INTRODUCTION
The Statement of the Problem
Among the four basic language skills in the process of language learning,
Competent writing is often regarded as the last language skill acquired by both native and foreign language learners (Hamp and Heasky, 1994) As English serves as a global communication tool, proficiency in English writing is crucial for students, enhancing their learning and future career prospects However, writing in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) poses significant challenges, particularly for second and third-year students at LHU, where a survey revealed that 96.75% of these students struggle with EFL writing Furthermore, 66.67% of experienced teachers at the Faculty of Foreign Languages reported that students' writing is often poor and difficult to comprehend This issue is prevalent across many colleges and universities, where students excel in speaking and listening but fall short in writing, particularly in accuracy and fluency Consequently, this struggle can diminish students' motivation during writing activities.
These problems are attributed to many factors, of which the following ones may be the most obvious
Effective writing demands a strong vocabulary, well-developed ideas, and the skill to organize sentences logically into coherent paragraphs or essays Unlike speech, proficient writing necessitates a greater level of accuracy and fluency, as errors and incomplete thoughts are generally unacceptable; writing is held to a standard of correctness.
EFL learners often struggle with writing due to a lack of practice stemming from low motivation Many students fear making mistakes in their writing, believing that errors are permanent on paper, which leads to reluctance and laziness Additionally, the absence of immediate feedback further hampers their writing development, with 75.97% of surveyed students practicing only a few hours weekly A significant 68.18% expressed a dislike for writing assignments, feeling unmotivated by tasks that do not interest them, while only 31.82% enjoyed these assignments In contrast, 92.86% of students practiced listening and speaking daily Interviews revealed that students often felt forced to write on assigned topics, leaving them with little inspiration or desire to engage in writing.
A significant factor contributing to students' poor writing in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) is their tendency to think in their native language, Vietnamese, while attempting to write in English This challenge is common among individuals from one cultural background learning to express themselves in another language In a survey conducted among writing teachers at LHU, all participants noted that most students often translated their thoughts from Vietnamese to English during writing assignments Furthermore, an overwhelming 98.05% of surveyed students acknowledged this habit, which not only hampers their writing quality but also prolongs the time needed to complete writing tasks in English.
It is because of the main problems above that not many EFL learners succeed in their formal writing, especially in terms of accuracy and fluency.
The Purpose of the Research
To address the challenges in improving students' writing skills, collaboration among education policymakers, researchers, teachers, and learners is essential While extensive research has been conducted in Vietnam to identify effective solutions, there is a notable lack of focus on journal writing as a supplementary activity to enhance formal writing skills As an English teacher at LHU, I believe that with dedication and patience, educators can significantly aid students in developing their writing abilities outside the classroom By offering low-pressure opportunities for students to express their thoughts and experiences through journal writing, we can foster regular practice, which is crucial for improving accuracy and fluency in their formal writing Ultimately, consistent engagement in journal writing provides invaluable opportunities for students to think and write in the language they are learning.
Students learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) often focus on how to write rather than what to write, leading to a lack of creativity and motivation Typically, they write only what their teachers assign, with the primary audience being the teacher, who prioritizes correct grammar over engaging ideas This can discourage students from expressing themselves However, incorporating journal writing as a low-pressure, extensive activity outside the classroom can inspire students to write freely It empowers them to choose their own purposes and audiences, fostering a habit that enhances their ability to communicate effectively in real-life situations.
This study investigates the impact of journal writing as an additional activity on enhancing the formal writing skills of second and third-year English students at Lac Hong University.
Hypotheses
The research is conducted on the basis of the following hypotheses:
1.3.1 Journal writing, as an extra writing activity, can help improve students' formal writing skill in terms of accuracy and fluency
1.3.2 Journal writing can enhance students' writing motivation.
The Research Questions
Two main questions, whose answers will confirm if the hypotheses set up by the researcher are true, guide this study:
1.4.1 Can journal writing, as an extra writing activity, help improve students' formal writing in terms of accuracy and fluency?
1.4.2 Can journal writing enhance students' writing motivation?
1.5 The significance of the study
Journal writing has the potential to enhance students' formal writing skills, particularly in improving accuracy and fluency Despite limited research on this topic in Vietnam, this study aims to investigate the effectiveness of journal writing in boosting students' writing motivation and overall quality of formal writing The findings from this research are intended to support students in becoming more proficient writers through the practice of journal writing.
1.6 The definitions of the key terms
This research focuses on the concept of "journal" while emphasizing two crucial aspects of effective writing: "accuracy" and "fluency." Additionally, it highlights "motivation" as a key element that contributes to good writing The study also addresses various important terms, which may have differing definitions across different fields, but are specifically defined within the context of this research.
1.6.1 JOURNAL: Journals are notebooks in which students can spontaneously record their feelings, thoughts, reactions, questions, events and so on happening around them every day
1.6.2 ACCURACY: the correct spelling, grammar, punctuation marks, choice of words, and the proper use of transition signals in the writing context, measured by the errors or mistakes made by students in these areas of the language
1.6.3 FLUENCY: the ease with which students write, measured by the writing speed, the smooth flow of ideas, the number of words and the level of task completion in limited time
1.6.4 MOTIVATION: the stimulation of interest or eagerness that keeps students continuing to write all the time thus making writing an active process of learning
1.6.5 FORMAL WRITING: Formal writing includes academic tasks which students are asked to write during their writing course
The study is based on the following assumptions and reliability:
1.7.1 The sample population of the second and third-year students of English in the FFL of LHU was the representative of the majority of students of English in LHU in particular and in Vietnam in general
1.7.2 The methods and the procedures of data collection and analyses were reliable and appropriate to obtain the information to answer the research questions
1.7.3 The respondents and informants were honest in their responses and information
1.8 The limitations of the research
Journal writing has been recognized for its benefits long before I encountered it in 2005 during my TESOL course with Mr Peter Leonard, who aimed to enhance our writing skills and gather our reflections on his lectures My experience revealed that journal writing positively impacted my writing abilities, prompting this research to explore its effectiveness with my own students.
1.9 The delimitations of the research
This study is constrained by material and time limitations, focusing specifically on second and third-year English students at the Faculty of Foreign Languages (FFL) of LHU While this specific sample may restrict the generalizability of the findings, the research offers valuable insights that could benefit English classes at LHU and other universities where English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing is a primary focus.
1.10 The Organization of the thesis
This paper consists of five chapters
Chapter 1 is the introduction In this chapter, the researcher stated the problems related to students’ EFL writing skills After highlighting the problems, he set the hypotheses, the purpose and the significance of the study The following parts are the definitions of the key terms, assumptions, limitation and delimitation of the research
Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature and the studies relevant to this research
Chapter 3 shows the research methodology and procedure
Chapter 4 show the findings of the research and discussion of the findings Finally, chapter 5 concludes the study and gives some recommendations to EFL learners, to writing teachers, and for further research.
The Definitions of the Key Terms
This research focuses on the concept of "journal" while emphasizing two critical aspects of effective writing: "accuracy" and "fluency." Additionally, it explores "motivation" as a key factor contributing to quality writing Various terms may have differing definitions across disciplines, but this study provides specific definitions tailored to its context.
1.6.1 JOURNAL: Journals are notebooks in which students can spontaneously record their feelings, thoughts, reactions, questions, events and so on happening around them every day
1.6.2 ACCURACY: the correct spelling, grammar, punctuation marks, choice of words, and the proper use of transition signals in the writing context, measured by the errors or mistakes made by students in these areas of the language
1.6.3 FLUENCY: the ease with which students write, measured by the writing speed, the smooth flow of ideas, the number of words and the level of task completion in limited time
1.6.4 MOTIVATION: the stimulation of interest or eagerness that keeps students continuing to write all the time thus making writing an active process of learning
1.6.5 FORMAL WRITING: Formal writing includes academic tasks which students are asked to write during their writing course.
The Assumptions and Reliability
The study is based on the following assumptions and reliability:
1.7.1 The sample population of the second and third-year students of English in the FFL of LHU was the representative of the majority of students of English in LHU in particular and in Vietnam in general
1.7.2 The methods and the procedures of data collection and analyses were reliable and appropriate to obtain the information to answer the research questions
1.7.3 The respondents and informants were honest in their responses and information.
The Limitations of the Research
Journal writing has been recognized for its benefits long before I was introduced to it in 2005 by Mr Peter Leonard, my Writing P.G instructor and thesis advisor during my TESOL course His goal was to encourage our reflections on his lectures while enhancing our writing skills I discovered that journal writing significantly improved my writing abilities, prompting this research to investigate its effectiveness with my students as well.
The Delimitations of the Research
This study is confined to second and third-year English students at the Faculty of Foreign Languages (FFL) of LHU, due to constraints in materials, time, and varying teaching contexts across universities in Vietnam While this specific sample may limit the generalizability of the findings, the research offers valuable insights that could benefit other English classes at LHU and other universities focused on EFL writing.
The Organization of the Thesis
This paper consists of five chapters
Chapter 1 is the introduction In this chapter, the researcher stated the problems related to students’ EFL writing skills After highlighting the problems, he set the hypotheses, the purpose and the significance of the study The following parts are the definitions of the key terms, assumptions, limitation and delimitation of the research
Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature and the studies relevant to this research
Chapter 3 shows the research methodology and procedure
Chapter 4 show the findings of the research and discussion of the findings Finally, chapter 5 concludes the study and gives some recommendations to EFL learners, to writing teachers, and for further research.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Students’ EFL Writing Problems
Success in learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) hinges on students' ability to complete writing tasks effectively, which is crucial not only for their academic performance but also for their future careers However, many EFL students find writing to be particularly challenging As Harmer (1992) points out, there is often a greater emphasis on written accuracy in language teaching compared to speaking accuracy This highlights the need for focused strategies to enhance writing fluency and proficiency among EFL learners.
Producing coherent and fluent extended writing is one of the most challenging aspects of language, as readers must comprehend the text without seeking clarification or relying on the writer's tone or expression English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners face additional difficulties due to the lack of immediate feedback from their audience, and in some cases, they receive no feedback at all on their writing Hedge (1991) highlights this issue, emphasizing the importance of feedback in the writing process.
The writer exists in isolation, devoid of the feedback and engagement that listeners provide, forcing him to anticipate reactions and respond accordingly Writing becomes a challenge as he lacks the ability to use gestures, vocal tone, and environmental cues, ultimately leading to a solitary monologue Without an audience to support or inspire him, he faces the struggle of expressing his thoughts without external encouragement.
Quoting Byrne’s words about this problem, Tho (2000: 36) has maintained:
Writing is fundamentally a solitary endeavor, and the necessity to compose independently, without interaction or feedback, inherently complicates the writing process.
Many English learners find writing unengaging, which hinders their motivation to practice regularly According to Hedge (1991), writing can be an unpleasant experience, as students often fear making mistakes The prospect of having their work scrutinized by a teacher, who may focus on errors, can be particularly discouraging Research by Hamp and Heasley (1994) supports these observations, highlighting the challenges learners face in the writing process.
Many individuals struggle with spontaneous writing and find it challenging to engage in formal writing tasks, especially when the audience is a teacher whose critical evaluation may impact their grades This pressure often leads to discomfort and anxiety about their written work.
Many students view writing as uninteresting and often dislike it because they are required to write on assigned topics instead of subjects that engage their interests.
Many individuals struggle with writing due to a perceived lack of topics to explore, often feeling uncertain when faced with assignments This hesitation is common, as even seasoned writers occasionally grapple with articulating their thoughts on paper.
Students often struggle to generate ideas when writing assignments given by teachers, particularly when the topics are unfamiliar or uninteresting to them Byrne (1991: 5) notes that many writers experience a lack of ideas when faced with mandatory writing tasks Additionally, Tho (2000: 36) highlights that non-native writers may find themselves with insufficient ideas or, in some cases, nothing to express at all This lack of inspiration can lead to decreased motivation and ultimately results in poor writing quality, as emphasized by Tho (2000: 38).
Many writers struggle to produce quality work due to a lack of genuine motivation, both internal and external Often, they feel compelled to write rather than choosing to do so out of personal desire, making the process feel like a difficult chore Without inspiration, writing becomes increasingly challenging, as it's hard to excel in a task when it's not driven by one's own will Additionally, student writers frequently lack a clear purpose or audience for their writing, further diminishing their motivation and effectiveness.
Time pressure significantly affects students' writing efficiency, as they are often required to complete tasks within strict deadlines This constraint can lead to incomplete assignments, as many students struggle to finish their work in the allotted time Weir (1990: 61) highlights the impact of these time restrictions on students' writing capabilities.
Time pressure can be an unrealistic constraint for extended writing, as timed essays are typically limited to academic settings For most individuals, the writing process is more extensive, often involving multiple steps before arriving at a polished final version.
Chanderasegaran (2002) highlights a common challenge in writing classrooms, where some students take significantly longer to complete their essays, often failing to finish during class time This issue is prevalent among students globally, including those writing in their native languages For English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, the situation is exacerbated as they frequently think in their mother tongue, such as Vietnamese, and translate their thoughts into English This translation process, influenced by their native language and cultural background, negatively impacts their writing abilities As noted by Benson and Heidish (1995), variations in language structure, thought expression, writing styles, and cultural factors significantly affect EFL learners' writing skills.
Discussing the interference of one’s mother tongue and native culture with his EFL writing, Brown (1994: 323) has also confirmed:
The influence of one's native culture and the accumulated experiences from education and critical thinking is undeniable In today's focus on understanding schemata and scripts, it is essential to recognize that native language patterns significantly shape our thinking and writing processes.
Many EFL students in Vietnam tend to formulate their ideas in Vietnamese before translating them into English, which often leads to errors in their writing Tho (2000: 31) highlights that these translation issues significantly impact the quality of students' EFL writing.
What Can Be Done to Solve Students’ EFL Writing Problems?
To foster a positive writing environment, authors emphasize the importance of a warm and supportive classroom atmosphere, as highlighted by Hamp and Heasley (1994: 2) This can be achieved by actively involving students in the writing process, aligning with the Chinese proverb that states, “Tell me and I forget; show me and I remember; involve me and I understand.” Merely explaining organizational structures or grammar rules is insufficient, as students are likely to forget this information quickly Instead, when teachers model writing practices and engage students, they facilitate deeper understanding Ultimately, effective writing instruction requires teachers to provide opportunities for students to express their thoughts and emotions, making the writing process meaningful and impactful.
It is also important to consider the affective role of creative writing In this view, Tin (2004: 5) has said:
Writing serves as a powerful medium for self-expression and personal feelings, particularly within the realm of creative writing This form of writing allows learners to explore topics that resonate with them and share personal experiences with their peers It empowers individuals to embrace their identities in a new language, granting them the ability to take command of their language skills and creativity.
Classroom writing is essential for academic success, but writing outside the classroom can significantly enhance students' skills due to limited classroom time Thanh (2007) emphasizes the challenge of providing comprehensive knowledge in class and advocates for inspiring students to pursue learning independently Writing outside of class allows students to express themselves freely, fostering motivation Chanderasegaran (2002) suggests that assigning writing tasks at home can be beneficial, and Thanh supports this by highlighting the importance of motivating students for successful self-study Integrating journal writing into the curriculum offers students the chance to explore their thoughts and emotions, making writing a more enjoyable experience As Tin (2004) notes, when students engage emotionally, they often exceed their language capabilities, turning writing into a rewarding task that encourages ongoing practice and skill improvement, as stated by John Langan (2000).
Writing is a skill that improves with practice, and maintaining a daily journal is an effective way to enhance your writing abilities even before starting to compose essays.
Talking about journals, Spaventa (2000:168) has said, “Journals are notebooks in which writers keep a record of ideas, opinions, and description of daily life Journals help writers develop their creativity.”
Journal writing enhances students' writing skills daily by allowing them the freedom to express their thoughts whenever they choose According to Hamp and Heasley (1994: 5), this practice provides valuable opportunities for self-expression and creativity.
To improve your writing skills, the most effective method is to practice consistently We recommend maintaining a personal journal where you can jot down ideas in English daily, focusing on topics that intrigue you This habit will not only enhance your writing but also lead to the creation of numerous pages of content.
Active learning techniques, as described by Chickering and Gamson (1987), emphasize the importance of student engagement in the learning process They argue that learning is not passive; students gain deeper understanding by discussing, writing, and connecting new knowledge to their personal experiences This approach encourages students to apply what they learn in real-life situations, making education more relevant and impactful.
Many authors emphasize the importance of maintaining a learner-journal, where students can document their personal experiences and activities The significance of personal or life writing has been explored extensively by various scholars As noted by Tin (2000: 49), referencing Artof (1992), this practice offers valuable insights into the intersection of personal reflection and academic growth.
Personal writing serves as a transformative tool for unlocking our hidden creative potential, delving into our family history, and gaining clarity in our worldview It aids in healing unresolved issues, understanding our fears, and exploring our motivations By engaging in personal writing, we enhance our writing skills while fostering greater self-awareness and interpersonal understanding, ultimately improving our ability to connect with others.
Quoting Ruth Spack and Cathy Sadow (1983) about journal writing, Ron White and Valeria Arndt (1991: 63) have also voiced their argument:
Ruth Spack and Cathy Sadow (1983) introduced a journaling technique aimed at engaging students in writing by having them maintain a journal This journal is neither graded nor corrected; instead, the teacher reads it and provides written feedback, including remarks, questions, and observations The primary goal of this approach is to foster an ongoing exchange of thoughts and ideas, encouraging students to reflect on their experiences as both readers and writers.
The primary purpose of journaling is to engage students in writing without the stress of making mistakes or time constraints, allowing them to express their thoughts freely rather than just completing exercises This approach transforms writing in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) into an enjoyable experience As Spaventa (2000: 168) notes, journaling provides language students the opportunity to articulate their ideas without the pressure of grades or grammatical accuracy, serving as valuable practice in both writing and critical thinking.
Emphasizing the benefits of journal writing, Ron White and Valerie Arndt (1991: 67) have explained:
This technique effectively stimulates interest in writing while enhancing fluency of expression It encourages students to understand their motivations for communicating ideas, viewing writing not just as personal expression but as a meaningful dialogue with the reader.
Journal writing offers a dual advantage for students, as it enhances their writing skills while also allowing them to express and document their thoughts and emotions effectively.
Adding to the benefits of journal writing, Spaventa (2000: 168) has also maintained:
Keeping a journal offers numerous benefits, including fostering an informal dialogue between you and yourself, as well as with your instructor Upon completing the course, you'll have a valuable record of your readings, experiences, and reflections, which can enhance your learning journey.
Discussing the benefits of journal writing, Hamp and Heasley (1994: 7) have suggested that his learners, as their first attempt of keeping a journal, consider the following statements:
1 The most important thing for me is to study more grammar
2 The most important thing for me is to memorize more useful expressions and sentences
3 The most important thing for me is to read more
4 The most important thing for me is to have a lot of practice in writing
5 The most important thing for me is to study more vocabulary
6 The most important thing for me is to think about what makes writing effective
In persuading his students of the merits of journal writing, John Lagan (2000: 14) has also stated:
Keeping a journal cultivates the habit of thinking on paper, revealing how ideas can emerge through the writing process By incorporating journaling into your daily routine, you make writing a familiar aspect of your life, while also creating a valuable reservoir of inspiration for future papers.
Conclusion of the Literature Review
In conclusion, journal writing significantly enhances students' writing accuracy and fluency, fostering interaction among participants and creating a positive learning environment This practice not only sustains students' interest in EFL writing but also cultivates their thinking and writing habits in the target language Despite its advantages, there is a lack of research in Vietnam demonstrating the benefits of journal writing As an experienced English teacher at LHU, I conducted this action research to validate the positive impact of journal writing on students' writing skills, aiming to improve their accuracy and fluency while encouraging regular practice in EFL writing.
THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
The Research Methodology
To carry out the research, the researcher employed both qualitative and quantitative methods to perform the following main tasks
Firstly, the researcher collected information from teachers and students from questionnaires and oral interviews
Next, the researcher uninterruptedly conducted action research, observed and recorded the activities and progress that the students did and made during the process of the research
Then, the researcher analyzed, generalized and compared the collected data to find out the outcomes
Finally, the researcher interpreted the findings, and gave the conclusion of the study and recommendations for the implementation of journal writing, and for other related studies.
The Background and the Subjects of the Research
The research took place at the Faculty of Foreign Languages (FFL) at LHU in Bien Hoa City, Dong Nai province, where the researcher is employed The FFL is dedicated to training university students to earn their Bachelor's degrees in English, requiring a rigorous study period of at least four and a half years.
This research focused on a sample of 161 students from the FFL's 18 English classes, which had a total of 864 students Due to time constraints, the study was limited to two second-year classes (06AV2, 06AV3) studying Writing 3 and two third-year classes (05AV2, 05AV3) studying Writing 5 All participants, aged between 19 and 26, were grouped by similar proficiency levels within their respective years, comprising 57 males and 104 females.
In the study, two second-year classes were divided into experimental and control groups, with class 06AV2 designated as experimental group 1 (EG1) and class 06AV3 as control group 1 (CG1) Similarly, two third-year classes were assigned, with class 05AV3 as experimental group 2 (EG2) and class 05AV2 as control group 2 (CG2) The focus was primarily on the students in the experimental groups, who were required to write journal entries at home in addition to their regular writing tasks, while the control groups continued with their standard learning activities without any additional assignments.
The teachers and the syllabi for the writing courses
3.3.1 The teacher and the syllabus for the writing course for the two second-year classes
During the research period, Mr Le Tuan Dat, M.A., an EFL writing instructor with 16 years of experience, taught the writing course for two second-year classes He adhered to the approved syllabus by utilizing the same course books, content, teaching procedures, and methods throughout the instruction.
Course books for the two second-year classes
The main materials for the writing course of the third semester for the second-year classes are the two following course books:
01 Ready to Write (Second Edition) by Blanchard, K & Root, C (1994)
02 Writing in Paragraphs (First Edition) by Zemach, D E & Islam, C
Contents and teaching procedures for the two second-year classes
During the third semester, second-year students participated in a writing course consisting of 60 sessions, each lasting 45 minutes The course was structured with one session per week, spanning four periods, and lasted a total of 15 weeks For detailed content, refer to Appendix 1.
3.3.2 The teacher and the syllabus for the writing course for the two third-year classes
Ms Nguyen Thi Kim Chung, M.A., with 11 years of experience in teaching EFL writing, led the writing course for two third-year classes during this research She utilized consistent course books, content, teaching procedures, and methods that adhered to the approved syllabus requirements.
Course books for the two third-year classes
The required textbook for the third-year students' fifth-semester writing course is "Introduction to Academic Writing" (2nd Edition) by Alice Oshima and Ann Hogue, published in 1991 by Longman, USA.
Contents and teaching procedures for the two third-year classes
During the fifth semester, third-year students participated in a writing course consisting of 60 sessions, each lasting 45 minutes The course was structured to include one session per week, with each session comprising four periods, totaling 15 weeks of instruction For more details, please refer to Appendix 2.
The Instruments of the Research
The following are only the general descriptions of the instruments employed in this research More details about them will be discussed in the next pages
3.4.1 The questionnaire to teachers of writing and the pre- questionnaire to students (see appendices 3 and 4)
Questionnaires were sent to teachers and students to obtain necessary information and grounds for the research
3.4.2 The pre-trial tests (see appendix 5)
The pre-trial assessments for second-year students consisted of an academic paragraph, while third-year students were evaluated through an academic essay These tests were designed to assess the initial writing proficiency of the selected classes, focusing on both accuracy and fluency as outlined in the introduction.
3.4.3 The post-trial tests (see appendix 6)
The post-trial tests were structured similarly to the pre-trial tests, focusing on evaluating students' writing proficiency at the conclusion of the research These assessments were instrumental in determining the impact of journal writing on the quality of students' formal writing.
3.4.4 A copy of instruction sheet (see appendix 7)
Each student in the two experimental groups received a detailed instruction sheet outlining the requirements for their journals and the purpose behind these tasks.
3.4.5 A copy of correction symbol checklist (see appendix 8)
Each student in the two experimental groups received a correction symbol checklist to aid in self-correction Recognizing that the correction process can be both time-consuming and discouraging, the researcher focused on the most common errors found in the students' journals and provided symbolic corrective suggestions This checklist enabled students to effectively identify and rectify their mistakes independently.
During the 13-week period between two trial tests, each student in the two experimental groups was required to have two ordinary notebooks labeled with their names for journal writing This setup allowed students to write entries regularly, as they could submit one notebook for review by the researcher while continuing to write in the second After the researcher provided corrective feedback in symbols on the submitted entries, students could reread and revise their work, enhancing their learning experience.
The researcher also kept a journal The purpose of this journal was to record any progress made by the students and the observations during the whole course of the research
During the research, the researcher conducted interviews with students from the two experimental groups regarding their experiences with journal writing These interviews typically occurred during breaks or after class and were documented in the teacher's journal for further analysis.
3.4.9 The marking criteria (see appendix 9)
The same marking criteria were applied to mark the students’ pre-trial tests and post-trial tests
3.4.10 The post-questionnaire to the students in the two EGs (See appendix 10)
The post-questionnaire aimed at collecting reflections from the students in the two EGs upon journal writing
The computer was the useful tool to record, analyze the collected data, make statistics, and carry out many other tasks during the research
To eliminate subjectivity in assessment, two writing instructors, Mr Le Tuan Dat, M.A., and Ms Nguyen Thi Kim Chung, M.A., were engaged to evaluate the students' pre-tests and post-tests using consistent marking criteria established by the researcher.
The Procedures of the Research
The research was conducted and written from August 1 st , 2007 to November 25 th , 2008 through three main phases
3.5.1 The first phase of the research
The first phase of the research lasted six weeks from August 1 st , 2007 to September 9 th , 2007
Between August 1 and September 2, 2007, all materials related to the research were compiled and prepared, including questionnaires, instruction sheets, a correction symbol checklist, and samples of journal entries.
From September 3 rd , 2007 to September 9 th , 2007 (the second week of the semester) the students in the experimental groups and control groups were asked to do the pre-trial tests
Second-year students were tasked with writing a paragraph on how to protect the environment from air pollution, while third-year students wrote an essay on preventing traffic accidents in their city This pre-trial writing task allowed students to express their feelings and sense of responsibility regarding societal issues Under strict teacher supervision, second-year students had 45 minutes to complete their tasks, and third-year students had 60 minutes These pre-trial tests were part of a study but presented as regular writing assignments to minimize any subjective effects; students were not informed about the research to avoid unnecessary anxiety that could impact their performance After completing the writing tasks, questionnaires were distributed to both students and their writing teachers.
3.5.2 The second phase of the research
The second phase of the research lasted 13 weeks (from September 10 th ,
From the beginning of the third week to the fifteenth week of the semester, the researcher concentrated on the main phase of the study, following the completion of pre-trial tests and the collection of pre-trial writing samples and questionnaires from the two experimental groups (EGs) and two control groups (CGs) This period, which spanned from 2007 to December 9, 2007, marked a critical stage in the research process.
Each student in the two experimental groups received a printed copy of explanations and instructions, along with oral interpretations in both Vietnamese and English, to familiarize them with the journal writing activity The researcher aimed to ensure that the students clearly understood the purpose and benefits of journal writing.
Journal writing was not graded, meaning it would not impact students' end-of-term test scores This approach alleviated unnecessary stress, allowing students to enhance their fluency and foster positive growth in their writing skills.
Regular journal writing offers significant benefits for students, encouraging them to write more frequently This fundamental principle is essential; without it, the research would yield minimal results.
A learner journal serves as a valuable tool for students to document their reflections on lessons, express expectations for upcoming classes, and articulate any challenges they face in their learning journey Additionally, it provides a space for students to share personal feelings and recount past experiences, fostering deeper engagement and self-awareness in their educational process.
After receiving comprehensive instructions on the purpose and expectations of journal writing, students in the two experimental groups were provided with detailed guidelines and a correction symbol checklist They were encouraged to write daily journal entries, and it was promising to see that nearly all students committed to consistently participating in this exercise.
Journal writing served as an extracurricular activity for students, who were engaged in various regular classes Each week, students submitted their journals for the researcher to review, providing feedback and suggestions for self-improvement.
3.5.3 The third phase of the research
The final phase of the research commenced in the last week of the semester, from December 10, 2007, to November 25, 2008 During this period, second-year and third-year students from both experimental groups (EGs) and control groups (CGs) participated in post-trial tests on topics related to their pre-trial assessments Unbeknownst to them, second-year students were tasked with writing a paragraph on the causes of air pollution in their city and their potential contributions as responsible citizens Meanwhile, third-year students were required to compose an essay addressing the causes of traffic accidents and their role in mitigating this issue The testing conditions mirrored those of the pre-trial assessments.
The topics for each course aligned with those of the pre-trial test, but the requirements were adjusted to prevent repetition of words and ideas that could skew the final research analysis After gathering the students' writing samples for the post-trial tests, the researcher distributed a post-questionnaire to students in both experimental groups to gather their reflections on journal writing The subsequent months were dedicated to generalizing and analyzing the collected data, as well as completing the remaining aspects of the research.
The primary objective of these phases was to establish a solid basis for comparing students' writing quality regarding accuracy and fluency before and after engaging in journal writing If the experimental groups demonstrate greater improvement than the control groups, this progress will confirm the positive impact of journal writing on students' writing skills.
FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
Reports on the Results of the Pre-trial and Post-trial Tests and
4.1 Reports on the results of the pre-trial and post-trial tests and interpretations of the results
The following tables show the results of the pre-trial tests and the post- trial tests earned by the students in the two CGs and the two EGs
THE RESULTS OF THE PRE-TRIAL TEST AND THE POST-TRIAL TEST EARNED BY CG1 - CLASS 06AV3 (SECOND-YEAR STUDENTS)
Pre-trial test Post-trial test
No Students' codes No of words
Level of completion Marks No of words
Average 96.55 14.48 1=finished:33 5.03 106.65 10.05 1=finished:35 5.74 Standard Deviation
Table 4.1: The results of the pre-trial and post-trial tests earned by CG1
THE RESULTS OF THE PRE-TRIAL TEST AND THE POST-TRIAL TEST
EARNED BY EG1 - CLASS 06AV2 (SECOND-YEAR STUDENTS)
Pre-trial test Post-trial test
No of words No of mistakes Level of completion Marks No of words No of mistakes Level of completion Marks
Table 4.2: The results of the pre-trial and post-trial tests earned by EG1
THE RESULTS OF THE PRE-TRIAL TEST AND THE POST-TRIAL TEST
GIANED BY CG2 - CLASS 05AV2 (THIRD-YEAR STUDENTS)
(AN ESSAY WRITTEN WITHIN 60 MINUTES)
Pre-trial test Post-trial test
No of words No of mistakes Level of completion
Marks No of words No of mistakes Level of completion
Table 4.3: The results of the pre-trial and post-trial tests earned by CG2
THE RESULTS OF THE PRE-TRIAL TEST AND THE POST-TRIAL TEST
EARNED BY EG 2 - CLASS 05AV3 (THIRD-YEAR STUDENTS)
(AN ESSAY WRITTEN WITHIN 60 MINUTES)
Pre-trial test Post-trial test
No Students' codes No of words
Level of completion Marks No of words
Average 193.71 24.00 1=finished:32 4.71 215.10 8.57 1=finished:39 6.17 Standard deviation
Table 4.4: The results of the pre-trial and post-trial tests earned by EG2
The analysis of the data presented in Tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 reveals the fluency and accuracy levels attained by students in both Control Groups (CGs) and Experimental Groups (EGs).
4.1.1 Report on the levels of fluency
The following table shows the report on the levels of fluency gained by the students in the two CGs and those in the two EGs
THE STATISTICS ON THE LEVELS OF FLUENCY
Pre-test Post-test Value Percent
Differences Average words 1.89 9.45 7.57 7.49% between Stdev 1.4415 -4.2810 -5.7225
CG1 and EG1 Unfinished pieces -1.0 -3.0 -2.0 -38.10%
Differences Average words 1.51 14.65 13.13 6.74% between Stdev -1.7475 -3.8306 -2.0831
CG2 and EG2 Unfinished pieces -1.0 -4.0 -3.0 -33.64%
Table 4.5: The statistics on the levels of fluency
THE DIFFERENCES IN THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF WORDS
Aver Words in pre-test Aver Words in post-test
Figure 4.1: The differences in the average number of words
THE DIFFERENCES IN THE LEVELS OF TASK COMPLETION
Unfi Pieces in pre-test Unfi Pieces in post-test
Figure 4.2: The differences in the levels of task completion
4.1.2 Interpretations of the levels of fluency
Measuring students' writing fluency quantitatively proved challenging, as it primarily relied on qualitative observation methods To enhance the assessment's concreteness, the researcher gathered data focusing on writing speed, specifically the number of words produced within a set timeframe, alongside evaluating the level of task completion.
Table 4.5 reveals that students in CG1 wrote an average of 96.55 words in 45 minutes, while CG2 students wrote 192.20 words in 60 minutes Similarly, EG1 students averaged 98.44 words, and EG2 students averaged 193.10 words The difference in writing speed between CG1 and EG1 was only 1.89 words, and between CG2 and EG2, it was 1.51 words This indicates that the writing speeds of students in CG1 and EG1, as well as CG2 and EG2, were nearly identical, with negligible differences highlighted in Figure 4.1.
After fifteen weeks of writing instruction, students in both experimental groups (EG1 and EG2) demonstrated a significant increase in writing speed compared to their control group counterparts (CG1 and CG2) Specifically, EG1 students wrote an average of 7.57 more words than CG1, reflecting a 7.49% increase, while EG2 students outperformed CG2 by an average of 13.13 words, marking a 6.74% improvement These results indicate that students in the experimental groups were able to write more quickly under the same time constraints and topic conditions.
The standard deviation of the average number of words written by students in the experimental groups (EGs) during their post-trial tests is lower than that of the control groups (CGs) This indicates that students in the EGs exhibited more consistent progress in writing speed compared to their counterparts in the CGs.
The progress in fluency among students is significantly influenced by the completion level of their writing assignments According to the results presented in Table 4.5, students in EG1 demonstrated a remarkable 38.10% decrease in task incompletion during the post-trial test compared to those in CG1 Similarly, students in EG2 experienced a 24.55% reduction in task incompletion when compared to their counterparts.
CG2 This proves that those who had written journal entries could complete their writing task in a given period of time better than those who had not
The findings indicate that students in both EG1 and EG2 demonstrated superior writing speed and higher levels of task completion in the post-trial test compared to their peers.
Figure 4.2 highlights the significant differences between CG2 and the two EGS groups, showing that students who maintained journals exhibited greater fluency in their writing compared to those who did not engage in journaling.
4.1.3 Report on the levels of accuracy
The table presents the accuracy levels attained by students in both Control Groups (CGs) and Experimental Groups (EGs) during their pre-trial and post-trial tests.
THE STATISTICS ON THE LEVELS OF ACCURACY
Pre-test Post-test Value Percent
Table 4.6: The statistics on the levels of accuracy
Note: In table 4.6 above, the mistakes include grammar mistakes (verb tenses, subject-verb agreement, articles, prepositions, and nouns), spelling mistakes, punctuation marks, word forms, and transition signals
THE DIFFERENCES IN THE LEVELS OF ACCURACY
Aver mistakes in pre-test Aver mistakes in post-test
Figure 4.3: The differences in the levels of accuracy
4.1.4 Interpretations of the levels of accuracy
Table 4.6 reveals that students in CG1 made an average of 14.48 mistakes in their pre-trial writing, while those in CG2 made 23.40 mistakes In the experimental groups, EG1 averaged 15.08 mistakes and EG2 24.00 Notably, the difference in average mistakes between CG1 and EG1 is only 0.60, mirroring the gap between CG2 and EG2 This indicates that prior to writing journals, the writing accuracy of students in EG1 was nearly equivalent to that of CG1, and similarly, CG2 and EG2 exhibited comparable accuracy levels The minimal differences are further illustrated in Figure 4.3.
After fifteen weeks of EFL writing instruction, all students in the two experimental groups (EG1 and EG2) demonstrated improved accuracy in their writing Notably, those who consistently maintained journal entries exhibited significantly fewer errors in their post-trial tests compared to their counterparts in the control groups (CG1 and CG2) Specifically, EG1 students made an average of 4.63 fewer mistakes than CG1, reflecting a 29.63% reduction, while EG2 students had 7.98 fewer mistakes than CG2, with a 32.45% decrease Additionally, the standard deviation of mistakes in the experimental groups was lower than in the control groups, indicating that EG students achieved more consistent progress in writing accuracy.
In the post-trial tests, students in the experimental groups (EGs) demonstrated significantly higher writing accuracy compared to those in the control groups (CGs) This is clearly depicted in Figure 4.4, which highlights the substantial differences between the two CGs and the two EGs The findings indicate that students who engaged in journal writing throughout the course achieved greater accuracy in their post-trial writing assessments than those who did not participate in journal writing.
4.1.5 Report on the average marks
The following table shows the average marks that the students in the two
CGs and the students in the two EGs earned for their pre-trial and post-trial tests
Pre-test Post-test Value Percent
Tables 4.7: The differences in the average marks
THE DIFFERENCES IN THE AVERAGE MARKS
Ave marks in pre-test Ave marks in post-test
Figure 4.4: The differences in the average marks
4.1.6 Interpretations of the differences in the average marks
Marks serve as a valuable evaluation tool for assessing the quality of students' writing, despite their inherent subjectivity To mitigate this subjectivity, the researcher enlisted the expertise of two writing instructors, Mr Le Tuan Dat, M.A., and Ms Nguyen Thi Kim Chung, M.A., to grade the students' work using a consistent set of marking criteria (refer to appendix 9).
Table 4.7 reveals that students in CG1 earned an average mark of 5.03 for their pre-trial writing, while those in CG2 achieved 5.06 In contrast, students in EG1 scored an average of 4.80, and EG2 students scored 4.71 The difference in average marks between CG1 and EG1 is only 0.04, and between CG2 and EG2, it is 0.09 This indicates that prior to writing journals, the writing performance of EG1 students was nearly equivalent to that of CG1 students, and similarly, CG2 and EG2 students had comparable average marks These minor differences are further illustrated in Figure 4.4.
After fifteen weeks of EFL writing instruction, students in both experimental groups (EG1 and EG2) achieved higher average marks in their post-trial tests compared to those in the control groups (CG1 and CG2) Specifically, EG1 students scored 0.81 marks higher than CG1, reflecting a 15.95% improvement, while EG2 students outperformed CG2 by 0.83 marks, resulting in a 17.79% increase Additionally, the standard deviation of average marks in the experimental groups was lower, indicating a more consistent improvement in writing quality among EG students compared to their counterparts in the control groups.
Reports on What Happened during the Research and on the Students’
to 17.79% Besides, the standard deviation of the average marks earned by the students in the two EGs for their post-trial tests is also lower than that by the students in the two CGs This means that the writing quality of the students in the two EGs was improved more uniformly than that by the students in the two CGs
The comparison of average marks from pre-trial and post-trial assessments reveals that students who maintained journals during their course achieved higher scores in their post-trial tests compared to those who did not engage in journaling.
4.2 Summary of the results of the pre-trial and post-trial tests
In conclusion, the statistics on fluency, accuracy, and average marks from pre-trial and post-trial tests demonstrate that journal writing significantly enhanced the formal writing quality of students in the experimental groups (EGs) This evidence supports the researcher's hypothesis that journal writing, as an additional activity, effectively improves students' formal writing skills, particularly in terms of accuracy and fluency, thereby addressing the first research question.
4.3 Report on what happened during the research and on the students’ writing motivation
4.3.1 The first phase of the research
The research, outlined in chapter 3, was conducted in three phases Initially, students from two experimental groups (EGs) and two control groups (CGs) completed pre-trial tests Following this, a pre-questionnaire was distributed to gather essential information before the students in the EGs began writing journal entries The results of these questionnaires are presented below.
4.3.1.1 The results of the pre-questionnaire to the students in the two EGs and to the students in the two CGs
Out of 161 pre-questionnaires distributed to students across two experimental groups (EGs) and two control groups (CGs), 154 valid responses were received, while 7 questionnaires were not returned The results of the pre-questionnaire are summarized in the following table.
THE RESULTS OF THE PRE-QUESTIONNAIRE TO THE STUDENTS
Among the four basic skills of English, which is the most important to you?
(You can choose more than one answer.) Writing 49 31.82%
Among the four basic skills of English, which is the most difficult to you? (You can choose more than one answer.) Writing 149 96.75%
Students Percentage Students Percentage Students Percentage
How often do you practise each skill?
What do you often do to practise your writing skill in EFL outside the classroom? (You can choose more than one answer.)
Do you like carrying out your writing assignments?
When writing in EFL, do you often think in Vietnamese first and then translate into English?
Table 4.8: The results of the pre-questionnaire to the students
4.3.1.2 Interpretations of the results of the pre-questionnaire to the students in the two EGs and in the two CGs
In a survey conducted among students from two experimental groups (EGs) and two control groups (CGs), 81.17% of the 154 participants identified listening as the most important skill, while 85.06% prioritized speaking In contrast, only 16.23% selected reading as a key skill, and just 31.82% regarded writing as important These findings indicate a significant lack of awareness regarding the importance of writing, which likely contributes to the limited time students dedicate to practicing this skill.
To question 2, 151 out of the 154 students (making up 98.05%) answered that listening was the most difficult to them; 137 students (accounting for 88.96%) selected speaking; 51 students (making up 33.12%) chose reading, and
149 students (96.75%) decided on writing Generally speaking, most of the students participating in the survey considered listening, speaking and writing almost equally difficult whereas reading was the easiest to them
To question 3, 143 out of the 154 students (making up 92.86%) answered that they practised listening and speaking every day, and 112 students (making up
A significant majority of students, 72.73%, reported engaging in daily reading practice; however, only 12.34% of students indicated they practiced writing each day Despite 96.75% of the students perceiving writing as the most challenging skill, a mere 12.34% actively worked on improving their writing abilities.
In response to question 4, all students indicated that they frequently practiced their writing skills through assignments Additionally, 44.81% of the students, or 69 out of 154, reported that they also engaged in reading books Only 1.95%, which amounts to 3 students, mentioned writing journals, while 16.23% (25 students) indicated they participated in other activities This suggests that only a small number of students had prior experience with journal writing before being prompted to create journal entries.
A survey revealed that 68.18% of students (105 out of 154) expressed a dislike for their writing assignments, primarily due to the requirement to write on teacher-assigned topics In contrast, only 31.82% of students (49) reported enjoying their writing tasks.
A significant majority of students, 98.05% (151 out of 154), reported that they typically think in Vietnamese before translating their thoughts into English while writing in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context In contrast, only 1.95% (3 students) indicated that they often think directly in English when writing This demonstrates that nearly all students have developed a habit of thinking in their native language when composing text in English.
The survey results indicate that most students find writing challenging, yet few dedicate time to improving their skills due to a lack of awareness about its importance and unengaging assignments This leads to poor writing abilities and a tendency to think in their native language when writing in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Notably, only 3 out of 154 students engaged in journal writing beyond their assignments, prompting the researcher to investigate the potential benefits of journal writing for skill enhancement.
4.3.2 The second phase of the research
In the second phase of the research, the researcher implemented action research by guiding students in the two experimental groups (EGs) to write journal entries, while meticulously observing and documenting the entire process for analysis.
After nearly two weeks of observation, the researcher noted that students gradually became comfortable with journal writing Initially, most students expressed their thoughts through short, simple sentences and often resorted to leaving blanks or using Vietnamese for words they didn’t know For example, one student started her journal with a few lines that showcased this early stage of their writing journey.
I have never kept a journal before and I'm uncertain about my ability to write regularly and effectively However, Mr Thinh has encouraged me to write as a way to improve my writing skills and has offered to correct my mistakes I will do my best and hope he follows through on his promise to support us.
(I, the author of this research, underline the parts that have problems for the convenience of easy identification.)
About the same feeling when starting to write journals in English, another student wrote:
Previously, I wrote my diary in Vietnamese, but now my teacher, Thinh, has asked us to write journals in English I find this challenging due to my limited vocabulary and grammar skills, which make it difficult to express my ideas clearly Nevertheless, I am willing to give it a try, as I believe it will be beneficial for my studies.
Mr Thinh will keep my journal secret as he promised (H.A – 06AV2) [Sic]
To review the event of the day, one student recorded in his journal:
Summary of the Report on What Happened during the Research and the Students’ Writing Motivation
In conclusion, the report highlights that journal writing significantly enhanced writing motivation among students in both experimental groups, encouraging regular practice and sustaining long-term interest in writing activities This supports the researcher's hypothesis that journal writing can effectively improve students' writing motivation and addresses the second research question.
The teacher's dedication significantly influenced the students' writing progress and motivation The researcher dedicated over six hours weekly to review students' journal entries, providing feedback and self-correction suggestions While this commitment may seem extensive, the remarkable improvement in writing skills among the two experimental groups justified the extra time and effort invested.