaluation tests and two written discourse completion tests (WDCT) were used to collect the data. In the pretest phase, an email evaluation test and a WDCT were administered to the participants in two sessions. Next, the two groups were provided with ten treatment sessions. The explicit group received direct instruction and metapragmatic explanation on the use of appropriate requestive strategies in writing emails. The implicit group, however, received instruction on writing requestive emails without any explicit explanation about the requestive strategies in emailing. Then, the participants took the posttest of email evaluation test and WDCT in two successive sessions. The results indicated that both modes of instruction exerted significant effects on the learners’ production of requestive strategies in English. The comparison of the two modes of instruction, nonetheless, indicated that the participants who underwent explicit instruction significantly surpassed those in the implicit group. The findings have implications for materials developers and instructors.

Correlational studies supporting the link between learners’ multiple intelligences and their learning are superseded by interventionist attempts to explore direct applications of Multiple Intelligence (MI) Theory in language teaching and learning. This quasi-experimental study examined the extent to which engaging ELT major university students in writing tasks, compatible to their dominant intelligences, might enhance the accuracy, organization, and fluency of their writing. The participants were 64 male and female English major sophomores. They were in three intact classes, randomly assigned to a control no task (NT) group, a task-supported (TS) group, and an MI-oriented task (MIT) group after their initial homogeneity was assessed. The fifteen-session treatment comprised pre-writing brainstorming activities in the NT group and a set of pre-writing tasks performed by the TS group. In the MIT group, however, individuals with the same dominant intelligences were grouped together to perform tasks that were compatible with their dominant intelligences. The one-way ANOVA analysis of the research data obtained from the post-test writing scores revealed that the MIT group surpassed the other groups in accuracy, fluency and organization. The findings underscore the necessity of taking learners’ intelligences into consideration as a criterion for task selection and offer important pedagogical implications for teaching writing.

Corrective feedback refers to a teacher or student’s reaction to a learner’s target language production containing an actual or perceived error. The last three decades have witnessed a large amount of research on the impacts of various types of corrective feedback on students’ written production. Along the same vein, the present study seeks to explore the effectiveness of providing teachers’ metalinguistic feedback vs. peers’ collaborative feedback on students’ writing performance. In so doing, the present study adopted a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design including three upper-intermediate groups (i.e., two experimental and one control). The participants of the study were a total of 62 English as a foreign language (EFL) freshman students from two public universities in Tehran, Iran. The writing tasks utilized in the present study were adopted from IELTS writing Task 2. The results of one-way between groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that students produced significantly more lexically diverse as well as grammatically accurate language as a result of both treatments. Moreover, it was observed that collaborative peer feedback led to significantly higher lexical diversity than those of other two groups. The findings of the present study suggest that L2 teachers can opt for a combination of corrective feedback strategies to help learners improve their writing performance.

The current research examined the use of lexical bundles in the result sections of research papers by Iranian non-native writers in the field of applied linguistics. The WordSmith Software was applied to identify lexical bundles. In addition, the two analytical frameworks Biber et al. (2004) and Ruiying and Allison (2003) were used to categorize the bundles with regard to their structural features and their moves and steps. Moreover, with the aid of concordance, the identified clusters were analyzed and categorized according to their communicative functions. The results of the current research showed that Iranian writers relied heavily on the use of specific formulaic bundles to perform the communicative functions associated with the moves and steps. The findings also revealed that four moves out of six moves were mostly used by Iranian authors. Moreover, the researchers found that the extensive range of formulaic clusters used to demonstrate Move 2, Reporting results, the least bundles occurred in Move 4, Summarizing results, and also no clusters were used in Move 5, Evaluating the study along with Move 6, Deductions from the research by Iranian writers. The findings of this study boost the awareness of formulaic sequences usage for novice writers in particular discourse and communicative function.

The impetus behind the current study was to get the best use of all possible pathways of the learner’s brain. Multiple-pathway model, one model of brain-based instruction, on which the current study was based, has synergic effect addressing sensory-motor, emotion, reward, attention, memory, language, frontal lobe (executive function), and social pathways of the learner’s brain altogether. To this aim, this quasi-experimental research, with pretest-intervention-posttest design, was carried out. The participants, who were selected through a convenient sampling method, included 30 BA University students studying TEFL at Islamic Azad University, Aliabad Katoul Branch, and 30 BA University students studying TEFL at Islamic Azad University, Gorgan Branch, were placed into two experimental and control groups, respectively. The instrumentation included DASS 21 and Learning Climate Questionnaires (LCQ) which were used as the pretest and posttest prior to and after the 10 session intervention of brain-based instruction for the experimental group. Descriptive and inferential analysis of collected data indicated the significant impact of the instruction on the participants’ stress, anxiety, depression, and perceived supportive learning climate in the experimental group.