writing fluency

The literature of ELT is perhaps overwhelmed by attempts to enhance learners’ writing through the application of different methodologies. One such methodology is critical discourse analysis which is founded upon stressing not only the decoding of the propositional meaning of a text but also its ideological assumptions. Accordingly, this study was an attempt to investigate the impact of critical discourse analysis-based (CDA) instruction on EFL learners’ writing complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF). To fulfill the purpose of this study, 60 female intermediate EFL learners were selected from among a total number of 100 through their performance on a piloted sample PET. Based on the results, the students were randomly assigned to a control and an experimental group with 30 participants in each. Both groups underwent the same amount of teaching time during 17 sessions which included a treatment of CDA instruction for the experimental group. A writing posttest was administered at the end of the instruction to both groups and their mean scores on the test were compared through a MANOVA. The results led to the rejection of the three null hypotheses, thereby demonstrating that the learners in the experimental group benefited significantly more than those in the control group in terms of improving their writing CAF. To this end, it is recommended that CDA instruction be incorporated more frequently in writing classes following of course adequate syllabus design and materials development.

According to sociocultural theory, dynamic assessment (DA) merges instruction and assessment. This study attempted to compare the effects of interactionist versus interventionist DA on the writing fluency and complexity of adult versus young IELTS candidates in an international language school in Tehran with the age range of 15-48. One hundred and forty students (90 males and 50 females) who had enrolled in the IELTS preparation course in the spring of 2021 participated in this study. The study participants were divided into four groups namely, young interactionist, young interventionist, adult interactionist, and adult interventionist. The participants in all groups were homogenized based on the result of their performance in a standard version of Preliminary English Test (PET). During the eight-week treatment period, the interactionist groups were given writing tests followed by the instructor’s feedback and guidance, while the interventionist groups received instructions and were given writing test samples without qualitative feedback. The pre-test and post-test comparisons among the four groups by Two Way ANCOVA showed that both young and adult individuals in the interactionist groups had a significant improvement in their writing performance compared to those in the interventionist group. In addition, the study revealed the significant impact of interactionist DA vs. interventionist DA on both young and adult participants' scores in both writing fluency and complexity post-test. Likewise, the results showed no statistically significant interaction between the type of assessment and the candidates’ age. The study presents pedagogical implications for teachers, students, and IELTS preparation program designers.