Chapter Three : Data Analysis and Interpretation

Introduction

[Link] Teachers’ Questionnaire

3.1.1. Description of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

3.1.2. Analysis and Interpretation of the Results of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

3.1.3. Overall Analysis of the Results of the written expression Teachers’ Questionnaire

3.2. The quasi-experimental study

3.2.1. Description of the Tests

[Link] .Pre-Test & Post-Test

[Link]. Control group & Experimental group

3.2.2. The Treatment ( the use of DCSI in writing )

3.2.3. Statistical Analysis and Interpretation of the Tests’ Results

[Link] Analysis of the Tests’ Results

Conclusion

Limitations of the study and suggestions for further Research

References

Appendices
Introduction

The research is conducted by using the mixed approach , two research tools are used to
collect the data. A teachers‘ questionnaire and A students’ test. The questionnaire was
administered to 10 written expression teachers at the Department of Letters and English at the
university of “Kasdi Merbah” Ouargla to get better insight on whether they use direct
cognitive strategy instruction in writing or not . It aims at gathering information about their
attitudes towards students’ writing problems, the use of direct cognitive instruction in writing.
Whereas , The students’ test is designed to explore the learners’ use of writing strategies . The
main aim is to assess the effect of direct cognitive strategy instruction on the learners’ second
language writing ;thus, the post –test has been administered to highlight the impact of
cognitive strategy instruction on the students’ performance in writing .Two groups are
randomly selected (each group consists of 30 students) . The difference between our sample is
that the experimental group received the treatment ,while the control group did not . At the
beginning of the year , both groups had a pre-test at the same time, and after the treatment
phase , the researcher administered a post-test . Between the tests , the experimental group
were taught how to use direct cognitive strategy instruction specifically the use of mind
mapping technique in writing. The pre-test and the post-test were similar in the form
( questions , categories ,and division), but the only difference was in the context to avoid
biased results .

The Teachers’ Questionnaire

1. Description of the Teachers’ Questionnaire

The teachers’ questionnaire consists of 20 questions , which are

divided into three sections. Section one “Teachers’ Profile” (Q1 , Q6) ,
it provides insights on teachers’ experience and specialty (Q1 , Q2) , the
most modules they have taught (Q3) , their experience in teaching written
expression, and the most difficult skill to teach and why (Q5 , Q6). Section
two “ The Writing Skill” (Q7 , Q12) concerned with the students’
weaknesses and strengths in writing ( Q7 , Q8) ,ways to improve students’
writing skill (Q9) , writing activities that teachers usually assign to their
students and the aim behind them (Q10) , teachers’ approaches in
teaching writing (Q11), and the essential elements teachers should teach
to their students(Q12) . Section three “Awareness of direct cognitive
strategy instruction implementation, and its significance”
(Q13,Q20) is designed to know teachers’ opinion about the most
successful learners (Q13) , the use of strategies by students (Q14), the
significance of using cognitive processes (Q15), and which cognitive step
their student use while writing (Q16) the effectiveness of direct cognitive
strategy instruction with the justification (Q17 , Q18) , the use of mind
mapping and its significance (Q19, Q20).

Analysis and Interpretation of the Results of the Teachers’

Questionnaire

Section One: Teachers’ Profile

Q1. How long have you been teaching English?

Table 2.1: Teaching English Experience

Options N %
Less than five years 2 20 %
Five to eight years 4 40%
Eight to twelve years 2 20%
More 2 20%
Total 10 100%

As the Table 2.1 shows that two teachers have a long in teaching English representing 20%
plus two who exceed that ( more than twelve years ) representing 20% . while 4 of them
taught English for five to eight years representing 40% , and 2 teachers taught less than five
years representing 20%. This implies that our teachers are experienced in teaching English ,
which means that collected data can be relied on .

Q2. Are you specialized in...?

Table 2.2. Teachers’ Specialty

Options N %
Linguistics 5 50%
Translation 0 0%
Literature 3 30%
didactics 2 20%
Total 10 100%

The results show that the majority of the teachers representing (50%) are specialized in
linguistics, 3 teachers are specialized in in literature, and only two of them in didactics while
none of the teachers are specialized in translation .

[Link] is/are the module(s) you have taught the most?

The obtained results show that all teachers have taught written expression and other modules
which are : oral expression , grammar , ESP , research methodology, didactics , creative
writing , phonetics , linguistics , civilization and literature . This indicates that the responses
are qualified to provide valid data .

Q4. How long have you been teaching written expression ?

Table 2.3. Teachers’ Experience in Teaching Written Expression

Options N %
1-4 years 6 60%
5-10 years 1 10%
More than 10 years 3 30%
Total 10 100%

Concerning teachers’ experience in teaching written expression, 30% have been teaching
this module for more than 10 years, and only one teacher have taught written expression
between 5 to 10 years representing 10% .whereas 6 teachers (60%) have less than five years’
experience in teaching written expression .This indicates that our teachers have taught written
expression, which make their contribution to the study can be relied on.

Q5. What is the most difficult skill to teach? (Choose one)

Table 2.4. The Most Difficult Skill To Teach

 Options N %
Reading 0 0%
Writing 10 100%
Listening 0 0%
Speaking 0 0%
Total 10 100%

As expected all teachers (100%) have chosen writing as the most difficult skill for teachers to
teach ,thus this skill requires efforts and practice from learners to be developed .

Q6. Please, explain why.

All teachers agree that writing is the most difficult skill to teach, due to the fact that it
requires much efforts from them to get students used to all the skills needed to write
better .Moreover, they confirmed that students understand the written expression lessons very
well but when it comes to writing they struggle in constructing sentences because of many
reasons such as lack of vocabulary knowledge ,grammar , mechanics , coherence and
cohesion .

Section Two: The Writing Skill

Q7. What are your students’ weaknesses in writing ( choose one)

Table 2.5. Students’ weaknesses in writing

Options N %
Vocabulary 2 20%
Grammar 3 30%
Spelling, punctuation 4 40%
Ideas/content 1 10%
Self-confidence and 0 0%
motivation
Total 10 100%

According to the teachers, Spelling, punctuation (40%) and Grammar (30%) are the most
students’ weaknesses in writing. while 20% of the teachers have said vocabulary and 10% of
them have chosen ideas /content. They added other elements like language
interference( Arabic / French ) , fluency and coherence.

Q8. What are your students’ strengths in writing ? ( choose one )

Table 2.6. Students’ strengths in writing.

Options N %
Grammar 2 20%
Vocabulary 3 30%
Spelling, punctuation , 0 0%
capitalization
Content/ideas 5 50%
Total 10 100%

As the Table 2.6 shows that 50% of the teachers (half of the respondents) answered by
content / ideas. The other five teachers answered by vocabulary (30%) and grammar (20%) .

[Link] can you improve your students’ writing skill?

Table 2.7. Ways To Improve Students Writing Skill .

Options N %
Through practice 1 10%
Through reading 0 0%
Both 9 90%
Total 10 100%

The results obtained that the majority of the teachers (90%) agree that both practice and
reading help students to improve their writing skill. While only 10% of them concentrate on
practice only. They added other elements like collaborative writing and direct instruction.

Q10. Which writing activities do you usually assign to your students? State the aim
behind such activities.

The following activities are assigned by teachers to their students:

  Give the students something to read to see the structure then show them how to write .
 Practice writing through: paragraph writing, fill in the gaps, paraphrasing, grammar
based activities, essay writing .
 Brainstorming to map and organize their thoughts in a form of mind map.
 Pair work: to help students share ideas and check their mistakes .

Q11. Which approach do you follow when teaching writing?

Table 2.8. Approaches That Teachers Use in Teaching Writing

Options N %
The product approach 0 0%
The process approach 1 10%
Both 7 70%
The genre approach 1 10%
The strategy approach 1 10%
Total 10 100%

As seen from Table 2.8 ,the results show that most of teachers (70%) use the product
process approach, which focuses on both the different steps of writing process and the
students’ final product. This indicates that the most used approach of teaching writing is the
product process approach.

Q12. According to you, which elements in writing do you regard the most essential to be
taught to students?

Table 2.9. The Most Essential Elements In Writing

Options N %
Grammar 0 0%
Vocabulary 0 0%
Spelling, punctuation, 1 10%
capitalization
All the previous mentioned 9 90%
ones
Total 10 100%
 As it is indicated in the table above, The majority of teachers (90%) agree that all the
elements: grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, and capitalization should be taught to
the students, thus they are essential in writing. they added discourse-based approach with
reference to discourse makers as essential elements in writing.

Section Three: Awareness of Direct cognitive strategy instruction implementation, and

its significance

Q13. The most successful learners are strategic ones.

Table 2.10. The Most Successful Learners

Options N %
Agree 8 80%
Disagree 0 0%
Not sure 2 20%
Total 10 100%

As Table 2.10 shows that only two teachers are not sure. While, The majority of the
teachers (80%) agree that the most successful learners are strategic ones. This indicates that
the teachers are aware of the significant role of strategies .

Q14. According to you, do EFL students apply some strategies when writing a
paragraph?

All the teachers agree that only part of EFL students apply some strategies when they are
writing a paragraph. This means that students’ problems in writing are due to limited use of
strategies.

Q15. To which extent do you think the use of cognitive processes is essential in writing
a paragraph?

Table 2.11. the Importance Of Using Cognitive Processes

Options N %
Important 9 90%
 Somehow Important 1 10%
Optional 0 0%
Total 10 100%

The majority of teachers (90%) think that the use of cognitive processes is essential in
writing a paragraph as they help students to produce a high-quality written piece. This implies
that written expression teachers are aware of the importance of applying cognitive processes
in writing.

Q16. Which of the following cognitive steps do you think the students use while writing
a paragraph ?

Table 2.12. Teachers Attitudes Towards The Students’ Use Of The Cognitive Steps .

Options N %
Clarification 1 10%
Retrieval 0 0%
Resourcing 0 0%
Deferral 0 0%
Avoidance 0 0%
Verification 2 2%
All of them 7 70%
Total 10 100%

As expected 70% of teachers have answered that their students apply all the cognitive
steps when they are writing a paragraph. whereas, 20% of the teachers have answered
verification and 10% of them choose clarification. According to teachers’ respondents, their
students are aware of the importance of using all these steps together to come up with high
quality writing.

Q17. Is it important for learners to be aware of direct cognitive strategy instruction

which would help them learn how to write more effectively?

Table 2.13. Teachers Opinions About The Importance Of DCSI

Options N %
Yes 10 100%
No 0 0%
Total 10 100%

The aim of this question is to know the teachers’ opinions about the effectiveness of direct
cognitive strategy instruction in improving students’ writing skill. Our teachers have
answered positively representing 100% that student need to be taught DCSI and how/when to
use it to develop their writing performance .

Q 18. Please, explain why.

The question is formulated to let teachers explain their thoughts about the importance of
using DCSI in writing. They said writing is a cognitive process in which students are going to
brainstorm ideas, recall and organize them then put them in order. DCSI will help them to be
more methodical and preformant. Moreover, they emphasize that students must be aware of
DCSI and writing strategies to know how the paragraph or the essay is structured and the way
it will be easy to write it.

Q19 . Do you advise your students to use Mind Mapping technique?

Table 2.14. Teachers’ Advice About The Use Of Mind Mapping .

Options N %
Yes 10 100%
No 0 0%
Total 10 100%

As Table 2.14 shows, all teachers (100%) said that they advise their students to use mind
mapping technique. This indicates that they are aware of its significance in the pre-writing
stage.

Q20. Do you think that Mind Mapping technique would help students develop their
ideas easily?

Table 2.15. The Significance of Mind Mapping Technique

 Options N %
A lot 10 100%
A little 0 0
Not at all 0 0
Total 10 100%
According to the results, all teachers (100%) have chosen the first option in which they
agreed that mind mapping techniques would help students develop their ideas easily. This
means that teachers encourage their student to use mind maps before writing to produce a
well-organized text.

Overall Analysis of the Results of the written expression Teachers’ Questionnaire

From the analysis of the teachers’ questionnaire, the obtained results give us the following
points for discussion .Starting with section one Teachers’ Profile, reveals that the majority of
the teachers are experienced in teaching the English language as well as written expression
module that’s why they admit that writing is the most difficult skill to teach to learners
(representing 100%). In section two, the questionnaire was more focused on writing skill .
The teachers agreed that students difficulties in writing are : spelling, punctuation , grammar ,
vocabulary , language interference ,fluency and coherence as seen in table 2.5. On the other
hand , they mentioned content and ideas as the most students strength in writing ( representing
50%), which reveals that many students are unable to produce clear, correct and
comprehensive written piece . Therefore , our teachers suggested that both practice and
reading help students to improve their writing quality as shown in Table [Link] the
activities they mentioned : pair work activities ,fill in the gaps , paragraph writing ,and the use
of mind mapping as pre writing technique . As seen in 2.8 , 70% of the teachers use the
process product approach in teaching writing in which they focus on both the writing
processes and the final product .They emphasized on teaching grammar , vocabulary ,
punctuation ,capitalization , and spelling as they considered essential in writing. Additionally ,
section three was concerned with The Teachers’ Awareness of direct cognitive Strategy
instruction use in writing. The majority of the teachers are aware of the vital role of using
strategies ,as they agreed that the most successful learners are the strategic ones .However ,
only part of EFL students apply some strategies when they are writing a paragraph. The
obtained results from the Tables 2.11 , and 2.12 show that the majority of the teachers are
conscious about the importance of using all the cognitive processes /steps in producing a
written piece . Moreover , our teachers in (Q17) unanimously agreed on the effectiveness of
direct cognitive strategy instruction in making students more strategic which affect their
writing quality positively . From (Q19,Q20) we notice that all the teachers are aware of the
vital rule of mind mapping as a prewriting technique that’s why they advise their student to
use it in their writing process which help them to organize their ideas easily .

The quasi-experimental study

[Link] of the Tests

[Link]-Test & Post-Test

Two tests were administered to the students: the pre-test and the post-test .The
participants who took part of this experiment are Second Year students at the Department of
Letters and English university “Kasdi Merbah” Ouargla. They are divided into two groups :
experimental group and control group . To examine the effectiveness of DCSI , particularly
the use of mind mapping as a pre-writing technique in developing students’ writing quality.
The tests were done in the written expression sessions. Moreover, the pre-test was about “
writing an introductory paragraph to describe someone you look up to”. It was taken by both
experimental group and control group , at the beginning of the year. After the treatment phase,
the same groups had the post- test which was about “ writing an introductory paragraph to
describe three vacation spots in your country ".

1.2. Control group & Experimental group

Each group consists of 30 students . Concerning the control group , they were taught
using the traditional instruction. While, the experiment group have received a treatment, in
which they are supposed to have sufficient information of the use of mind mapping
technique as an instance of CSI in the writing process. These students had also dealt with
the steps of creating mind maps and aware about how to transform their mind maps into
well-organized introductory paragraph .

[Link] Treatment ( the use of DCSI in writing )

In the department of letters and English at the university “ Kasdi Merbah” Ouargla.
Second year students have written expression session twice a week each session lasts
(1h30mins) .The teacher employs CSI as it is presented in the following lesson plan to the
students followed by a sample mind map with an introductory paragraph .( see appendix
for the other lesson plan)
Lesson plan:01

Time: approximately 60 minutes Module: Written Expression

Topic: Mind Mapping Technique

Class: 2nd Year English L.M.D

Learning style: visual /hands on materials: whiteboard , markers, papers and

pencils
Mind map use : creating mind maps by hands session : organizing and planning before
writing an introductory paragraph
Objectives:
. to create and use mind map in writing their own introductory paragraph about the topic
.to get students participate their ideas about the topic
.to work in groups to create mind maps
Warming up: ask students about mind mapping technique and its effect on their writing
procedures :
. Discuss the purpose of an introductory paragraph
. Introduce the concept of mind mapping to the class.
.Explain how to create a mind map on the whiteboard
.Give an example about how to use it (drawing a mind map about social media ),and transform
this mind map into a paragraph with the help of the students .
. Break the class into groups .
.Give the students a topic such as : smoking
. Let them present their ideas about the topic to the class and discuss .
.Give them time to create their own min maps for their introductory paragraph
. Review the mind maps and let students share what they come up with
practice: ask students to choose a topic and draw a mind map (15minutes) then transform the
mind map into an introductory paragraph .
Evaluation : collecting students mind maps and correcting them .

The mind map

Social media introductory paragraph

Social media has emerged in the late of 19990S to the early of the 2000s. It refers to the
online platforms that enable individuals to create, share, and exchange information through
virtual communities by using social sites including : Facebook, twitter, Instagram, and what’s
app . While social media provides many benefits including such as facilitating connections,
good tool for education, and business opportunities . It also has a negative impact on
individuals mental/physical health, addiction, and lack of privacy.

Statistical Analysis and Interpretation of the Tests’ Results

Our experiment was about dividing students randomly into two groups : control group and
experimental group , in which the experimental group received a treatment ,while the control
group did not .That’s why we use the software SPSS22 to calculate the independent sample
[Link] by considering the test as one tailed significance.

Figure : Compare Means : Independent Sample T Test

 Figure : Define Groups ( control / experimental)

Students’ scores in writing

Table 3: students’ scores in the pretest and post test

Pre Test Scores Post Test Scores

Pre_ test control pre _test Post_test control Post_test
group experimental group group experimental group

7.00 7.00 8,00 9,00

8.25 7.00 8,25 9,00
8.50 8.25 8,25 9,50
8.50 8.25 8,25 10,00
8.50 8.25 8,50 10,50
9.75 9.50 8,50 11,00
9.75 9.50 8,75 12,50
9.75 9.50 8,00 12,00
10.00 9.50 9,00 12,00
10.00 10.00 9,50 12,00
10.00 10.50 9,50 12,00
10.00 11.00 9,50 12,00
10.00 11.00 9,75 12,50
11.25 11.00 10,00 12,75
 11.50 12.00 10,00 12,75
11.50 12.00 10,75 13,00
11.50 12.00 11,00 13,75
12.75 12.00 12,00 13,75
12.75 12.00 12,50 14,50
12.75 12.00 12,75 14,50
12.75 12.00 12,50 14,75
12.75 12.00 12,50 14,75
12.75 12.00 12,50 14,75
12.75 12.00 12,50 14,75
12.75 13.25 12,50 15,50
12.75 14.00 12,50 15,25
12.75 15.00 13 15,25
14.50 16.50 13,25 15,50
16.75 16.50 13,25 17,00
17.00 16.75 17,00 17,00

Pre Experimental versus Pre Control

Group Statistics
Std. Std. Error
Group N Mean Deviation Mean
Pretest Experimental
30 11,4083 2,58350 ,47168
Group
Control group 30 11,3833 2,35139 ,42930

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. Mean Std. 95% Confidence
(2- Differe Error Interval of the
tailed nce Differe Difference
 ) nce Lower Upper
Equal
variances ,053 ,819 ,039 58 ,969 ,02500 ,63780 -1,25169 1,30169
Pret assumed
est Equal
variances not ,039 57,493 ,969 ,02500 ,63780 -1,25193 1,30193
assumed

The previous table was the description of the results of both pre-test experimental / pre-test
control group . As it is observed in the table the “sig(2 tailed )” is 0.969 which is greater than
0.05. Here we can say that there is not a significance difference between both groups in the
pretest scores .

Post experimental versus Post Control

Group Statistics
Std. Std. Error
Group N Mean Deviation Mean
Post Experimental
30 13,1167 2,20670 ,40289
test Group
Control group 30 10,8083 2,20861 ,40323

Independent Samples Test

Levene's
Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Sig. Std. 95% Confidence
(2- Mean Error Interval of the
tailed Differen Differe Difference
F Sig. T df ) ce nce Lower Upper
Post Equal
test variances ,059 ,810 4,050 58 ,000 2,30833 ,57001 1,16733 3,44934
assumed
Equal
58,00
variances not 4,050 ,000 2,30833 ,57001 1,16733 3,44934
0
assumed
 In this study the required t is 1.98at 0.05 level of significance and 58 degree of
freedom .The obtained t is 4.050 except we did not want two tailed test , our hypothesis is one
tailed and there is no alternative way to specify one tailed test in SPSS software , we will
divide the found t by 2 ; hence, it is 2.025 which is higher than 1.98 .It leads to provide our
hypothesis to be valid . In other words , the treatment phase impacted positively the
experimental group by developing students’ writing skill through the use of DCSI .

Overall Analysis of the Tests’ Results

From the analysis of the students’ test , we find that the obtained results of the pretest
scores of both groups of students reveals that they have the same level concerning the writing
performance .Meanwhile , in the post test it is observed that there is a significant difference
concerning the performance of both groups .Since the mean of control group is 10.80 while
the mean of experimental group is 13.11, thus the treatment phase had a positive impact on
experimental group. This indicates that teaching DCSI improve students’ writing skill ,which
is the answer of our research question .

General conclusion

In this study , the main aim is to investigate the effectiveness of direct cognitive strategy
instruction in teaching writing to improve the students writing skill, thus two research tools
have used to answer the research question and to test its hypothesis. The data gathered from
the teachers questionnaire showed that most of them use the product process approach in
teaching writing. They think that their students have difficulties in grammar , vocabulary, and
spelling. That’s why these elements is essential to be taught to students .They are also aware
of the effectiveness of DCSI ,and the use of mind mapping as a pre writing technique to
organize ideas and to enhance students’ writing quality. Then , pre and post tests were
administered to the students of second year license to confirm the resulted obtained from the
teachers’ questionnaire .The data gathered reveals that in the pretest both groups have
approximately the same level ,while in the post test , the experimental group scores are higher
than control group scores .This implies that indeed the use of direct cognitive strategy
instruction improves the students’ writing performance. As a result, the students of
experimental group are aware enough of the use cognitive strategy instruction specifically the
use of mind mapping ,which help them to develop their writing skill ; hence , our hypothesis
“if teachers employ direct cognitive strategy instruction this would develop learners’ skills in
writing” is confirmed .
Limitations of the study and suggestions for further Research

Although the research has reached its aims, there were a number of limitations. First, the
study was concerned with 60 students of second year license from the university of Kasdi
Merbah. In future research, researchers could use large sample from different
universities .Second , the treatment focused on using mind mapping in writing an introductory
paragraph . Therefore, further research might expand the use of this technique in writing the
whole essay. Finally , the research was conducted in a short time ( one semester ).