2.2 Approaches in teaching foreign language writing

Writing is the most difficult skill for second and foreign language learners to master due to the difficulty that “lies not only in generating and organising ideas, but also in translating these ideas into readable text”. The skills involved in writing are highly complex as foreign language writers have to pay attention to higher level skills of planning and organising as well as lower level skills such as spelling, punctuation, and word choice.

This complexity requires writing teachers to select appropriate approaches in teaching these skills. Prior to my decision regarding which approaches would be appropriate to my research, existing approaches and their practices including in the Indonesian context will be explored. The different approaches to teaching EFL writing derived from my literature reading involve product approach, process approach, genre approach, and process genre approach. I will elaborate on these approaches in subsequent sections.

1. Product approach Product approach in writing was initiated by Fogarty to refer to the traditional ways of writing instruction. Casanave suggested that this approach focuses on correct form, grammar and translation. With this approach, the students wrote in English and had their submissions evaluated by the teacher. Ultimately, students may or may not see their papers again.

According to Kinneavy, components of communication that include writer, audience, and (knowledge of) the world determine the type of writing products. The text with more emphasis on the writer will have expressive features that can be found in, for example, journals or diaries. Emphasising the audience component will produce a text with persuasive features such as argumentative or persuasive essays. If it focuses more on (knowledge of) the world, referential features will be seen, as can be found in reports or expositions. There are some approaches that shared the same characteristics as the product approach, for example, the “controlled composition” approach that views the writer as “simply a manipulator of previously learned language structures”. In the “controlled composition” approach, an English teacher plays the role of a proofreader, who is not especially concerned with quality of ideas or expression, but instead, focuses primarily on formal linguistic aspects. The text is viewed as “a collection of sentence patterns and vocabulary items, a linguistic artifact, a vehicle for language practice”. Another common approach in the product approach category involves a focus on contrastive rhetoric.

According to Kaplan, as EFL writing students write English as a foreign language, which differs from their first language culturally and linguistically, teaching EFL writing should involve raising understanding and awareness to students about rhetorical differences in standard English. Various learning activities can take place in this approach.

Silva suggested writing exercises that include imitating the formats of paragraph/essays, 20 paragraph completion, sentence sequencing, and identifying elements of paragraphs/essays (topics, controlling ideas, and supporting ideas). Students in the writing class that implement this approach are asked to focus on the language form and “choose among alternative sentences within the context of a given paragraph or longer discourse”. The product approach and other common approaches in the product approaches category, in principle, focus on the same objective which is to create a final product.

Accuracy in terms of mechanical aspects (grammar, spelling, punctuation and vocabulary) of the standard English becomes a major concern, whether it is the writing of a report, journal, paragraph, or essay. This kind of approach, in relation to the components of communication (writer, audience, or knowledge of the world) as mentioned earlier, requires conventional organisation such as in five-paragraph essay (introduction, three paragraph body, and the conclusion) and in paragraph writing, which should include a topic sentence (a sentence stating the main idea of the paragraph) and controlling idea (part of topic sentence which states the specific area to discuss). Moreover, the product approach is basically teacher-centered in nature, as in this approach the teacher tells the students what and how to write, and all products are written for the teacher. The products are graded, corrected, and commented on without any additional input, and then returned to the students.

In the same vein, Badger and White stated that in the product-based approach, the task of writing deals mainly with students’ knowledge of the language structure, and students develop their writing through imitating the input in the form of texts given by the teacher.

Indicating the strength of the product approach, Badger and White view the approach as an approach that recognises “the need for learners to be given linguistic knowledge about texts, and they understand that imitation is one way in which people learn”. Moreover, Myles stated that native-like models of writing will minimise students’ errors in writing. There have been various studies of the implementation of the product-based approach. In the Indonesian context, a study was conducted by Cahyono and Mukminatien to examine the impact of structure-based writing assignment, an assignment based on product-approach, on students’ argumentative essay in an English department. The approach proved to be effective in reducing students’ grammatical errors.

Another study conducted by Setyono shows that a number of high schools in Indonesia employed the product approach of writing instruction, which was characterised by “the linear model of instruction in which learners do not receive adequate time and opportunities to produce the final product of writing through revising process”. Students were expected to follow a certain rhetorical style prescribed by the teacher, show accuracy in grammar, and produce well-organised pieces of writing. The study indicates that the use of the product approach in teaching writing, results in some improvements in the grammatical accuracy of the students’ writing. However, as the skills to organise ideas is equally important in the formation of writing, the approach implemented in teaching writing should be able to facilitate the development of both language skills and the skills to organise ideas [9, p.72].

The studies researching the implementation of product approach mentioned earlier show that the product approach could not fulfil the need to improve both important areas of writing skills. The weaknesses of the product based approach have been confirmed by Badger and White who stated that the product based approach does not give sufficient roles to the process skills (such as planning a text), and it tends to undervalue the students’ existing “knowledge and skills they bring to the classroom”.

2. Process approach. As one of the pedagogical approaches in the foreign language writing context, the “process approach” was introduced by Vivan Zamel in 1976. The emergence of the “process approach” was due to the fact that none of the existing approaches during that time (“controlled composition” and “traditional rhetorical” approaches which were product based), adequately fostered thought or its expression. Unlike the approaches focusing on the final written product, the process approach (in its various formats) is concerned with the process of writing. In the process approach, “the composing process was seen as a non-linear, exploratory, and generative process whereby writers discover and reformulate their ideas as they attempt to approximate meaning". In other words, the process approach of writing views the writing process as a complex problem-solving process. The process-based approach does not view writing as a reproduction of syntactic or discourse structures which learners had learned previously. Instead, “it views writing as a process of developing organisation as well as meaning” with invention strategies, multiple drafts, and feedback from both teacher and peers. This view indicates that interaction and communication take place in the process of writing.

Moreover, Matsuda mentioned that “advanced L2 writers are similar to L1 writers and would benefit from instruction emphasising the process of writing”. 23 In line with Matsuda’s views, Silva previously argued that in the classroom context, the process approach of writing encourages a positive learning environment that enables the learners to cooperate with others and to try different ways through the process of their writing. The teacher’s role is to help students develop viable strategies for getting started (finding topics, establishing audience and purpose, generating ideas and information, focusing and planning structure and procedure), for drafting (encouraging multiple drafts), and for revising (adding, deleting, modifying ideas; rearranging; and editing with attention to vocabulary, sentence structure, grammar and mechanics. Some authors suggested the typical features of the process approach in many English writing classes which involve prewriting exercises, reflection on writing, teacher and peer formative feedback, multiple redrafting cycles, and interactions with teachers and peers through conferencing and group discussion.

Moreover, Jones stated that, though not everyone works on the same process, “basically the various phases of writing include; prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing.” In the Indonesian context, the process approach has been examined in various studies.

Widiati and Cahyono reported some studies that examined various strategies in the process approach of writing such as peer feedback and conferencing. In a study conducted by Antoni and Gunawan, the process-oriented approach was revealed as an effective approach that encourages students to revise their writing drafts throughout their process of producing the final product. Another study conducted by Laksmi also incorporated feedback for students to revise their writings and suggested that students felt more confident with their writing through the rewrite-revise process before they submit the final draft of their writings [10, p.72].

Although the process based approach offers some advantages such as fostering thought and encouraging cooperation among learners, as mentioned earlier, this approach has been lack of concern on the kinds of text the learners are expected to write. Moreover, focusing on the same set of processes, the process approaches do not give sufficient input concerning linguistic knowledge which is crucial for writing learners to write successfully.

3. Genre approach. According to Badger and White, “Genre approaches have strong similarities with product approaches and, in some ways, genre approaches can be regarded as an extension of product approaches”. Both product and genre approaches view writing as essentially linguistic. The stages involved in the product and genre approaches in the classroom practice are also similar. However, the genre approach is different from the other two approaches discussed earlier in that the genre approach puts the emphasis on the various social contexts in which the text is produced.

According to Dudley-Evans, there were three stages in genre approaches to writing. In the first stage, students were introduced to a model of a particular genre to be analysed. In the next stage, students are given exercises to manipulate language forms that are relevant to their needs of the necessary language forms. After becoming familiar with the genre through analysing the text model and exercising the relevant language forms, students then try to produce their own text.

Flowerdew indicated different kinds of writing associated with different situations such as research articles, sales letter and report. The need of social contexts to emphasise differs amongst learners in different institutions, and thus there will be implications on the syllabus of the writing class. Moreover, the genre approach pays attention to the cultural and linguistic resources necessary for the learners to engage in critical texts. Some authors view genre as a synonym of text type, which is the language types used in writing such as narratives, descriptions, compare and contrast, processes, cause and effect, expositions, persuasion, and argumentation. On the other hand, other authors distinguish between genre and text type; they refer genre to a specific purpose of a text which is written or spoken in a particular social and cultural context (e.g newspaper, a Web site and other genres suggested by Flowerdew as mentioned earlier,) and viewed by a discourse community.

There are various examples of genre, such as novels, essays, scientific and lab reports, research reports, lectures, resumes, legal texts, different types of letters, e-mail messages, and so on. Distinguishing genre and text type is particularly important when it deals with English for academic purposes (EAP) and English for specific purposes (ESP) as those two fields deal with different aspects of language.

As reported by Widiati and Cahyono some studies focusing on the genre-based approaches to teaching EFL writing in the Indonesian context have been carried out. For example, Rozimela examined the effects of the genre-based approach toward the development of students’ EFL writing and revealed that explicit teaching had enabled students to improve their understanding of aspects of language needed to develop argumentative essays. Applying the genre-approach, students were taught writing in some stages. It was started with the introduction of two model texts of argumentative essays for the students to understand some features of argumentative genre. Following that, students developed and organised their ideas to be a basis for them to write their essay. After having introduced features of argumentative essay, then developed and organised their ideas, students eventually produced their own text. Guidance about general characteristics of the argumentative essay was provided throughout the process of writing.

Through the study, it was also revealed that, by practising the use of language in context, students were able to activate and use effectively their knowledge of the language for communicative purposes. Another study was conducted by Emilia in an EFL tertiary teaching context in Indonesia. The study revealed that a programme of teaching EFL writing using a genre-based approach was successful. The genre-based approach helped students enhance their understanding of the target argumentative genre with clear schematic structure. Moreover, the approach improved students’ ability to use evidence and information from various resources to support their arguments. After being taught to write with the genre-based approach, students’ skills of argumentative writing improved. However, the study revealed some issues to do with “students’ low motivation to read and their lack of familiarity with reading texts critically”, the need for more comprehensive exploration of grammar relevant to argumentative essay, and the need to teach “critical reading to EFL beginner learners due to their language restrictions “. The studies discussed above revealed the advantages of the genre approach including the success of the implementation of such an approach in the Indonesian context. However, students from different backgrounds might have different levels of the writing skills they need to produce a particular genre of text. Badger and White have identified the need for an approach that takes into account the skills needed to produce a text and the active roles students play in building the skills. They suggested an alternative approach, which will be discussed in the following section [11, p.65].

4. Process genre approach. As discussed previously, product approach, process approach and genre approach each has its own strengths and weaknesses. As the weaknesses and strengths of each approach have been identified, it became apparent that the three approaches are complementary. Badger and White suggested that the incorporation of the three approaches can be done by starting with one approach and then adapting it. According to White and Arndt, the lack of input, as a weakness of the process approach could be solved by for example, group work, where learners can give and receive feedback from their peers. Moreover, a model of a text can be given after students write their first draft in a process based approach writing class. Even though adapting an approach has resulted in important developments in teaching second language writing practices, Badger and White identified an approach that synthesises the product, process and genre approaches which they refer to as process genre approach. In this approach, the writing class essentially recognises that writing involves knowledge about language (as in product and genre approaches), knowledge of the context in which writing happens and especially the purpose for the writing (as in genre approaches), and skills in using language (as in process approaches) writing development happens by drawing out the learners' potential (as in process approaches) and by providing input to which the learners respond (as in product and genre approaches)”.

In more recent literature, Pasand and Haghi postulated that an integration of the three approaches to EFL writing enables the learners to gain the skills from each 28 approach, transfer them to different learning modes, and lead them to achieve better writing performance. Moreover, he suggested some steps in teaching writing practices starting with teaching rhetorical patterns in a product-based approach. It is then followed with familiarisation of different organisations of text by showing models of text and work on them.

Peer feedback activities involving interaction amongst learners can be made part of the teaching practice in the process-based approach. Students from different groups who start their writing from various stages will develop their writing differently, and the need for input as well as the kinds of input will be different amongst them. Learners who are knowledgeable and skilled in producing a certain genre may not need much input and can proceed with the process of writing. In other cases, a group of learners may lack knowledge of language forms that are appropriate to a particular audience, and thus need more input on language knowledge in relation to the particular audience to whom they write the text. The input in a process genre approach can be drawn from the teacher, other learners and text (examples of the target genre).

Drawing on the process genre approach suggested by Badger & White, Nordin and Mohammad emphasised the need to make learners aware that they write in a social context and situation to achieve a particular purpose before proceeding to a process of multiple drafts and ending it with a finished product. Instructions focusing on a range of text genres (comparison-contrast, narrative and argumentative), but at the same time taking into account the process of writing, need to be considered. Moreover, students learned English as a foreign language which is different from their first language in terms of culture and linguistics. For these reasons, this study drew on the process genre approach in order to fulfill the students’ needs for skills of writing different genres and give equally high attention to the process of writing with available supporting technology tools (blog) in the EFL writing class in a particular context [12, p.8].

Summary This section examined the existing approaches to teaching EFL writing. Different approaches to teaching EFL writing which involved product approach, process approach, genre approach, and process genre approach were elaborated. The discussion also involved the implementation of these approaches in some previous studies including those in the Indonesian context. This review has been very useful to inform me of the most appropriate approaches to draw on in teaching EFL writing using online portfolios. The next section will discuss e-learning and blended learning, which shaped the context of the current study.