Advertisement

A Proposed Metacognitive-Based Approach to Promoting EFL Cohesion and Coherence in Essay Writing of Algerian Master Students

  • Manal Horiya Boudghene Stambouli
  • Amine Belmekki
Chapter

Abstract

Many English as a Foreign Language (hereafter, EFL) learners argue that writing is a challenging skill to develop because of cohesion and coherence hindrances they encounter. This study aimed at investigating the impact of metacognitive-based strategy writing instruction in EFL essay cohesion and coherence development. Accordingly, a pre-experimental research was carried out with first-year EFL Master students at the English Department in the University of Tlemcen, Algeria. Various research tools were needed to collect data: pretest, posttest, and stimulated recall protocol. The gathered data were analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative methods. The main findings indicated that longer strategy training would demonstrate that metacognitive strategy instruction can improve EFL essay writing cohesion and coherence.

Keywords

EFL cohesion Coherence Metacognitive strategy-based instruction 

References

  1. Bailey, K. M. (1988). Learning about language assessment: Dilemma, decisions, and directions. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
  2. Chamot, A. U., Barnhardt, C., Beard El-dinary, P., & Robbins, J. (1999). The learning strategies handbook. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross cultural aspects of second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Crismore, A. (1989). Talking with readers: Metadiscourse as rhetorical act. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  6. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.  https://doi.org/10.2307/356600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  9. Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. London: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
  10. Harris, J. (1993). Introducing writing. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  11. Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(4), 437–455.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  13. Lee, I. (2002). Teaching coherence to EFL students: A classroom inquiry. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(2), 135–159.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00065-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  15. O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manal Horiya Boudghene Stambouli
    • 1
  • Amine Belmekki
    • 2
  1. 1.University of MostaganemMostaganemAlgeria
  2. 2.University of TlemcenTlemcenAlgeria

Personalised recommendations