Cette thèse a pu se réaliser grâce au soutien de plusieurs personnes et je leur suis particulièrement reconnaissante. Je voudrais tout d’abord adresser toute ma reconnaissance à ma directrice de la thèse, Madame Nguyễn Thị Cúc Phương, pour la confiance qu’elle m’a accordée tout au long de ces années et pour ses encouragements pendant des moments apparemment insurmontables que jai rencontrées au cours de la recherche. Sous sa direction, jai acquis non seulement des connaissances mais aussi de lexpérience dans la conduite d’une recherche scientifique. Sa consultation dexpert dans la conception de cette recherche et ses commentaires éclairants tout au long de mon écriture ont rendu cette thèse possible. Jadresse mes plus sincères remerciements aux professeurs de français de l’Université de Hanoi pour leurs soutiens précieux dans mes études ainsi que dans la réalisation de la thèse. Je remercie en particulier à Monsieur Nguyễn Hữu Bình, qui est à la fois mon professeur et mon collègue, pour m’avoir donné des suggestions précieuses et pour avoir eu la patience de répondre à mes innombrables questions sur les analyses statistiques.
Origines de la recherche
This research stems from extensive professional experience, particularly over fifteen years of teaching French as a Foreign Language (FLE) Throughout this time, we have observed significant gaps in our students' argumentative skills in written production.
This situation prompted us to ask several important questions: What challenges do Vietnamese students of French as a Foreign Language (FLE) face when writing argumentative texts? What are the underlying causes of these difficulties? What solutions can be implemented to enhance their performance in argumentative writing?
To address the challenges faced by students in writing argumentative texts, we conducted interviews with four teachers from the French Department at the University of Danang They identified three main obstacles: content, text organization, and linguistic competence The primary issue with content is the lack of idea diversity, while the organizational challenge stems from insufficient use of connectors In terms of vocabulary, students often struggle with incorrect word usage and limited vocabulary, and when it comes to language use, they frequently encounter problems with sentence structure.
According to educators, the challenges faced by students primarily stem from the training program and class size Specifically, the limited number of credits allocated to writing skills development, combined with overcrowded classrooms, significantly impacts student learning outcomes.
The challenges faced by students in effectively writing argumentative texts stem from limited foundational knowledge, insufficient linguistic skills, lack of planning and revision, and reliance on their first language for idea development Additionally, low motivation and dependence on technology further exacerbate these difficulties To enhance students' performance in argumentative writing, educators suggest implementing several strategies: increasing credits for writing courses focused on argumentative texts, providing diverse writing techniques to improve linguistic and writing skills, and fostering motivation and autonomy in the writing process.
To better understand teachers' perspectives, we consulted previous research on the topic Our findings suggest that students need to develop their own language learning strategies to overcome challenges in writing argumentative texts Numerous studies indicate that with the consistent use of appropriate writing strategies, learners can eventually overcome their writing difficulties and become effective, independent writers (Manchón et al., 2007a; Sasaki, 2004; Sengupta).
De plus, Rubin et al., (2007) ont affirmé que si l'enseignement des stratégies d'apprentissage aux apprenants était efficacement dispensé, il augmenterait non
3 seulement leur connaissance de stratégies, mais aussi leur motivation et leurs performances
However, it is important to highlight that there has been limited research focused on teaching writing strategies in second language learning contexts Specifically, there is a lack of studies examining the connections between learners' knowledge of these strategies, how they are acquired, and their writing performance (De Silva, 2010).
Given the significant role of mastering written production in an academic setting and the impact of writing strategies on improving writing performance, there is a clear need for empirical research focused on the explicit teaching of writing strategies This study aims to assist Vietnamese students learning French as a foreign language in enhancing their understanding of writing strategies and their performance in producing argumentative texts Additionally, it seeks to enrich the body of research on language learning strategy instruction in a new context.
Explication des termes utilisés dans la présente recherche
In this research, we adopt the definition of a second language (L2) as outlined by Gass et al (2013), which refers to any language learned after the acquisition of the first language (L1), regardless of whether it is the second, third, fourth, or fifth language Since most of the studies reviewed are conducted within an English-speaking context, the term "second language" or its abbreviation "L2" can be considered synonymous with a foreign language.
Niveau de compétence de l’apprenant
Le ô niveau de compộtence ằ de l’apprenant fait rộfộrence à sa ô maợtrise de la production ộcrite ằ Les niveaux de compộtence des participants de la recherche ont
4 ộtộ ộvaluộs comme ô bon ằ, ô moyen ằ et ô faible ằ en fonction des notes de la production écrite qu’ils ont obtenues lors de l’examen de fin semestre
We acknowledge that the terms "high," "medium," and "low" may be perceived as relative judgments that could discomfort some readers However, drawing from previous studies where these terms are commonly used to categorize learners based on their success in learning, and considering the need to group learners by competency levels in this research, we have chosen to consistently use these expressions throughout our work.
Objectifs de la recherche
Les objectifs de la présente étude visent à :
- Identifier les stratégies d’écriture utilisées par les étudiants de FLE et examiner les différences entre les étudiants classés bons, moyens et faibles concernant l’utilisation de ces stratégies
- Évaluer si l’enseignement des stratégies d’écriture exerce des impacts différents sur l’utilisation de celles-ci en fonction des niveaux de compétence des étudiants en FLE
- Évaluer si l’enseignement des stratégies d’écriture exerce des impacts différents sur la performance des étudiants de FLE en fonction de leurs niveaux de compétence
- Analyser les corrélations éventuelles entre l’utilisation des stratégies d’écriture et la performance en production de textes argumentatifs.
Questions de la recherche
Conformément aux objectifs ci-dessus, la présente étude tentera de répondre aux questions de recherche suivantes :
1a Quelles sont les stratégies d’écriture qu’utilisent les étudiants en FLE à l’École supérieure des langues étrangères - Université de Danang ?
1b Y a-t-il des différences dans l’utilisation des stratégies d’écriture selon les niveaux de compétence des étudiants ?
2a Quels sont les impacts de l’enseignement des stratégies d’écriture sur leur utilisation par les étudiants en FLE ?
2b Cet enseignement profite-t-il de manière similaire aux apprenants de différents niveaux de compétence ?
3a Quels sont les impacts de l’enseignement des stratégies d’écriture sur la performance en production de textes argumentatifs chez les étudiants en FLE ?
3b Cet enseignement profite-t-il de manière similaire aux étudiants de différents niveaux de compétence ?
3c Quelles sont les corrélations entre l’utilisation des stratégies d’écriture et la performance en production de textes argumentatifs ?
Structure de la recherche
Cette thèse comprend une introduction générale, trois chapitres et une conclusion générale
L'introduction générale se concentre sur le contexte de la recherche, ses origines, les objectifs, les questions de la recherche et la structure de la thèse
The first chapter focuses on synthesizing theoretical and empirical research related to the production of argumentative texts and the teaching of language learning strategies It aims to present key concepts of writing competence, highlighting the characteristics of argumentative writing and summarizing research on this text type Additionally, it discusses theories concerning language learning strategies, particularly those related to writing and their instruction.
The research methodology is detailed in the second chapter, outlining various methodological choices, data collection instruments, participant selection, and data analysis tools This section provides a comprehensive overview of the approaches utilized in the study.
6 également les démarches d’expérimentation d’un module pédagogique ó se trouvent les stratégies choisies à enseigner, les étapes et la mise en œuvre de l’enseignement des stratégies d’écriture
The third chapter presents the results and analysis of the data to address the research questions It compiles findings from various data collection tools and provides a detailed interpretation in relation to similar studies in the field.
The general conclusion summarizes the study and discusses its contributions to teaching and learning in written production, particularly in the area of writing strategies It also highlights the study's limitations, explores its pedagogical implications, and offers recommendations for future research.
CADRE CONCEPTUEL ET THÉORIQUE
Production écrite du texte argumentatif
According to Cornaire and Raymond (1999), writing is a complex process, and helping learners develop writing skills is not an easy task Deschênes (1988) emphasizes that writing a text involves not only the physical act of forming letters, words, and sentences but also the crucial task of crafting a message that conveys the author's thoughts and effectively informs the reader Thus, writing necessitates significant cognitive effort in organizing and structuring information, which results from the interaction between the writer and the context of communication.
In recent decades, several attempts have been made to develop a writing process model, with significant contributions from Rohmer (1965), Flower and Hayes (1980), and Scardamalia and Bereiter (1987) These models will be briefly reviewed in the following sections.
L’un des premiers modèles d’écriture en L1 est le modèle par étapes de Rohmer
(1965) qui décrit l’écriture comme un processus essentiellement linéaire et caractérisé par trois étapes principales : pré-écriture, écriture et réécriture
Pre-writing encompasses all activities, primarily reflection, that occur before the actual writing process The writing stage involves translating thoughts into written form, where writers transcribe their ideas Finally, rewriting focuses on checking spelling and punctuation A key aspect of Rohmer's model is the introduction of thought as an essential characteristic of writing.
However, a clear drawback of this model is its linear process, which fails to capture the complex nature of writing and subsequent patterns.
As noted by Flower and Hayes (1980), the weakness of this model lies in its focus on the stages of text production rather than the mental processes of the writers creating it.
1.1.1.2 Modèles de Flower et Hayes
Since the 1980s, researchers have begun to develop explanatory models of the text production process, drawing on studies conducted in psychology (Cornaire & Raymond, 1999).
Among these models, the Flower and Hayes (1980) framework is frequently cited as one of the most significant theories in first-language writing It is also the most widely accepted writing model among second-language writing instructors (Hyland, 2008).
While maintaining the key stages proposed by Rohmer, researchers Hayes and Flower develop their model differently, illustrating that writing is not a linear process Instead, it relies on the interrelation of cognitive activities occurring at various stages or sub-stages of the writing process.
Figure 1 1 : Modèle princeps de Flower et Hayes (1980)
Trois constituants principaux sont présentés dans le modèle : l’environnement ou contexte de la tâche, la mémoire à long terme du scripteur et le processus d’écriture
The task environment is defined as the collection of characteristics surrounding a task, including the audience, the topics covered, the text itself, and all environmental factors that stimulate motivation in the writer.
Another factor that influences the writing process is the writer's long-term memory When presented with a topic, the writer taps into the knowledge stored in their long-term memory.
Les processus d’écriture se divisent en quatre phases : la planification, la mise en texte, la révision et le contrôle Le premier peut également être séparé en trois sous-
The writing process consists of ten components, including recovery, organization, and goal production The second process, text creation, allows the writer to coherently transcribe ideas generated during planning, necessitating mastery of linguistic and discursive codes of written language The third process, revision, is divided into two sub-processes: reading and editing Reading involves evaluating the written content against the intended goals, while revision entails modifying sections the writer feels need improvement Lastly, control emerges whenever these processes interact; for instance, during revision, the writer may revisit the planning phase to retrieve relevant information from long-term memory.
The Flower and Hayes model (1980) has significantly influenced research on writing processes in both L1 and L2, yet it has faced considerable criticism Some researchers argue that writers are unlikely to differ in their cognitive processing and abilities Instead, writing involves various processing model choices, and strategies for approaching tasks can vary among writers (Grabe & Kaplan, 1996).
Other critiques have focused on the development of the model North (1987) argues that it is too vague to meet the standards of a formal model For instance, it fails to clarify how texts are constructed and does not account for the linguistic constraints that may be imposed.
Zimmerman (2000) presented a significant critique of the Flower and Hayes model, arguing that it is deductive and hypothetical He contends that the model is based on a limited amount of empirical evidence from proficient L1 writers, which should not be generalized.
11 déduire que les scripteurs faibles ne pourraient pas suivre toutes les étapes décrites ci-dessus et que cela remettrait en cause l’exhaustivité des résultats
Malgrộ toutes les critiques, il faut reconnaợtre l’influence du modốle proposộ par Flower et Hayes (1980), qui a créé une base solide pour l’évolution d’autres modèles
1.1.1.3 Modèles de Scardamalia et Bereiter
Unlike the single-process model proposed by Flower and Hayes (1980), which was deemed inadequate for explaining the differences between novice and expert writers, the dual-process writing models developed by Scardamalia and Bereiter (1987) effectively highlight this distinction.
Enseignement des stratégies d’écriture
Pour commencer, nous pensons qu’il est indispensable d’exposer les notions des stratégies d’apprentissage des langues et d’écriture avant d’aborder le rôle de l’enseignement de ces stratégies
1.2.1 Stratégies d’apprentissage des langues et leurs classifications
1.2.1.1 Définition des stratégies d’apprentissage des langues
The concept of strategies as a general term in language learning has not reached a complete consensus (Atlan, 1997, 2000; C Paul, 1996) There is considerable debate in the literature regarding how these strategies are defined.
Rubin (1975 : 43), l’un des premiers chercheurs dans ce domaine, définit les stratộgies d’apprentissage des langues comme des ô techniques ou procộdures que les apprenants utilisent pour acquộrir les connaissances ằ
Ensuite, Rigney (1978 : 165) en donne une définition qui précise mieux les activitộs de l’apprentissage : ô un ensemble d'opộrations utilisộes par l'apprenant pour faciliter l'acquisition, le stockage et la rộcupộration d'informations ằ
In their 1985 research, O'Malley and colleagues defined strategies as operations or steps employed by learners to enhance the acquisition, storage, retrieval, or utilization of information This definition laid the groundwork for Rigney's earlier formulation in 1978.
According to Oxford (1990: 8), the definition of language learning strategies is broadened to include operations utilized by learners to enhance the processes of acquisition, storage, retrieval, and usage of language.
Specific actions taken by learners aim to enhance the learning experience, making it easier, faster, more enjoyable, self-directed, effective, and transferable to new situations (Oxford, 1990).
Il est à constater que la définition d’Oxford (1990) inclut les aspects cognitifs, ộmotionnels et sociaux qui amộlioreraient la maợtrise de l’apprentissage des langues et la confiance en soi des apprenants
Stern (1992) asserts that the concept of learning strategies is based on the premise that learners consciously engage in activities aimed at achieving specific goals He emphasizes that learning strategies can be viewed as intentional orientations and broad learning techniques.
Cohen (in Cohen & Macaro, 2007: 31) aligns with Stern's view that strategies can be categorized as conscious mental activities These strategies must encompass not only an action but also a clear objective (or intention) and a specific learning context.
Les définition de Stern (1992) et de Cohen (2007) supposent, tout comme Griffiths
In 2013, it was emphasized that learning strategies are consciously selected by learners These strategies involve activities that students intentionally choose to effectively manage and regulate their own language learning process.
Many researchers and specialists define language learning strategies from various perspectives, focusing on how learners process new information and the types of strategies they employ to understand, learn, or memorize information in second or foreign language acquisition Consequently, some researchers argue that it is challenging to provide an exact definition of language learning strategies due to the lack of consensus in the field (O'Malley et al., 1985).
Language learning strategies can be defined as consciously chosen behaviors or actions by learners to achieve their goals These strategies aim to enhance understanding, facilitate the memorization of new information, and enable the use of previously acquired knowledge in new language production Two key characteristics of language learning strategies emerge: first, they are intentionally selected by learners; second, they help learners regulate their language acquisition and make it more transferable to new contexts.
Ainsi, ces caractéristiques nous offrent une base théorique pour construire la définition des stratégies d’écriture ultérieurement
In addition to the ongoing debates among researchers about the appropriate definition of language learning strategies, there are notable differences in how these strategies are classified into groups These discrepancies arise from the various criteria that underpin these classifications.
Dans la section qui suit, nous allons aborder les classifications de Rubin (1981), d’O’Malley et Chamot (1990) et d’Oxford (1990) a) Classification de Rubin
La typologie proposée par Rubin (1981) est l’une des premières tentatives de classement des stratégies L’auteur en identifie deux types : celles qui contribuent directement à l'apprentissage et celles qui y contribuent indirectement
Direct and indirect learning strategies are categorized into eight sub-groups, each containing more specific strategies The table below outlines the strategies identified in Rubin's classification.
Tableau 1.2 : Classification des stratégies d’apprentissage des langues de
Groupes de stratégies Sous- groupes de stratégies
Stratégies directes 1) clarification/ vérification, 2) surveillance, 3) mémorisation,
4) supposition/ inférences inductives, 5) raisonnement déductif, 6) pratique
Stratégies indirectes 1) création d'opportunités de pratique, 2) astuces de production b) Classification d’O'Malley et Chamot
La classification d’O’Malley et Chamot (1990) est adaptée de O’Malley et al
In 1985, the metacognitive and cognitive categories closely align with Rubin's (1981) indirect and direct strategies O'Malley and Chamot (1990) identify three primary types of learning strategies: cognitive, metacognitive, and socio-affective These main strategies are further categorized into various sub-strategies.
Cognitive strategies directly influence incoming information by manipulating it to enhance learning This includes deducing meaning from context, utilizing dictionaries and grammar books, retaining information through memorization, repetition, and mnemonic devices, as well as writing it down and retrieving information effectively.
Metacognitive strategies are high-level skills that encompass planning, monitoring, and evaluating the success of a learning activity For instance, self-management involves setting goals, tracking progress, and conducting self-assessments.
Social and emotional strategies involve interactions with others or managing one's emotions This includes cooperation with classmates, friends, and teachers, as well as using English in conversations with other English speakers.
Tableau 1.3 : Classification d’O'Malley et Chamot (1990)
Organisation avancée, Préparation avancée, Planification fonctionnelle, Attention sélective, Autosurveillance, Auto- évaluation, Auto-régulation
Stratégies cognitives Utilisation de ressources, Groupement, Prise de note, Imagerie
Représentation auditive, Élaboration, Transfert, Déduction
Question pour clarification, Coopération, Parler à soi-même c) Classification d’Oxford
Sur la base des recherches antérieures sur les stratégies d'apprentissage, Oxford
Conclusion
This chapter aims to provide a literature review on two key theoretical concepts relevant to this research: the production of argumentative text writing and the teaching of writing strategies.
In our exploration of argumentative writing, we examined the concept of written production and its specific properties in both L1 and L2 contexts We defined argumentative texts, highlighting their characteristics and structure It is important to note that the theoretical framework surrounding written production and argumentative texts aids in the development of research tools and experimental programs Finally, the literature review on argumentative texts proved valuable in situating our research effectively.
In examining writing strategies, we have outlined the evolution of research in this field, providing a synthesis of studies focused on language learning strategies in general and writing strategies specifically We highlighted the importance of teaching learning strategies and their role in enhancing the writing process.
This article presents a synthesis of empirical research on writing strategies, highlighting their significant role in learners' writing activities It reviews findings from previous studies on teaching writing strategies, identifying key insights and notable limitations that informed our research questions Additionally, it discusses 60 models proposed by various researchers, emphasizing emerging trends in the field.