簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 徐惠娟
Hsu, Brenda Hui-chuan
論文名稱： 台灣大一學生藉由網路閱讀及摘要寫作活動
A Case Study of the Process of Web-based Reading and Summary Writing for EFL College Novice Writers in Taiwan
指導教授： 林至誠
Lin, Chih-cheng
學位類別： 博士
Doctor
系所名稱： 英語學系
Department of English
論文出版年： 2003
畢業學年度： 91
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 160
中文關鍵詞： 網路閱讀 、摘要寫作 、電腦網路語言學習 、英語寫作過程教學 、結合讀寫活動
英文關鍵詞： web-based reading, summary writing, network-based language learning, Pedagogy in EFL writing process, reading and writing connection
論文種類： 學術論文
相關次數： 點閱：275  下載：16 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 本研究目的在探討大一學生學習英語寫作的過程，網路閱讀及摘要寫作的活動主要是協助英語寫作的初學者，意識到如何撰寫一篇具有完整架構及文意表達清楚的文章。研究問題則包括（1）大一學生參與網路閱讀及摘要寫作活動過程的表現為何？（2）在完成這兩個活動後，參與的大一學生對於幫助自己英語寫作能力之看法為何？（3）在整個寫作過程中，參與大一學生的情境表現為何？
    參與本研究的學生為十二位就讀國立台灣師範大學英語系的大一新生。本研究採用問卷（questionnaires）、訪談（interviews）、觀察（observations）、摘要寫作之評量指標（evaluation guidelines）、及英文寫作評分標準（the composition scoring scheme）的方式來蒐集和分析資料。
    研究結果顯示，參與的大一學生透過網路閱讀活動，藉由與網路互動中，建構寫作的想法，同時，學生會使用較高層次的閱讀認知策略（top-down cognitive strategies），除此之外，學生問題解決及批判性思考的能力培養，亦有助於學生在寫作過程中規劃（planning）的認知活動。而摘要寫作活動，則是協助參與大一學生如何處理他們所閱讀的文章，轉換成（transform）寫作成品，解決了他們在撰寫英語寫作所碰到的問題。且發現學生除了注意表面層次的寫作（surface-level writing）之外，也會著重在廣義層面的寫作（macro-level writing）。另外，從參與大一學生看法的角度而言，整體的結果顯示，對於網路閱讀及摘要寫作活動，學生皆抱持著積極的態度。而大部分的參與大一學生，皆能採取較謹慎的判斷力，在網路的環境中選擇英語閱讀文本，更重要的是，提供有意義、有趣的及有效的學習活動，能夠讓學生擁有成就感，增加他們接受較具有挑戰性學習活動的意願。至於，參與大一學生在從事寫作的認知活動當中，沒有產生負面的寫作焦慮。在結論中，本研究除了提供教學上的建議，也提出了不足之處（如：活動之成效，及結論之廣泛性而言），以提供將來從事相關研究之參考。

    The purpose of this study was to investigate EFL college novice writers’ learning process in English writing. Web-based reading and summary writing activities were designed to help L2 English writers develop metacognitive knowledge for composing a well-organized and acceptable writing. The focuses of research questions were: (1) the process of participants’ performances in web-based reading and summary writing, (2) their perception of experiencing these two activities for English writing, and (3) their affective state in EFL writing process.
    The case study approach was used to conduct this present study. Twelve freshmen of English majors at National Taiwan Normal University in Taiwan participated in this study. The study employed questionnaires, interviews, observations, evaluation guidelines, and the composition scoring scheme to collect and analyze data. The results indicated participants’ ideas were interactively generated and their top-down cognitive strategies were activated in web-based hypertext. In addition, cultivation of problem-solving and critical thinking ability was found conducive to ideas planning in their writing process. Through the summary writing activity, processing L2 English reading texts could be transformed into written products for solving L2 writers’ problems in English writing. Participants attended to not only surface-level writing but also macro-level writing. As for participants’ perception, the overall results indicated their positive attitude toward these activities. Most participants showed prudent judgment in selecting reading materials on web-based hypertext. The findings further exhibited that meaningful, interesting and effective tasks made them feel a sense of achievement and willingness to undertake challenging activities. Writing anxiety, negative affection, was not raised when participants involved in cognitive activities within the complex writing process. The conclusion of the current study provides pedagogical implications. Limitations, the effects or generalized results for all EFL writers, and suggestions for future research were also presented.

    TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract i Acknowledgments iii Table of Contents iv List of Tables ix List of Figures xi 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background and Motivation 1 1.2 Purposes of the Study 3 1.3 Significance of the Study 6 1.4 Definition of Terms 7 1.5 Abbreviation of Terms 9 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 10 2.1 Writing Process in EFL Writing Pedagogy 10 2.2 Reading and Writing Connection 14 2.2.1 Relationship between reading and writing 14 2.2.2 Reading-to-write process 16 2.2.3 Viewpoints from second language acquisition 17 2.3 Summary Writing 18 2.4 Integration of Web-based Activities with the Teaching of EFL Writing Process 26 2.4.1 The application of web-based activities for language learning 26 2.4.2 The application of web-based activities in the writing process 28 2.4.3 The role of web-based hypertext in reading and writing Connection 29 2.5 The Process of Web-based EFL Writing in Accordance with EFL/ESL Pedagogy 34 2.5.1 Language learners’ individual learning conditions 35 2.5.2 Language learners’ ability development 36 2.5.3 Authenticity for language learning 37 2.6 Summary 39 2.7 Research Questions 39 3. METHODOLOGY 41 3.1 Participants 41 3.2 Procedure of the Study 44 3.2.1 Instructional session 44 3.2.2 Summary writing training session 46 3.2.3 Final project session 47 3.3 Instruments 48 3.3.1 Questionnaires 48 3.3.2 Evaluation guidelines 49 3.3.3 Composition scoring scheme 51 3.3.4 Observations 52 3.3.5 Interviews 52 3.3.6 Procedure sheets in the final project 52 3.4. Data Collection Procedure and Analysis 53 3.4.1 Data collection procedure 53 3.4.2 Data analysis 54 3.4.2.1 summary writings, compositions and one of participants’ previous assignments 55 3.4.2.2 the responses to questionnaires and interviews 56 3.4.2.3 the responses to the second language writing apprehension test 57 3.4.2.4 the records in the procedure sheets and video-recorded data 57 4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 58 4.1 Web-based Reading Activity 58 4.1.1 Students’ experiences of reading on web-based hypertext 58 4.1.2 Web-based reading activity in the final project 60 4.1.2.1 how participants dealt with the information found by the search engine 61 4.1.2.2 participants’ choosing topics and reading materials 62 4.1.3 Participants’ perception of the web-based reading activity 66 4.1.3.1 hyperlinks on the WWW 66 4.1.3.2 influence of web-based L2 English reading on participants’ cognitive process 67 4.1.3.3 participants’ evaluation and reflection on the web-based reading activity 68 4.1.4 Web-based reading: Ideas constructed and ideas discovered to solve problems in EFL writing process 69 4.2 Summary Writing Activity 71 4.2.1 Participants’ performances in summary writing in the training session 71 4.2.1.1 participants’ viewpoints toward reading texts 72 4.2.1.2 participants’ performances in summary writings 1 and 2 72 4.2.2 Participants’ metacognitive knowledge in EFL writing 77 4.2.3 Summary writing for EFL writers’ metacognitive knowledge development 78 4.2.4 Participants’ performances in summary writing for compositions in the final project session 80 4.2.4.1 participants’ performances in summary writing for writing a composition 80 4.2.4.2 the effect of summary writing on participants’ writing performances 85 4.2.5 Participants’ perception of the summary writing activity 88 4.2.5.1 difficulties in doing the summary writing activity 89 4.2.5.2 advantages from doing summary writing activities 90 4.2.5.3 participants’ attitudes toward the summary writing activity 94 4.2.6 Participants’ affective state in the writing process 97 4.3 Summary 99 5. CONCLUSION 101 5.1 Pedagogical Implications 101 5.2 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research 103 5.3 Conclusion 104 REFERENCES 109 APPENDIX A 120 APPENDIX B 124 APPENDIX C 125 APPENDIX D 128 APPENDIX E 131 APPENDIX F 134 APPENDIX G 137 APPENDIX H 139 APPENDIX I 140 APPENDIX J 142 APPENDIX K 144 APPENDIX L 145 APPENDIX M 147 APPENDIX N 148 APPENDIX O 149 APPENDIX P 156 APPENDIX Q 160

    REFERENCES
    Barnhardt, E. B. (1991). The Nature of second language reading. In Reading Development in a Second Language, pp. 1-17. Alex Publishing Company.
    Bauman, M. L. (1999). The evolution of Internet genres. Computers and Composition, 16, 269-282.
    Belisle, R. (1996). E-mail activities in the ESL writing class. The Internet TESL Journal, 2 (12), http://www.aitech.ac.jp/~iteslj/.
    Blin, F. (1999). CALL and the development of learner autonomy. In J. Egbert and E. Hanson-Smith, CALL Environments: Research, Practice, and Critical Issues (pp.113-147). TESOL Inc.
    Braine, G. (1997). Beyond word processing: Networked computers in ESL writing classes. Computers and Composition, 14, 45-58.
    Brandl, K. (2002). Integrating internet-based reading materials into the foreign language curriculum: From teacher- to student-centered approaches. Language Learning & Teaching, 6, 87-107.
    Campbell, C. (1987). Writing with others’ words: using background reading text in academic compositions. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 211-230). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Carrell, P. L. (1987). Text as interaction: Some implications of text analysis and reading research for ESL composition. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing in a Second Language: Insights From First and Second Language Teaching and Research (pp. 40-47). Longman.
    Casazza, M. E. (1993). Using a model of direct instruction to teach summary writing in a college reading class. Journal of Reading, 37, 202-208.
    Chang. Y-P. (2000). A Study on the Performance of Summary Strategy Embedded in the Web-based Environment. Master Thesis at Graduate Institute of Information Education National Taiwan Normal University.
    Chapelle, C. A. (1999). Theory and research: Investigation of “authentic” language learning task. In J. Egbert and E. Hanson-Smith, CALL Environments: Research, Practice, and Critical Issues (pp.101-115). TESOL Inc.
    Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition: Foundations for Teaching, Testing, and Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Cheng, Y-S., Horwitz, E. K., & Schallert, D. L. (1999). Language anxiety: Differentiating writing and speaking components. Language Learning, 49 (3), 417-446.
    Chiang, M-C. (1999). The Effects of Model-based Instruction on Chinese Students’ English Writing. Master Thesis of Graduate Institute of English National Taiwan Normal University.
    Corbett, E. P. J. (1987). Teaching composition: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing in a Second Language: Insights from First and Second Language Teaching and Research (pp. 2-9). Longman.
    Daly, J. A., & Miller, M. D. (1975). The empirical development of an instrument to measure writing apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 9, 242-249.
    Debski, R., & Levy, M. (Eds.). (1999). WORLDCALL: Global Perspectives on Computer-Assisted Language Learning. The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger B.V.
    Deming, M. P. (2000). Reading and writing: Making the connection for basic writers. BWe: Basic Writing e-Journal, 2, July 2000, http://www.asu.edu/clas/english/composition/cbw/summer_2000_V2N2.htm#Mary
    Devine, J., Railey, K, & Boshoff, P. (1993). The implications of cognitive models in L1 and L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2, 203-225.
    Dewitt, S. L. (1996). The current nature of hypertext research in computers and composition studies: An historical perspective. Computers and Composition, 13, 69-84.
    DiPardo, A., & DiPardo, M. (1990). Towards the metapersonal essay: Exploring the potential of hypertext in the composition class. Computers and composition, 7 (3), 7-22.
    Egbert, J., & Hanson-Smith, E. (Eds). (1999). CALL Environments: Research, Practice, and Critical Issues. TESOL Inc.
    Egbert, J., Chao, C-C., & Hanson-Smith, E. (1999). Computer-enhanced language environments: An overview. In J. Egbert and E. Hanson-Smith, CALL Environments: Research, Practice, and Critical Issues (pp.1-13). TESOL Inc.
    Eisterhold, J. C. (1990). Reading-writing connections: Towards a description for second language learners. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 88-101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Eldred, J. M. (1991). Pedagogy in the computer-networked classroom. Computers and Composition, 8, 47-61.
    Ellis, R. (1996). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
    Feng, H-P. (2001). Writing an Academic Paper in English: An Exploratory Study of Six Taiwanese Graduate Students. Dissertation at Teachers College of Columbia University.
    Flower, L., Stein, V., Ackerman, J., Kantz, M. J., McCormick, K., & Peck, W. C. (1990). Reading to Write: Exploring a Cognitive & Social Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Flower, L. S., & Hayer, J. R. (1977). Problem-solving strategies and the writing process. College English, 39, 449-461.
    Fox, G. (1998). The Internet: Making it work in the ESL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, 4 (9), September 1998, http://iteslj.org/Articles/Fox-Internet.html.
    Ganderton, R. (1999). Interactivity in L2 web-based reading. In R. Debski and M. Levy (Eds.), WORLDCALL: Global Perspectives on Computer-Assisted Language Learning (pp. 49-66). The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger B.V.
    Goodman, K., & Goodman, Y. (1983). Reading and writing relationships: Pragmatic functions. Language Arts, 60 (5), 590-599.
    Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory & Practice of Writing. London: Longman.
    Graus, J. (1999). An Evaluation of the Usefulness of the Internet in the EFL Classroom. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Nijmegen.
    Greaney, G. L. (1997). Less is more: Summary writing and sentence structure in the advanced ESL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, 3 (9), September 1997, http://www.aitech.ac.jp/~iteslj/Techniques/Greaney-Writing.html.
    Gresham, M. (2000). The new frontier: Conquering the world wild web by mule. Computers and Composition, 16 (3), http://corax.cwrl.utexas.edu/cac/archives/v16/16_3_html/16_3_feature.html.
    Gu, P., & Xu, Z. (1999). Improving EFL learning environment through networking. In R. Debski and M. Levy (Eds.), WORLDCALL: Global Perspectives on Computer-Assisted Language Learning (pp. 169-184). The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger B.V.
    Harris, L. D. (1996). The Internet-based composition classroom: A study in pedagogy. Computers and Composition, 13, 353-371.
    Hayes, D. A. (1989). Helping students GRASP the knack of writing summaries. Journal of Reading, 96-101.
    Head, M. H. (1986). Factors Affecting Summary writing and Their Impact on Reading Comprehension Assessment. Dissertation at the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical.
    Hidi, S., & Anderson, V. (1986). Producing written summaries: task demands, cognitive operations, and implications for instruction. Review of Educational Research, 56 (4), pp. 473-493.
    Hoter, E. (2002). A Model for Learning how to Teach Advanced Literacy Skills via Computer Mediated Communication. Dissertation published online. http://www.talpiot.ac.il/elaine/index.htm.
    Huang, S-Y. (1998). The value of networked computers in teaching EFL writing. Paper from Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 519-528). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Company, LTd.
    Huang, S-Y. (1999). EFL students’ use of ideas provided by peers during prewriting discussions conducted on networked computers. Paper from Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 334-341). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Company, LTd.
    Huang, J-Y. (1999). Rethinking of Internet use in an EFL writing classroom. Paper from the Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 363-373). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Company, LTd.
    Johnson, D. M. (1992). Approaches to Research in Second Language Learning. London: Longman.
    Juan, E. U., & Palmer, J. C. (1998). A product-focused approach to text summarization. The Internet TESL Journal, 4 (1), January 1998, http://iteslj.org/Articles/Juan-TextSummary.html.
    Karchmer, R. A. (2001). The journey ahead: Thirteen teachers report how the Internet influences literacy and literacy instruction in their K-12 classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 442-466.
    Kern, R., & Warschauer, M. (Eds.). (2000). Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Kim, S. A. (2001). Characteristics of EFL readers' summary writing: A study with Korean university students. Foreign Language Annals, 34, 569-581.
    Kirkland, M. R., & Saunders, M. A. P. (1991). Maximizing student performance in summary writing: Managing cognitive load. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 105-121.
    Kozma, R. B. (1991). Computer-based writing tools and the cognitive needs of novice writers. Computers and Composition, 8 (2), 31-45.
    Krajka, J. (2000). Using the Internet in ESL writing instruction. The Internet TESL Journal, 6 (11), November 2000, http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Krajka-WritingUsingNet.html.
    Kramsch, C., A’Ness, D., & Lam, W. H. E. (2000). Authenticity and authorship in the computer-mediated acquisition of L2 literacy. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (2), September 2000, http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/kramsch/default.html.
    Lafford P. A., & Lafford B. A. (1997). Learning language and culture with internet technologies. In M. D. Bush and R. M. Terry (Eds.), Technology-Enhanced Language Learning (pp. 215-262). National Textbook Company.
    Leki, I. (1992). L2 composing: Strategies and perceptions. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing in a Second Language: Insights from First and Second Language Teaching and Research (pp. 27-37). Longman.
    Leeds, B. (1996). Writing in a Second Language: Insights from First and Second Language Teaching and Research. Longman.
    Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Concepts and Conceptualization. Oxford: Clarendon.
    Lee, K-W. (2000). Energizing the ESL/EFL classroom through Internet activities. The Internet TESL Journal, 6 (4), April 2000, http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-InternetActivities.html
    Liao, C-C. (1999). E-mailing to improve EFL learners’ reading and writing abilities: Taiwan experience. The Internet TESL Journal, http://www.aitech.ac.jp/~iteslj/.
    Lin, C-C., & Hsu, H-C. (2001). EFL students’ perceptions of web-based reading-writing activities. Paper from Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 525-533). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Company, LTd.
    Lin, C-C., & Hsu, H-C. (2002). WWW materials and EFL summary writing: Web-based reading-writing connection. Unpublished paper presented in 37th 2002 RELC International Seminar.
    Lin, C-L. (2002). Constructivism and Second Language Learning: A Web-based Reading-Writing Activity. Master Thesis at Graduate Institute of English National Taiwan Normal University.
    Liu, C-K. (1996). Between reading and writing. Research on English Composition. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Lte.
    Moran, C. (1990). The computer writing room: Authority and control. Computers and Composition, 7 (2), 61-69.
    Muehleisen, V. (1997). Projects using the Internet in college English classes. The Internet TESL Journal, 3 (6), June 1997, http://iteslj.org/Lessons/Muehleisen-Projects.html.
    Oded, B., & Walters, J. (2001). Deeper processing for better EFL reading comprehension. System, 29, 357-370.
    Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning & Technology, 1, July 1997, http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/ortega/default.html.
    Palmquist, M. E. (1993). Network-supported interaction in two writing classrooms. Computers and Composition, 9 (4), 25-57.
    Pan, S-H. (2002). A Study of the Effects of Summary Writing with Structure Guidelines on the Writing of EFL Beginning Writers. Master Thesis at Graduate Institute of Foreign Languages and Literature National Cheng Kung University.
    Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing in a Second Language: Insights from First and Second Language Teaching and Research (pp.10-26). Longman.
    Radmacher, S. A., & Latosi-Sawin, E. (1995). Summary writing: A tool to improve student comprehension and writing in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (2), 113-115.
    Reid, J. M. (1993). Teaching ESL Writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
    Reid, J. M. (1994). The Process of Paragraph Writing. The United States: Prentice Hall Regents.
    Rosenblatt, L. (1994). The transational theory of reading and writing. In Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, pp. 1057-1092.
    Ruiz-Funes, M. (1999a). The process of reading-to-write used by a skilled Spanish-as- a-foreign-language student: A case study. Foreign Language Annuals, 32 (1), 45-62.
    Ruiz-Funes, M. (1999b). Writing, reading, and reading-to-write in a foreign language: A critical review. Foreign Language Annuals, 32 (4), 514-526.
    Schultz, F. M. (2000). Computers and collaborative writing in the foreign language curriculum. In M. Warschauer and R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based Language Learning: Concepts and Practice (pp.121-150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Singhal, M. (1997). The Internet and foreign language education: Benefits and challenges. The Internet TESL Journal, 3 (6), June 1997, http://iteslj.org/Articles/Singhal-Internet.html.
    Slatin, J. (1990). Reading hypertext: Order and coherence in a new medium. College English, 52, 870-883.
    Sorapure, M., Inglesby, P., & Yatchisin, G. (1998). Web literacy: Challenges and opportunities for research in a new medium. Computers and Composition, 15, 409- 424.
    Spack, R. (1984). Invention strategies and the ESL college composition student. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing in a Second Language: Insights from First and Second Language Teaching and Research (pp. 98-113). Longman.
    Stein, V. (1990). Exploring the cognition of reading-to-write. In L. Flower, V. Stein, J. Ackerman, M. J. Kantz, K. McCormick, & W. C. Pecki (Eds.), Reading-to-write: Exploring a Cognitive and Social Process (pp. 119-143). New York: Oxford University Press.
    Susser, B. (1993). Networks and project work: Alternative pedagogies for writing with computers. Computers and Composition, 10 (3), 63-89.
    Susser, B. (1994). Process approaches in ESL/EFL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3 (1), 31-47.
    Takayoshi, P. (1996). The shape of electronic writing: Evaluation and assessing computer-assisted writing processes and product. Computers and Composition, 13, 245-257.
    Taylor, K. K. (1984). The different summary skills of inexperienced and professional writers. Journal of Reading, 691-699.
    Trokeloshvili, E. A., & Jost, N. H. (1997). The Internet and foreign language instruction: Practice and discussion. The Internet TESL Journal, 3 (8), August 1997, http://iteslj.org/Articles/Trokeloshvili-Internet.html.
    Valeri-Gold, M. (1990). A summary writing strategy for secondary and college developmental students. Ohio Reading Teacher, 25 (1), 41-42.
    Victori, M. (1999). An analysis of writing knowledge in EFL composing: A case study of two effective and two less effective writers. System, 27, 537-555.
    Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds). (2000). Network-based Language Learning: Concepts and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Warschauer, M. (2002). A developmental perspective on technology in language education. TESOL Quarterly, 36 (3), 453-475.
    Yan, S-C. (1998). The World Wide Web as an EFL writing tool. Paper from Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 897-903). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Company, LTd.
    Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: the process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 16 (2), 195-209.
    Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17 (2), 165-187.

    QR CODE