Rationale of the study
Throughout history, various educational methodologies have developed, one of which is peer tutoring Defined as students teaching their peers in structured or unstructured learning environments overseen by a teacher (Wagner, 1982), peer tutoring has been shown to be particularly effective in assisting students through the intricate stages of the writing process, a skill often regarded as one of the most challenging in English language education.
Peer tutoring significantly alleviates the pressure on teachers by enabling them to instruct large groups while providing slow learners with the individual attention they require (Johnson and Johnson, 1975) Additionally, it helps to minimize anxiety stemming from differences in age, status, and background between students and teachers, as peer tutors often communicate more effectively with their peers (Buckholt and Wodarski, 1978) Consequently, peer tutoring offers numerous advantages for teaching in multi-level large classes, fostering communicative opportunities and enhancing motivation for learning, while simplifying classroom management for educators.
I have been teaching English at the University of Economic and Technical Industries (UNETI) for over three years, where I've observed similar challenges in the classroom This experience has motivated me to conduct a study titled "Teaching Writing in Large Classes through Peer Tutoring at UNETI."
Aims of the study and research questions
This study was aimed to:
(1) Examine the current situations of using peer tutoring to teach large writing classes
(2) Examine the advantages of use of peer tutoring in large writing classes
(3) Examine the difficulties of use of peer tutoring in large writing classes
The study was carried out in order to find out the answers to 2 research questions
(1) How has peer tutoring been used in large writing classes in UNETI?
(2) What are advantages of use of peer tutoring in large writing classes?
(3) What are difficulties of use of peer tutoring in large writing classes?
This study specifically targets second-year college students majoring in economics and electricity, as these disciplines often feature large classes ranging from 60 to 100 students However, the findings may not be universally applicable to all Vietnamese universities with similar large class sizes Therefore, the proposed implementation of peer tutoring in large writing classes is recommended solely for second-year college students.
The study utilizes both quantitative and qualitative methods to enhance the validity and reliability of the collected data Surveys will be distributed to gather information on the current use of peer tutoring in large writing classes Additionally, classroom observations were conducted in two distinct classes, followed by interviews with two teachers to clarify any unclear aspects of the survey questionnaires.
This study aims to enhance my teaching methods and provide valuable insights to colleagues at UNETI and others involved in addressing the challenges and benefits of implementing peer tutoring in large writing classes.
The study is comprised of three parts
Part A - Introduction provides a brief introduction of the study
Part B– Development which is the main part is divided into 3 chapters
Chapter 1 – Literature review reviews the literature relevant to the study including aspects of teaching writing and peer revision
Chapter 2 – Methodology outlines the research method employed in the study, highlighting the rationale for selecting action research It details the study's context, the intervention implemented, and the tools used for data collection Additionally, this chapter describes the procedures followed for gathering data and the methods applied for data analysis.
Chapter 3 – Data analysis, findings present significant findings of the study, It describes how collected data is analyzed and presented
Chapter 4: Recommendation provides recommendations for better teaching and learning English writing skill through peer tutoring in large classes
In the conclusion, the article summarizes the key issues discussed throughout the study, highlighting significant findings Additionally, it addresses the limitations encountered, which form the foundation for the researcher’s recommendations for future research.
PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter provides the theoretical background for the study It covers theories related to teaching writing, large classes and peer tutoring
1.1 An overview of teaching writing
The traditional higher education system often relies on written output for individual assessment, making collaborative writing challenging to evaluate Recently, there has been a growing emphasis on writing as a tool for enhancing learning and critical thinking, alongside initiatives like "writing across the curriculum," "writing centers," and "collaborative writing." This shift in perspective frames writing more as a process than a product, presenting new challenges for educators in teaching writing effectively.
Teaching writing, in language teachers’ opinions, is “a language skill which is difficult to acquire” (Tribble, 1996: 3) because teaching writing is an increasingly
“multifaceted activity” with some following ideas:
People learn to write by writing
Writing grows out of many different purposes
Convention of finished and edited texts are important to readers and therefore to writers
Writing and reading are related
Writing has a complex relationship to talk
Literature practices are embedded in complicated social relationships
Composing occurs in different modalities and technologies
Assessment of writing involves complex, informed, human judgment
(Writing Study Group of the NCTE Executive Committee (2004))
Writing is a complex language skill that is closely linked to speaking and reading abilities According to Ur (1996), teaching writing can be more challenging than teaching speaking, as most individuals intuitively acquire their spoken language, particularly their mother tongue In contrast, writing typically necessitates explicit instruction, as it is not a skill that can be easily acquired through exposure alone.
Moreover, writing is defined as a social process by Candlin and Hyland (1999:
Writing is a social process that involves creating texts through specific methodologies, arguments, and rhetorical strategies aimed at engaging and persuading readers Consequently, teaching writing is closely linked to communication skills, emphasizing the vital relationship between writers and their audience.
Writing skills encompass various abilities, including reading, speaking, and communication Consequently, teaching writing presents challenges for both educators and students alike.
Both writing and speaking are productive skills However, according to some researchers, writing is different from speaking in such terms of three criteria as linguistics, creating process and interaction
Ur (1996: 160) highlights the key differences between writing and speaking, emphasizing that writing is characterized by its explicitness, density, and adherence to standard language He argues that the physical separation between the reader and writer limits the benefits of spoken communication, such as context and paralinguistic features Consequently, written content must be presented in a more explicit, dense, and universally understandable manner compared to spoken language.
The production processes of speaking and writing differ significantly According to Raimes (1983), speaking tends to be spontaneous and unplanned, whereas writing is characterized by a recursive, planned, and time-consuming approach Harmer (2004) further emphasizes that the writing process, with its recursive nature and requirement for multiple drafts, is inherently more complex than that of speaking.
According to Ur (1996), writing lacks the immediate feedback and interaction that a speaker enjoys with a known audience due to the detachment of space and time This limitation can affect the writer's engagement with their readers.
Harmer (2004) highlights that face-to-face interaction includes immediate verbal and non-verbal reactions, as well as frequent role swapping between the speaker and listener, features that writing lacks As a result, writers often struggle to define their audience (Brown, 1994) and to receive feedback from readers (White, 1981).
In summary, the analysis of three key criteria—linguistic features, production processes, and interaction—reveals that writing and speaking are fundamentally distinct forms of communication This distinction highlights the unique characteristics inherent in writing.
Raimes (1983) identifies six distinct approaches to writing: the Controlled-to-Free Approach, which transitions from structured to more open writing; the Free-Writing Approach, emphasizing spontaneous expression; the Paragraph-Pattern Approach, focusing on the organization of ideas; the Grammar-Syntax-Organization Approach, which highlights the importance of language mechanics; the Communicative Approach, aimed at effective interaction through writing; and the Process Approach, which emphasizes the stages of writing development.
This approach stress upon three features: grammar, syntax and mechanics and on accuracy rather than fluency Thus, students are likely to have good grammatical competence and low communication skills