Research Paper

Journal of
Language and Translation
Volume 14, Number 4, 2024, (pp.175-189)

Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners 'Argumentative

Writing Performance
Somayeh Abdollah Zadeh1, Saeideh Ahangari2*, Mahnaz Saeidi3
1
Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
2*
Associate Professor of TEFL, Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Tabriz, Iran
3
Professor, Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

Received: January 03, 2023 Accepted: February 28, 2023

Abstract
Teaching and development of writing skill in foreign language education is very important, but it has
been regarded as a challenging task for some teachers especially in the context of teaching English as a
Foreign Language. In this respect, different teaching approaches, including Problem-Based Learning
(PBL) have been developed to help learners improve their writing skills. This study sought to investigate
the effect of problem-based learning on Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative writing performance. To
fulfill the above purpose 46 EFL upper intermediate female learners within the age range of 16-18 were
selected through a convenience sampling design, out of a population of 73 learners, based on their
performance on a First Certificate in English test (FCE). Then, they were randomly assigned into two
groups of problem-based and traditional product- based group. Both groups took a pretest at the beginning of
the study to measure the amount of pre-existing knowledge on argumentative writing performance
including its components of (Generic features, syntactical language, and spelling) and a post-test in the
end to check the effectiveness of the treatment applied. PBL group benefitted from PBL method and
the control group received traditional writing instruction method. The results of the study, based on the
analysis of covariance, indicated that PBL group outperformed the control group in writing performance,
including its component of generic features, syntactical language, and spelling. Teachers, EFL learners,
material developers, and syllabus designers can be the beneficiaries of this inquiry's outcomes.

Keywords: Argumentative Writing, Learner-Centered Teaching Approach, Problem-Based Learning,

Process Writing Approach

INTRODUCTION (Jabali, 2018; Su Ping, Verezub, Adi Badi-

Research on writing and attempts to improve ozaman & Chen, 2019; Timothy Kolade, 2012).
second and foreign language writing instruction Many language teachers and learners have
have been remarkably increased. This may be difficulty in making progress in writing by
because of the fact that writing skill has an leaps and bounds due to insufficient sub skills
important role in language learning and devel- in writing (Wolf, 2000, as cited in Topuz,
opment (Merkel, 2018; Muller & Gregoric, 2004). In fact, learners in EFL contexts are
2017; Steinlen, 2018). Writing in a foreign more concerned with writing as a supportive
language is seen as the most difficult skill to be technique to reinforce handwriting, grammar
taught among other three language skills and vocabulary and EFL teachers find it diffi-
*Corresponding Author’s Email: cult to achieve multiple characteristics of writing
[email protected] and thus highlight the linguistic component.
176 Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners' …

Therefore, they don't succeed in developing a and extricate learners from the oppression of
communicative command of this productive teachers by training them how to manage the
skill. One important type of writing which is process of writing and how to evaluate their
needed in school and higher education to write performance. A new student-centered method
various writing tasks is argumentative writing of learning and teaching is required to promote
(Alarcon & Morales, 2011). In language learning the students' communication skills, team working,
contexts, success or failure of learning depends problem solving and responsibility for their
on the quality of students’ argumentation skills own learning (Kohonen, Kaikkonen &
(Andrews, Ferretti, and Lewis, 2004). Research Lehtovaara, 2014).
evidence from different language learning In reference to the poor performance of EFL
settings shows that an argumentative writing learners in writing skill especially argumenta-
essay is the most difficult genre for both ESL tive writing, L2 practitioners investigated alter-
and EFL students (El-Henawy, Dadour, Salem, native approaches to teach writing skill (Bryant
& El-Bassuony, 2012; Felton, Crowell, & Liu, & Timmins, 2002). It is believed that process
2015). Students have difficulties in using argu- writing approach enhances the learners’ writing
mentative writing strategies and adapting them skill. Some studies reported that the process
to the communicative circumstances (Liu & writing approach was found useful in helping
Stapleton, 2014). According to Amogne learners to generate ideas confidently (Arslan &
(2013), the most obvious problem is students' Kizil, 2010; Arici & Kaldirin, 2015; Timothy
inability in criticizing and presenting well-man- Kolade, 2012). Moreover, according to Jones
nered declarative statements and giving convening (2007), writing can be best learnt by learners
support, because they are not accustomed to via student-centered teaching approaches. All
work with this type of writing and also, they these call for problem-based learning which is
don't have enough knowledge to support their learner centered and process-oriented approach.
argumentation obviously. Similarly, some Learner-centered teaching methods involve
research show that students’ problems arise active learning, cooperative learning and induc-
from grammar and lexis (Chanie, 2013). tive teaching and learning. Inductive methods
With many conflicting theories about writing, consist of inquiry-based learning, case-based
the teaching of writing has changed dramati- instruction, project-based learning, discovery
cally over the last quarter century. Focusing on learning, and problem-based learning (Prince &
formal features of the language and ignoring the Felder, 2006). Problem-based learning (PBL) is
meaning in writing and evaluation of writing re- an educational approach, rooted in constructivist
veals the traditional product-oriented approach views of learning and aimed at preparing stu-
that dominated the all levels of many educa- dents for real world circumstances (Hung,
tional systems. Recent years, however, have 2013). It increases students' learning conse-
witnessed the paradigm change from traditional quences by solving problem, practicing higher
learning environment and assessing the end order thinking and thinking about their own
product toward the student-centered learning learning (Hmelo-Silver, 2013; Hung, 2013;
environment and evaluating learning process Ceker & Ozdemli, 2016). The educational im-
and performance during the constructivist post portance of PBL is that it enables learners to do
method period (McNamara, 2000). In an EFL research, incorporate theory and practice and
context where the importance of involving employ knowledge to develop a applicable
learners in the writing process has been widely solution to a defined problem (Savery, 2006).
acknowledged, the training pendulum began to Wosinski, Belcherb, Durrenbergera, Allina,
fluctuate slowly and gradually shifted from the Stormacqa and Gersonb (2018) define the PBL
product to the process of constructing meaning method as the learning process that starts with
and culminated in a more balanced learner- the presentation of an authentic problem to
oriented pedagogy. The reformist process- learners as a stimulus for active learning. Students
oriented approach is in line with Progressive attempt to solve problems by using their prior
Educational Philosophy (PEP) (Clarke, 1987) knowledge and the knowledge received after
Journal of language and translation, Volume 14, Number 4, 2024 177

research. To find the best solution to the relationship between critical thinking ability
problem, students develop their critical thinking and argumentative writing performance of
skills and make selections based on their Iranian EFL learners. The results showed that
evaluation of the choices they have found these two variables are correlated significantly
(Alfaro-Lefevre, 2017). and positively.
Zepke and Leach (2010), refer to the Despite the fact that a wide range of studies
compliance of the principles of PBL with all have delved into EFL learners’ PBL (Ansarian,
needs created in higher education to increase Adlipour, Saber & Shafiei, 2016; Aryyanti &
students' academic achievement. Stentoft Artini, 2017; Azman &Shin, 2012; Bashith &
(2017) understands PBL as an experiential ped- Amin, 2017; Dharma, Marhaeni, & Budasi,
agogy that helps learners to move beyond the 2014; Jumariati & Sulistyo, 2017; Kumar &
passive recipient of knowledge and turn them Refaei, 2017; Lin 2017a; Lin, 2017b; Othman
into engaged learners who enthusiastically & Ahamad Shah, 2013), there is still lack of
engage in meaningful activities in order to sufficient empirical evidence to support superi-
build knowledge for themselves by relying on ority of PBL particularly in Asian EFL context
their previous knowledge. Researchers like (Lin, 2015). Based on the literature review,
Hmelo-Silver, Duncan and Chinn (2007) and many studies have emphasized on how to try on
Strobel and Van Barneveld (2009) believe that learners’ structural features of argumentative
unlike traditional methods, PBL provides writing (Hirose, 2003; Kobayashi & Rinnert,
extensive scaffolding which is considered a 2008; Uysal, 2008; Qin & Karabacak, 2010).
required fact in educational settings and supplies Little research has been done to indicate the po-
scaffolding to facilitate meaningful learning tential roles of different approaches in the field
which is not often found in traditional lecture- of teaching argumentative writing in an EFL
based classes (Simon & Kelin, 2007). context. To the best knowledge of the researchers,
To examine the effectiveness of problem- there have been any studies on the effect of PBL
based learning, researchers conducted different on learners' argumentative writing perfor-
investigations, each with a particular focus. For mance, including its component of (Generic
instance, study conducted by (Lin, 2015) indicated features, syntactical language, and spelling) in
that PBL approach had an important influ- the Iranian EFL context. For these reasons, this
ence on the students' writing skill. Furthermore, study intended to investigate the effect of PBL
study by Suyoga- Dharma, Marhani, Budasi on learners' argumentative writing performance
(2014) showed that PBL had positive effect on in an Iranian EFL context.
development of students' reading and writing Accordingly, the following research question
skills. The effect of problem-based learning on was proposed:
writing competency and self-regulated learning
by EFL learners was the focus of study by RQ. Does the PBL have significant effect on
Dharma and Adiwijaya (2018). The findings of writing performance of EFL learners?
their study indicated that PBL had an important
impact on learners’ writing competency and LITERATURE REVIEW
self-regulated learning. Jumariati and Sulistyo Argumentative writing
(2017) conducted study to investigate the effect Writing skill is difficult for students since they
of Problem-Based writing instruction on ar- need to use several linguistic and cognitive
gumentative writing performance including its skills before, while, and after composing their
components of content, organization, vocabulary, writing (Selvaraj & Abdul Aziz, 2019). It is
grammar, and mechanics. The findings of their complex because there are various modes of
study indicated that PBL group outperformed writing. Accordingly, Richards and Schmidt
the control group those taught using guided (2010) introduce four types of writing modes
writing in writing performance. In an Iranian such as descriptive, narrative, expository, and
EFL context, Hashemi, Behrooznia and Mo- argumentative writing. Argumentative writing
haghegh Mahjoobi (2014) investigated the
178 Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners' …

refers to a type of writing that includes discus- apply such knowledge in new real-life environ-
sions, realities, evidences, reasons, explanations ment (Lin, 2015). In today's technology driven
which support the side in question (Crossley & universe, a new student-centered method of
Wilson, 1979). teaching and learning is needed to advance the
Four features of argumentative writing students' communicating skills, group working,
which are specific to this genre according to problem solving and responsibility for their
Connor (1990) are superstructure, quality of own learning (Gorghiua et al, 2015; Sangestani
logical reasoning, persuasive appeal, and audi- & Khatiban, 2013). As Tan (2003) indicates,
ence awareness. Superstructure refers to the what is important is a change toward a teaching
organizational plan and linear development of method based on more real-world problems
any text. The quality of logical reasoning is around which learners can attain learning re-
evaluated by analyzing the interrelationships of sults through actively working on instructed
authors' claims and the related support or data problems. According to Carriger (2016) a good
provided to corroborate those claims. Persuasive learning method results in creation of the prob-
appeal includes affective appeal and establish- lem-solving, the persuasion of self-directed
ment of writer credibility. Audience awareness learning, and fostering a collaborative learning
is one of the important features of successful context. All this calls for a problem-based
argumentative writing. The author must be learning method to cultivate change in tradi-
aware of the reader's point of view by dealing tional learning contexts.
implicitly or explicitly with possible reciprocal Problem Based Learning (PBL) is an ap-
arguments. proach to teaching which was introduced in
Richards and Sandy (2015) suggest an im- medical pedagogy in the mid 1950’ by Barrows
portant style for the argumentative essay which (1980) and later spread to other fields, particu-
consists of introduction of the problem and the larly business and social studies (Barrows
thesis statement, the opponent perspective and &Tamblyn, 1980; Boud & Feletti, 1998).
the writer’s thought and conclusion. However, Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is a student-
according to Bacha (2010), argumentative centered teaching method which is characterized
essay composed of five parts which can be in- by the creation of student learning in the
cluded into a five-paragraph essay, a paragraph context of solving a real problem (Marra,
for introduction, three paragraphs of body and Jonassen, Palmer & Luft, 2014, p.221). It be-
a paragraph for conclusion. The first part is the gins with a real problem related to the learners'
subject on which the author argues. Then a review real-life experiences and emphasizes the main
of the opposing statements is required. The concept to be taught (Barrows &Tamblyn, 1980).
third part is the refuting of the opposing view, The teacher in PBL is a facilitator of student
and the last part is presenting the author's learning, and his or her guidance will decrease
statements. when the students are cognitively prepared to
use the target language, especially in an appli-
Problem-based learning cable manner, i.e. solving a real problem. With
Traditional educational contexts are teacher this in mind, Hmelo-Silver and Barrows (2006)
oriented and follow the lecture-practice-test state that the teacher in PBL acts as the facilita-
process (Al-Zu be, 2013). Learning is charac- tor who uses questioning strategies to scaffold
terized by memorization, imitation and modeling student learning. The teacher’s scaffolding is
(Jalania & stern, 2015). The variety of problems based on a hypothesis that when facilitators
that learners solve in traditional classes are ex- support the learning and collaboration processes,
ercises rather than real problems. Paper and students can better build flexible knowledge
pencil tests are also relevant in such model of (Hmelo-Silver, 2004).
learning (Gorghuiua, Draghicescu, Cristea, As Hung (2009) states PBL is an educa-
Petrescu & Gorghiu, 2015). The knowledge pro- tional model that employs problem as the stim-
duced in teacher-centered method is so inert that ulus for learning. The preparation stage for its
the learners do not have the ability to actively application is selection and design of problems
Journal of language and translation, Volume 14, Number 4, 2024 179

and the learning process starts after requiring in the experimental and control groups to test
students to solve a problem that has been taken students' level of homogeneity in proficiency
from everyday life (Shamir, Zion, & Levi, level. This proficiency test is a Cambridge
2008). Problems in problem-based learning are English test consisting of the five sections of
semi-structured which are similar to problems writing, listening, speaking, reading and use of
that we face in everyday life (Şendağ & Oda- language. This test is suitable for upper inter-
başı, 2009). Students attempt to solve problems mediate level English learners. Due to practi-
by using their prior knowledge and the cality problems in this research, the listening
knowledge acquired after research (Sockalin- and speaking sections were not utilized and
gam, Rotgans, & Schmidt, 2011). According to only the reading and writing and language use
Hmelo-Silver and Barrows (2006), it is essential sections were implemented. The reading and
that teachers select the problem cautiously use of English parts consist of seven parts with
because problem has an important role in PBL. 52 questions. Questions 1-24 and 43-52 worth
Problem based learning practice is performed one point. Questions 25 – 30 worth up to two
in small groups of 6-8 students through discus- points and questions 31 – 42 worth two points.
sion, problem solving, and studying with peers The writing part consists of two parts with four
(Hmelo-Silver, 2004, Abou-Elhamd, Rashad, questions and each question carries equal
& Al-Sultan, 2011). Therefore, one of the marks.
significant aspects in the strength of the problem-
based learning method is students’ cooperative Pre- and Post-tests
working skills (Tarmizi, Tarmizi, Lojinin, & At the beginning and end of the study, learners'
Mokhtar, 2010). As Savery (2006) indicates col- writing performance ability, including its
laboration is necessary in effective learning in components of Generic features, syntactical
PBL. To address collaborative learning, a PBL language, and spelling was measured by pre-
curriculum places primary focus on group work. and posttests. The test consisted of one part
(writing one essay) suitable for participants'
METHOD level and background knowledge. The partici-
Participants pants were required to write one argumentative
The study was conducted at Melal language essay. The time of the argumentative writing
institute in Miandoab. The initial population of test lasted 90 minutes. Two experts in teaching
this study were 73 female upper intermediate and assessing essays validated the writing test.
EFL learners who have studied English for at The researchers asked the participants to write
least four years. The participants were all native three paragraphs about the given topic for
speakers of Turkish with their age range be- pre-test. After instructional sessions, the par-
tween 16 and 18. The participants were at the ticipants were required to write post-test which
upper intermediate level, but in order to ensure was similar but not identical with pre-test topics
the homogeneity of the participants, First Cer- to avoid the effect of pre-test. The topics were
tificate in English test (FCE) was administered selected from FCE test.
to all of the population and from among them
46 students were selected as the final sample. Scoring rubric of writing
Then they were randomly assigned into two The essays were rated according to the scoring
groups, i.e. experimental group including 22 rubric of writing by Knapp and Watkins (2005).
participants and a control group including 24 The rubric includes four different sections, each
participants. Experimental group received prob- of which focuses on an area of learners’ writ-
lem-based instruction and control group received a ings. The first section gives criteria for evaluat-
traditional method, product based instruction. ing the Generic features of writings (genre,
theme, structure, rhetorical strategies, linguistic
Instruments features, Vocabulary). The second section
First Certificate in English test (FCE) introduces criteria for scoring the writing as-
First Certificate in English test (FCE) was used signments based on their textual features
180 Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners' …

(connectives, reference, tense, sentence struc- The instruction in problem-based group was
ture). The third section has some criteria for the developed by using the stages of PBL proposed
assessment of the writings’ syntactical features by Boud and Felleti (1997) which includes
(clause pattern, agreement, verb form, preposi- introduction to problem, discussion and posing
tion, articles, plural, and punctuation). The last a question, setting the priority and explore and
part represents products to evaluate the learners’ integrate new knowledge. As treatment, the
writings based on the spelling. Learners' writing participants were divided into some groups and
performance, in terms of Generic features, went through following phases. At the begin-
syntactical language, and spelling were scored ning of the program, the researcher asked the
in pre-test participants about current problem faced in the
society and asked them if they have any idea
Data Collection Procedure about solution of that problem. Following the
This study was conducted in two phases: the introduction of the program the rest of the pro-
pilot study and the main study. In this study, gram was main activity. Teacher, first, played
before the main stage of the study, the researchers video about topic (problem) and ask partici-
validated the data collection instruments in a pants what the video is about. Then she asked
pilot study. Due to the validity of the instru- the participants in groups to discuss about the
ments, the researchers first asked two other possible solutions of the problem and make a
experienced English teachers to review the list of it. Participants were given an argumenta-
content of the pre-test and post-test and make tive text which was about topic (problem) and
suggestions. Then, they asked 20 upper-inter- solution of the problem and asked them to find
mediate Iranian EFL learners similar to the a solution in the text. Participants were supposed to
main population to see whether the argumenta- identify the text by looking at linguistic feature
tive texts and videos used for treatment are of the text and point some part of the text which
readable and suitable for the participants. The show linguistic features of argumentative text.
participants seemed to be responsive to them They discussed within their group to make their
and did not report any particular problem in own argumentative paragraph based on the
their understanding. solution that they have listed before. Then they
After checking the learners' homogeneity at exchanged their writing to the other groups and
the beginning of the main study, the researchers asked them to give feedback. They revised their
randomly divided the two classes into two ex- group's writing based on the feedback. After
perimental and control groups: problem- based that, the result of the group work was reported
group and traditional product- based group. by one student from every group in a class con-
Then, pretest was administered to the experi- ference. Teacher gave feedback by focusing on
mental and control groups to measure the Generic features, syntactical language, and
amount of pre-existing knowledge on argumen- spelling. According to teacher’s feedback
tative writing performance including its compo- students revised the draft. Finally, they wrote
nents of (Generic features, syntactical language, the argumentative essay draft individually as an
and spelling). The treatment and administering assignment for the next session (application
tests lasted 14 sessions (two sessions for admin- stage).
istering FCE, homogeneity purposes, and for In the product-based group (control group),
administering pretest of writing performance; there were no instruction concerning processes
one session for modeling and explaining PBL involved in writing an essay. Tangpermpoon
method and for introducing the assessment (2008) states that there are different activities in
rubric for writing; one more session after the product-based writing approach to increase
last session of the treatment for administering EFL participants’ awareness in foreign language
the posttest; 10 sessions left for the main treat- writing. These activities are model paragraphs,
ment). Every session was lasted 90 minutes. sentence combining, and rhetorical pattern
The instructor and the length of the instruction exercises. At the current study, the researchers
for these two groups were the same. used model paragraph. To do product-based
Journal of language and translation, Volume 14, Number 4, 2024 181

approach for control group, the instructor used 0.89 and 0.92, which show a high inter-rater
argumentative texts as models. Every session, reliability between raters.
the participants were asked to write an essay
which they should follow the model. RESULTS
At the end of the instruction, the post-test As previously mentioned, the purpose of this
which was similar not identical to pretest was study was to investigate the effect of problem-
given to experimental and control groups to based learning (PBL) on EFL learners' writing
measure the participants' progress. In order to performance. For this purpose, one research
ensure inter-rater reliability, the participants' question and one hypothesis were formulated.
compositions (pre and post test scores) were In this part, the research hypothesis was tested,
rated by two capable raters based on specific the related data was analyzed, and the results
rating criteria. The raters were trained to use the and discussion section were indicated. Firstly,
rating scale. The training session was approxi- to test the reliability of the participants' written
mately, 60 minutes. First, the researchers expli- performance scores, the Pearson correlation co-
cated the purpose of the study and the nature of efficient test was used. Then, the data obtained
the instruments to the raters. Then, they were from the sample groups were described by the
instructed to follow the rating scale while rating statistical table and the related information was
the essays. The criteria include Generic features, presented. In the inferential section, the research
syntactical language, and spelling. The scoring question was analyzed and the results were
was done based on scoring rubric of writing by interpreted. Firstly, to identify the normal
Knapp and Watkins, (2005). It focuses on the distribution of the variables, the Kolmogorov-
writing components namely, (Generic features, Smirnov test and to check the effect of prob-
syntactical language, and spelling). The inter- lem-based instruction on writing performance
rater reliability for pre-tests and post-tests were of EFL learners the ANCOVA test was used.

Table1
Mean and Standard Deviation of participants' written performance scores in the PBL and control groups in
pre-and post-test
Variables Group N Mean Std. Deviation
Pre 22 12.52 3.24
Problem- based
post 22 16.21 2.47
Writing Scores
Pre 20 12.28 3.77
Control
post 20 13.22 3.43

Table 1 shows the mean and standard de- and also it indicates the mean and standard
viation of participants' written performance deviation of participants' written performance
scores in the PBL (M= 12.52; SD= 3.24) and scores in the PBL (M= 16.21; SD= 2.47) and con-
control groups (M= 12.28; SD= 3.77 in pre-test trol group (M= 13.22; SD= 3.43) in the post-test.

Table 2
Smirnov-Kolmogorov test to detect normal distribution of variables
Variables Group N Z Sig
Pre 22 0.58 0.88
Problem- based
post 22 0.87 0.43
Writing Scores
Pre 20 0.65 0.78
Control
post 20 062 0.82

As Table 2 indicates, according to the results of post-test was more than 0.05 and normal.
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test the significance Therefore, the parametric tests used for the var-
level for all variables in both groups in pre- and iables considered in this study are appropriate.
182 Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners' …

Table 3
Levon's test of Equality of Error variances
Variables F df1 df2 Sig
Writing Scores 0.59 1 40 0.44

According to Table 3, the results of Leven's research question and to measure the effect
test of Equality of Error variances indicate PBL had on learners' writing performance
that as p>./.1, there is equality of Error vari- ability, Analysis of Covariance was con-
ances of dependent variable. To answer the ducted (Table 4).

Table 4
Results of covariance analysis of the effect of problem-based instruction on improving the written performance
of participants
Variables Sum of squares df Mean square F Sig Eta
Pre-test 284.74 1 284.74 191.47 0.000 0.83
Group 84.76 1 84.76 56.99 0.000 0.59
Error 57.99 39 1.48

As Table 4 indicates, the results of the Analysis written performance in PBL group. In this anal-
of Covariance yielded a significant and mean- ysis, the pre-test scores were statistically con-
ingful difference in learners' argumentative trolled; i.e., the effect of the same variable
writing performance in PBL and control groups scores on the written performance score of the
(p <0.05, F = 56.99, eta squared = 59), and it is two groups was removed and the groups were
possible to predict 59% improvement in students' compared based on the residual variance.

Table 5
Mean and standard deviation of the written performance scores of the two groups of participants
95% confidence interval
Group Mean Std Error
Lower Bound Upper Bound
Control 13.31 0.27 12.76 13.87
Problem- based 16.16 0.26 15.63 16.69

According to Table 5, the written performance higher than the written performance score of the
score of participants in the problem-based participants in the control group with a mean of
group with a mean of 16.16 is significantly 13.31.

17

16

15

14

GROUP
13

control

12 problem- based
1 2

Score

Figure 1.
Written Performance of participants in Problem-Based and Control Groups
Journal of language and translation, Volume 14, Number 4, 2024 183

DISCUSSION (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). The idea is that indi-

The results of this research study verified the viduals learn best when collaborating with others.
null hypothesis and indicated that participants As it is directly observed, students in the exper-
in the PBL group outperformed the control imental group worked as a team to apprehend
group in argumentative writing performance. the problem, found the causes and the effects,
The results of the present study is supported by explored information relevant to the problem,
the theory of PBL proposed by Hung (2013) offered and determined the best solution to the
which states that PBL increases students’ learn- problem. They also acquired to listen to others,
ing consequences by elevating their skills and negotiate opinions, and run any conflict due to
abilities in solving problems, applying disagreement on problem solutions. Therefore,
knowledge, practicing higher order thinking according to Savery (2006) the procedures of
skills, self-directing and focusing on their own PBL help learners to increase their skills in
learning. Consistent with previous researches problem solving activities.
(Othman & Shah, 2013), the present study of- The second conducive factor to outperfor-
fers evidence that the PBL enhances students' mance of the PBL group is the process writing
writing performance. The findings of this study approach which is incorporated into PBL. It is
are also relevant with other results, which indi- supported by empirical studies that process
cated that PBL enhances language learning in writing aids learners to make better their writ-
general and language skills in particular (An- ing performance wherein students have the op-
sarian, et al, 2016., Aryanti & Artini,2017., portunity to review each other’s draft (Arslan &
Dharm & Adiwijaya, 2018., Jumariati & Su- Kizil, 2010; Arici & Kaldirin, 2015; Faraj,
listyo, 2017., Lin, 2015). Altogether, the find- 2015). Process writing is an approach to writing
ings of the present research support the results and class activity which consolidate the writing
of previous studies which indicated that this stages such as planning, drafting, replying, cor-
method is very useful for improving students’ recting, editing, and sharing and help learners
argumentative writing (Jumariati & Sulistyo, to write a piece of writing (Seow, 2002).
2017). We were clear that all these results were The act of scaffolding from both the teacher
achieved partly due to the presence of lecturer and the classmates is another contribution of
who acts as a facilitator as suggested by Hmelo- PBL. The scaffolding from the teacher is based
Silver and Barrows (2006). Since one of the im- on a hypothesis that when teachers (facilitators)
portant goals of PBL is learning to solve prob- protect the learning and collaboration pro-
lems, students will require to be guided during cesses, students can better create flexible
the investigating and solving process. Based on knowledge (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). According to
the literature review, this role was necessary in Yang, Badger and Yu (2006), peer feedback
creating a bridge between the learners’ prior activities are useful for development of greater
passive-learning habits and active learning autonomy in writing. In the current study, the
needed by PBL. teacher of the PBL group aids students by
Group work applied in experimental group guiding them, using the questioning strategies,
(PBL) which lies within the concept of social asking leading questions and providing feedback.
constructivist view is the first conducive factor On the contrary, the low learning outcome in
of the important difference in the writing per- the control group is due to the product-based
formance of students in the experimental group methodology of instruction in which students
and those in the control group. The notion of don’t provide scaffolding as the classmates’
social constructivist view is: "the distance be- editing during the writing process. This study
tween the actual development levels as deter- also proved that in a learning situation in which
mined by independent problem solving and the students make extensive use of their peers the
level of potential development as determined consequence of the instruction outperform the
through problem solving under adult guidance context in which learners attempt to solve the
or in collaboration with more capable peer" problems lonely.
184 Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners' …

In addition, Hmelo-Silver and Eberbach knowledge in writing performance compo-

(2012) state that in PBL, problems which are nents, including, Generic features, syntactical
identical to those in real life are used as the language, and spelling.
vehicle to promote student language learning. The results of this study indicated that the
Presenting everyday problems to students to null hypothesis (the difference between the
solve makes PBL interesting and enjoyable. experimental and control groups in writing per-
The students in this study learned directly from formance due to the effect of PBL) was veri-
everyday life in context. They could acquire to fied, indicating that there was high level of dif-
become more flexible and responsible for their ference between the PBL and control groups in
own learning and knowledge independently, their writing performance ability. To put it
which promoted their self-reliance in learning clearly, the participants in the experimental
(Hmelo-Silver 2004). group outperformed learners in the control
Students’ active participation in learning group in writing performance including compo-
can be considered as the other efficient factor in nents of Generic features, syntactical language,
enhancing writing performance in the PBL and spelling. Therefore, it is recommended that
group. According to Hallinger and Bridges Problem-Based writing instruction is an important
(2016) most learning happens in the context of method to teach writing skill.
student-centered small groups rather than It can be concluded through the conse-
teacher-directed learning. Malik and Iqbal quences of the current study that the outperfor-
(2011) proved that the procedures of Problem- mance of the experimental group who received
Based writing instruction help learners to be problem-based writing instruction over the
active in classroom teaching and increases their control group who received the traditional
problem-solving skills. The reason for low out- product-based is due to the features that prob-
come of learning in traditional methodologies is lem-based learning brought to the writing learn-
due to teacher-centered instruction (Duck- ing environment. These features are group
Worth, 2009; Geisli, 2009; Alrabai, 2016) and work, pushing learners to be more autonomous
product-based method (Arici & Kaldirin, 2015; in their learning, helping them to focus on their
Faraj, 2015; Timothy Kolade, 2012). In this writing, and making the learners aware of the
study, the learners in the control group followed process of writing. These characteristics are
the traditional method product-based instruc- fundamental prerequisites for developing one’s
tion which was mostly based on paragraph L2 writing skills and they can be provided by
model without any active participation of learn- the problem-based writing instruction.
ers. This made learners tired and did not will to A number of pedagogical implications can
learn more. In the current study, the procedures be derived and proposed based on the obtained
of Problem-Based writing instruction in the results. First and foremost, the results of this
experimental group (PBL) were designed carefully research may be of benefit to EFL teachers.
into the stages of introduction to problem, The results may change teachers' viewpoints
discussion and posing a question, setting the who still believe in teacher centeredness in lan-
priority, explore and integrating new knowledge guage teaching in favor of more learner-cen-
and application. Each of these stages helps the teredness approaches. The results also benefit
students in writing argumentative essay. students. Learning writing skill through PBL
would be more enjoyable and meaningful,
CONCLUSION because it enriches the learning process and
The findings of present study support executing help learners to learn what they want to learn
PBL in EFL classes to improve learners' writing not what they have taught and also it can en-
performance. This study is significant because hance learning experience of the students in all
due to the lack of enough empirical evidence educational settings. Syllabus designers can
especially in an Iranian EFL context, it ex- prepare material which make students think and
plored effectiveness of PBL in English writing analyze the subjects instead of memorizing
class and drew attention to enhancing them. Textbook writers can include peripheral
Journal of language and translation, Volume 14, Number 4, 2024 185

educational materials in teachers 'guides to Amogne, D. (2013). Enhancing students ' writ-
help teachers act more effectively in their ing skills through the genre approach. In-
classes. The central aim of this study was to ternational Journal of English and Liter-
highlight the importance of implementing ature, (5), 242–248.
problem-based learning into EFL setting. The Andrews-Weckerly, S., Ferretti, R. P., &
researchers hope that this study can add the Lewis, W. E. (2004). Determinants of the
importance of this issue, and language teachers quality of arguments written by students
apply what has been presented in this study with and without learning disabilities.
into their own classes. Paper presented at the Annual Pacific
This study was subject to a number of lim- Coast Research Conference. San Diego,
itations, which can create new avenues for CA.
further research. The most important limita- Ansarian, L., Adlipour, A. A., Saber, M. A., &
tion was the limited sample size. There were Shafiei, E. (2016). The Impact of Prob-
22 participants in PBL group and 24 partici- lem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL
pants in control group after being homoge- Learners’ Speaking Proficiency. Ad-
nized in the study, so the results cannot be vances in Language and Literary Stud-
generalized to larger population. Therefore, ies, 7(3), 84-94.
the further research is needed to cover larger Arici, A. F., & Kaldirim, A. (2015). The effect
samples and to demonstrate the potential of the process-based writing approach on
roles of PBL in training other three language writing success and anxiety of pre-ser-
skills so that more conclusive results on its vice teachers. The Anthropologist, 22(2),
roles can. 318– 327.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2015.
References 11891883.
Abou-Elhamd, K. A., Rashad, U. M., & Al-Sul- Arslan, R. Ş., & Şahin-Kızıl, A. (2010). How
tan, A. I. (2011). Applying problem- can the use of blog software facilitate the
based learning to otolaryngology teach- writing process of English language
ing. The Journal of Laryngology and learners? Computer Assisted Language
Otology, 125(2), 117-120. Learning, 23(3), 183–197.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022215110 https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.
001702. 486575.
Alarcon, J.B., & Morales, K.N. S. (2011). Aryanti, N.W.V., & Artini, L.P. (2017). The
Grammatical cohesion in students’ Ar- Impact of Problem Based Learning on
gumentative essay. Journal of English Productive Skills and Attitude toward
and Literature, 2(5), 114-127. English Language Learning. Advances in
Alfaro- Lefevre, R. (2017). What is critical Social Science, Education and Humani-
thinking, clinical reasoning, and clinical ties Research, 134.
judgment? In Alfaro- Lefevre, R. (Eds.), Azman, N., & Shin, L. K. (2012). Problem-
critical thinking, 1- 20. Elsevier Saun- based learning in English for a second
ders, Philadelphia. language classroom: Students' perspec-
Alrabai, F. (2016). Factors Underlying Low tives. International Journal of Learning,
Achievement of Saudi EFL Learners. In- 18(6), 109-126.
ternational Journal of English Linguis- Bacha, N. N. (2010). Teaching the academic ar-
tics, 6(3), 21-37. gument in a university EFL environment.
Al-Zu’be, A. F. M. (2013). The Difference Journal of English for Academic Pur-
between the Learner-Centered Ap- poses, 9, 229-241.
proach and the Teacher- Centered Ap- Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980).
proach in Teaching English as a For- Problem-based learning: An approach to
eign Language. Educational Research medical education. Springer Series on
International, 2(2), 24-31. Medical Education, 1Bashith, A., &
186 Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners' …

Amin, S. (2017). The effect of problem- https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/201842

based learning on EFL students' critical 00036.
thinking skill and learning outcome. Al- DuckWorth, E. (2009). Helping Students Get to
Talim Journal 24(2), 93-102. Where Ideas Can Find Them. The New
Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (1997). Changing prob- Educators, 5, 185-188.
lem-based learning. Introduction to sec- Faraj, A. K. A. (2015). Scaffolding EFL stu-
ond edition. In D. Boud & G. Feletti dents’ writing through the writing pro-
(Eds).The challenge of Problem-Based cess approach. Journal of Education and
Learning, 2nd edition. London: Kogan Practice, 6, 131–141.
Page. El-Henawy, W.M.., Dadour,E.M., Salem,
Bryant, S. L., & Timmins, A. A. (2002). Using M.M., & El-Bassuony,J.M. (2012).The
portfolio assessment to enhance student Effectiveness of Using Self-Regulation
learning. The Hong Kong Institute of Strategies on Developing Argumentative
Education, Hong Kong, China. Writing of EFL Prospective Teachers.
Carriger, M.S. (2016). What is the best way to Journal of the Egyptian Association for
develop new managers? Problem-based Reading and Knowledge affiliate of the
learning vs. lecture-based instruction. In- International Reading Association, 27,
ternational Journal of Management Ed- (1) 1-28.
ucation, 14(2), 92–101. Felton, M., Crowell, A., & Liu, T. (2015). Argu-
doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2016.02.003. ing to agree: Mitigating my-side bias
Ceker, E., & Ozdemli, F. (2016). Features and through Consensus-seeking dialogue.
characteristics of problem Based learn- Written Communication, 32(3), 317–331.
ing. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sci- Geisli, Y. (2009). The effect of student centered
ences, 11, 195-202. instructional approaches on student suc-
Chanie, B.S. (2013). Assessing pre- engineer- cess. Procedia Social and Behavioral
ing students ' writing errors at Bahir Dar Sciences, 1(1), 469-473.
University, Ethiopia. J. Media Commun. Gorghiu, G., Draghicescu, L. M., Cristea, S.,
Stud, 5(3):20-24. Petrescu, A.-M., & Gorghiu, L. M.
Clarke, J. L. (1987). Curriculum renewal in for- (2015). Problem- Based Learning—an
eign language learning. Oxford: Oxford Efficient Learning Strategy in the Sci-
University Press. ence Lessons Context. Procedia—Social
Connor, U. (1990). "Linguistic/Rhetorical and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1865-
measures for International persuasive 1870.
student writing". Research in the Teach- Hallinger, P., & Bridges E. M. (2016). A sys-
ing of English, 24, 67-87 tematic review of research on the use of
Crossley, D. J., & Wilson, P. A. (1979). How to problem-based learning in the prepara-
argue: An introduction to logical think- tion and development of school leaders.
ing. New York: Ransom House. Educational Administration Quarterly
Dharma, I. P. S., Marhaeni, A. A. I. N., & Bu- 53(2), 1-34.
dasi, I. G. (2014). The effect of problem Hashemi, M.R., Behrooznia, S., & Mohaghegh
based learning and performance assess- Mahjoobi, F. (2014). A Critical Look
ment on students’ reading and writing into Iranian EFL University Students’
competences. E- Journal Program Pas- Critical Thinking and Argumentative
casarjana Universitas Pendidikan Gane- Writing. Iranian Journal of Applied Lin-
sha, 2. guistics (IJAL), 17(1), 71-92
Dharma, I.P.S., & Adiwijaya, P.A, (2018). The Hirose, K. (2003). Comparing L1 and L2 or-
effects of Problem based learning and ganizational patterns in the argumenta-
self-assessment on students' writing tive writing of Japanese EFL students.
competency and self-regulated learning. Journal of Second Language Writing,
SHS Web of Conferences 42, 12(2), 181- 209.
Journal of language and translation, Volume 14, Number 4, 2024 187

Hmelo, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: Kohonen, V., Jaatinen, R., Kaikkonen, P., &
what and how do students learn? Educa- Lehtovaara, J. (2014). Experiential
tional Psychology Review, 16(3), 235- learning in foreign language education.
266. NY and London: Routledge.
Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2013). Creating a learning Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (2008). Task re-
space in problem based learning. Inter- sponse and text construction across L1
disciplinary Journal of Problem based and L2 writing. In R. M. Manchón & P.
learning, 7(1), 5. De Haan (Eds.), Writing in foreign lan-
Hmelo-Silver, C.E., & Barrows, H.S. (2006). guage contexts: Research insights. Jour-
Goals and strategies of a problem based nal of Second Language Writing, 17(1),
learning facilitator. The interdisciplinary 7-29.
journal of problem based learning, 1(1), Kumar, R., & Refaei, B. (2017). Problem based
21-39. learning pedagogy fosters students' criti-
Hmelo-Silver, C.E. & Eberbach, C. (2012). cal thinking about writing. Interdiscipli-
Learning theories and problem based nary Journal of Problem based Learn-
learning. Innovation and Change in Pro- ing, 11(2), 1.
fessional Education, 8(1), pp. 3-17. Lin, L. F. (2015). The impact of problem based
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G.,& Chinn, learning on Chinese-speaking elemen-
C. A. (2007), “Scaffolding and achieve- tary schoolStudent’s English vocabulary
ment in Problem-based and inquiry learning and use. System, 55, 30–42.
learning: A response to Kirschner, Lin, L.F. (2017a). Impacts of the Problem based
Sweller, and Clark”, Educational Psy- learning pedagogy on English learners'
chologist, 42 (2), 99–107. reading comprehension, strategy use,
Hung, W. (2009). The 9-step problem design and active learning attitudes. Journal of
process for problem-based learning: Ap- Education and Training Studies, 5(6),
plication of the 3C3R model. Educa- 109-125.
tional Research Review, 4(2), 118-141. Lin, L.F. (2017b). Integrating the problem
Hung, W. (2013). Problem-based learning: A based learning approach into a web-
learning environment for enhancing based English reading course. Journal of
learning transfer. New Directions for Educational Computing Research, 0(0),
Adult and Continuing Education, 137, 1-29, 0735633117705960.
27- 38. Liu, F., & Stapleton, P. (2014). Counter argu-
Jabali, O. (2018). Students' attitudes towards mentation and cultivation of Critical
EFL university writing: A case study at thinking in Argumentative writing: In-
Najah National University, Palestine. vestigating wash back from a High-
Heliyon, 4 (11). stakes test. System, 45,117- 128.
Jalani, N. H., & Sern, L. C. (2015). Efficiency Malik, M. A., & Iqbal, M. Z. (2011). Effects of
Comparison between Example-Problem- problem solving teaching strategy on
Based Learning and Teacher-Centered problem solving and reasoning ability of
Learning in the Teaching of Circuit The- 8th graders. International Journal of Ac-
ory. Procardia—Social and Behavioral ademic Research, 3(5), 80-84.
Sciences, 204, 153-163. Marra, R., Jonassen, D. H., Palmer, B., & Luft,
Jones, L. (2007). The Student-Centered Class- S. (2014). Why problem- based learning
room. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- works: Theoretical foundations. Journal
sity Press. on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3-
Jumariati, J., & Sulistyo, G. (2017). Problem- 4), 221-238.
based writing instruction: Its effect on McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. In H.
students' skill in Argumentative writing. G. Widdowson (Series Ed.), Oxford In-
Araba World English Journal (AWEJ), 8 troductions to Language Study. Oxford:
(2). Oxford University Press.
188 Effect of Problem- Based Learning on Iranian EFL Learners' …

Merkel, W. (2018). Role reversals: A case attributes of effective problems in prob-

study of dialogic interactions and Feed- lem-based learning. Higher Education,
back on L2 writing. Journal of Second 62(1), 1-16.
Language writing, 39, 16-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-
Muller, A., & Gregoric, C. (2017). The impact 9361-3.
of explicit instruction and corrective Şendağ, S., & Odabaşı, H. F. (2009). Effects of
feedback on ESL postgraduate students’ an online problem based learning course
grammar in academic writing. Journal of on content knowledge acquisition and
Academic Language and Learning, critical thinking skills. Computers & Ed-
11(1), A125-A144. ucation, 53(1), 132-141.
Othman, N., & Shah, M.I.A. (2013). Problem- http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.200
Based Learning in English Language 9.01.008
Classroom. English Language Teaching; Shamir, A., Zion, M., & Levi, O. S. (2008).
6(3), 125-134. Peer tutoring, metacognitive processes
Prince, M.J., & Felder, R.M. (2006). Inductive and multimedia problem-based learning:
teaching and learning methods: definition The effect of mediation training on criti-
comparisons and research bases. Journal cal thinking. Journal of Science Educa-
of Engineering Education, 95, 123-137. tion and Technology, 17(4), 384-398.
Qin, J., & Karabacak, E. (2010). The analysis http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-
of Toulmin elements in Chinese EFL 9108-4
University argumentative writing. Sys- Simons, K., & Klein, J. (2007). The impact of
tem, 38(3), 444–456. scaffolding and student achievement lev-
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Long- els in a problem-based learning environ-
man dictionary of language teaching and ment. Instructional Science, 35(1), 41,
applied linguistics (4th ed.). London: (32).
Longman (Pearson Education). Steinlen, A. K. (2018). The development of
Richards, J., & Sandy, C. (2015). Passages 2. German English writing skills in a bilin-
New York: Cambridge University Press. gual Primary School in Germany. Jour-
Sangestani, G., & Khatiban, M. (2013). Com- nal of Second Language Writing, 39, 42-
parison of Problem-Based Learning and 52.
Lecture-Based Learning in Midwifery. Stentoft, D. (2017). From saying to doing inter-
Nurse Education Today, 33, 791-795. disciplinary learning: Is problem‐based
Savery, J.R. (2006). Overview of Problem- learning the answer? Active Learning in
Based Learning: Definitions and Distinc- Higher Education, 18(1), 51‐61.
tions Interdisciplinary Journal of Prob- Strobel, J., & Barneveld, A. (2009) “When is
lem-Based Learning, 1(1), 9-20. PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of
Seow, A. (2002). The Writing Process and Process Meta-analyses comparing PBL to con-
Writing. In J. Richards &.W.Renandya. ventional classrooms”. Interdisciplinary
(Eds). Methodology in Language Teaching: Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3
an Anthology of Current Practice. Cam- (1) 44-58.
bridge: Cambridge University Press. Su Ping, R. L., Verezub, E., Adi Badiozaman,
Selvaraj, M., &Abdul Aziz, A. (2019). Systematic I. F. b., & Chen, W. S. (2019). Tracing
review: Approaches in teaching writing EFL students’flipped classroom jour-
skill in ESL classrooms. International Jour- ney in a writing class: Lessons from
nal of Academic Research in Progressive Malaysia. Innovations in Education
Education andDevelopment, 8(4), 450–473. and Teaching International, 1-12.
http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v8- doi:10.1080/14703297.2019.1574597.
i4/6564. Suyoga-Dharma, I.P., Marhani, A.A.I.N., & Bu-
Sockalingam, N., Rotgans, J., & Schmidt, H. G. dasi, I.G. (2014). The effect of problem-
(2011). Student and tutor perceptions on based learning and performance assessment
Journal of language and translation, Volume 14, Number 4, 2024 189

on students 'reading and writing competen- Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). Compar-
cies. E-Journal program Pascasarjana ative study of peer and teacher feedback in
Universitas PendidikanGanesha Program a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of
studi Pendidikan BahasaInggris, 2. second Language Writing, 15(3), 179-200.
Tan, O.S. (2003). Problem-based learning in- Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Improving
novation: using problems to power student engagement: Ten proposals for
learning in the 21st Century. Singapore: action. Active learning in higher education,
Thomson Learning. 11(3), 167-177
Tangpermpoon, T. (2008). Intergraded ap-
proaches to improve students writing
skills for English major students. ABAC Biodata
Journal, 28(2), 1–9. http://www.assump- Somaieh Abdollahzadeh is a Ph.D. student of
tionjournal.au.edu/index.php/abacjour- TEFL at Azad University, Tabriz, Iran. She has
nal/article/view/539 been teaching English for several years at
Tarmizi, R. A., Tarmizi, M. A. A., Lojinin, N. universities and language schools and has
I., & Mokhtar, M. Z. (2010). Problem- published a number of papers in international
based learning: Engaging students in ac- and national academic journals. Her main areas
quisition of mathematical compe- of interest include teaching methodology and
tency. Procedia - Social and Behavioral innovative teaching methods.
Sciences, 2, 4683–4688. Email: [email protected]
Timothy Kolade, A. (2012). The influence of
process approach on English as second Saeideh Ahangari is an associate professor of
language students' performances in essay English Language Teaching at Islamic Azad
writing. English Language Teaching, University, Tabriz Branch, Iran. She mainly
5(3), 16- 29. teaches language testing, research methodology,
Topuz, E. (2004). The effects of two different and teaching language methodology at the
goal setting processes on students’ atti- graduate level and his main areas of interest
tudes towards writing and towards a include teacher education, cooperative learning,
writing course (Unpublished master’s language testing, and research. She has published
thesis). Bilkent University, Ankara- some books in the field of translation, language
Turkey. learning, and teaching and papers in international
Uysal, H. (2008). Tracing the culture behind and national academic journals and also presented
writing: Rhetorical patterns and Bidirec- in seminars.
tional transfer in LI and L2 essays of Email: [email protected]
Turkish writers in relation to educational
context. Journal of Second Language Mahnaz Saeidi is a professor of English Language
Writing, 17, 183-207. Teaching at Islamic Azad University, Tabriz
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The Branch, Iran. She mainly teaches language
development of higher psychological testing, research methodology, and teaching
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard language methodology at the graduate level and
University Press. her main areas of interest include teacher
Wosinski, J., Belcher, A.E., Durrenbergera, Y., education, cooperative learning, language test-
Allina, A.C., Stormacqa, C., & Gersonb, ing, and research. She has published papers in
L. (2018). Facilitating problem-based international and national academic journals
learning among undergraduate nursing and presented in seminars.
students: A qualitative Systematic re- Email: [email protected]
view. Nurse Education Today, 60, 67-74.

Creative Commons License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike
International License