IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v9y2016i3p139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the Effects of Four Instructional Treatments on EFL Students’ Achievement in Writing Classified Ads

Author

Listed:
  • Farzaneh Khodabandeh

Abstract

The current study set out to compare the effect of traditional and non-traditional instructional treatments; i.e. explicit, implicit, task-based and no-instruction approaches on students’ abilities to learn how to write classified ads. 72 junior students who have all taken a course in Reading Journalistic Texts at the Payame-Noor University streamed by performing a TOEFL proficiency test. The selected participants were randomly divided into the following four groups; an explicit group which received direct instruction; an implicit group which were instructed indirectly, and the self-study group with no-instruction treatment in comparison to the task-based group which were asked to prepare a classified ad. A pre-test and a post-test were administered before and after the treatment. The moves in classified ads pre- and post- tests were analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistics. The quantitative analysis of the post-tests revealed that the explicit and task-based groups outperformed the implicit and self-study instruction groups. The findings of this research offer English teachers the chance to reconsider their practices and performances through the advantages and disadvantages of the traditional and new techniques which were employed in the current research and combine them to help learners improve their reading and writing skills.

Suggested Citation

  • Farzaneh Khodabandeh, 2016. "Comparing the Effects of Four Instructional Treatments on EFL Students’ Achievement in Writing Classified Ads," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(3), pages 139-139, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/57363/30628
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/57363
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rebekha Abbuhl, 2011. "Using Models in Writing Instruction," SAGE Open, , vol. 1(3), pages 21582440114, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alastair M Kilpatrick & Audra Anjum & Lonnie Welch, 2020. "Ten simple rules for designing learning experiences that involve enhancing computational biology Wikipedia articles," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-12, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.