Arab World English Journal (January 2022)                       Theses ID 282                                                    Pp. 1-106
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/th.282

 Full Theses PDF

 

The Impact of Telegram on Syntactic Complexity of the Saudi Female EFL
Undergraduates’ Argumentative, Classification, and Reaction Essays

Lamyaa Falah AlMohaya
Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University
Saudi Arabia
Email: lamyaa.almohaya@gmail.com

 

Author: Lamia Falah AlMohaya
Thesis Title: The Impact of Telegram on Syntactic Complexity of the Saudi Female EFL Undergraduates’ Argumentative, Classification, and Reaction Essays
Institution: Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University
Degree: Master
Major: Applied Linguistics  
Year of award:
2020
Supervisor:
Dr. Talal Musaed Alghizzi
ORCid ID:   https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4753-2296
Keywords: EFL student, learning environment, syntactic complexity, Telegram, text types

Abstract:
The aim of this exploratory experimental quantitative is to investigate the impact of the learning environment and text types on the syntactic complexity of female Saudi students majoring in English language. Specifically, the study seeks to explore how and when the syntactic complexity of these students increases/decreases as a whole and across the fourteen measures of syntactic complexity (MLS, MLT.MLC.C/S, VP/T, C/T, DC/C, DC/T, T/S, CT/T, CP/T, CP/C, CN/T, CN/C) in two learning contexts: traditional learning context (TLC) and blended learning context (BLT) across three writing tasks (argumentative, classification ,and reaction). It purports, also, to find out when and which learning context leads to the most/least increase/decrease in the syntactic complexity (as a whole and across specific measures) of Saudi undergraduate in the three writing tasks. To answer such questions, 48 female Saudi EFL undergraduate students were recruited from the pool of level six students. The participants were randomly divided into the control and experimental groups. The control group consisted of 28 students; while the experimental group was comprised of 20 students. The 288 students’ writing productions were analyzed according to the fourteen measures of syntactic complex by using a paired t-test and an independent t test. For the first question, the results of this study show that there was no increase/decrease in syntactic complexity, either as a whole or partially across individual measures, for the control group for the three writing tasks (argumentation, classification, and reaction). This would suggest that traditional learning method does not reach to level to be significant to the participants in the control group. For the second research question, the t-tests showed that the syntactic complexity of the participants in the experimental group increased as a whole in both the classification and reaction essays. An increase in complexity was shown across the following measures for the classification essay: MLS, MLT, MLC, CN/T/VP/T, and CN/C. For the reaction essay, an increase in complexity was shown across MLS, MLT, MLC, and CN/T measures. Although the syntactic complexity of these participants did not increase/decrease as a whole for the argumentation essay, the CN/T measure did show some increase. Finally, the comparison between the results of the two groups revealed that, although the experimental group in this study showed more improvement in syntactic complexity than the control group, the degree of difference between the two groups was too small to draw any definite conclusion about the relative effectiveness of the two methods. This may be due to the comparatively short duration of the study: ten weeks. The findings of this research have significant implications for academic research and for Saudi EFL teachers at the university level.

Cite as: AlMohaya, L. F. (2022). The Impact of Telegram on Syntactic Complexity of the Saudi Female EFL Undergraduates’ Argumentative, Classification, and Reaction Essays, Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (M.A.Thesis). Retrieved from Arab World English Journal (ID Number: 282) Novermber, 2022: 1-106.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/th.282

References

[1] Afrin, S. (2016). Writing Problems of Non-English Major Undergraduate Students in Bangladesh: An Observation. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 104–115.

[2] Aghajani, M., & Adloo, M. (2018). The Effect of Online Cooperative Learning on Students’ Writing Skills and Attitudes through Telegram application. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 433–448. doi:10.12973/iji.2018.11330a

[3] Ahmed, M. A. E. A. S. (2015). The Effect of Twitter on Developing Writing Skills in English as a Foreign Language. Arab World English Journal, Special issue on CALL (2), 134–149.

[4] Akele, F. E. (2013). Information and Communication Technology as Teaching and Learning Space for Teachers of English Language in Schools. Journal of   Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 5(1), 100–107.

[5] Al Shumaimeri, Y.A. N. (2003). A study of class room exposure to oral pedagogic tasks in relation to the motivation and performance of Saudi secondary learners of English in a context of potential curriculum reform (Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis). University of Leeds, Leeds.

[6] Al Zumor, A. W. Q., Al Refaai, I. K., Eddin, E. A. B., & Al-Rahman, F. H. A. (2013). EFL Students’ Perceptions of a Blended Learning Environment: Advantages, Limitations and Suggestions for improvement. English Language Teaching, 6(10), 95–110.

[7] Al-Buainain H. (2009). Students’ Writing Errors in EFL. International Journal of  EFL, 7(12), 205–222. Retrieved from: http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/0010      

[8] Aldiab, A., Chowdhury, H., Kootsookos, A., Alam, F., & Allhibi, H. (2019). Utilization of learning management systems (LMSs) in higher education system: A case review for Saudi Arabia. Energy Procedia, 160, 731–737.

[9] Alghizzi, T. M. (2011). The Role of English Writing Instruction Methodologies on the Types of Written Mistakes/Errors EFL Graduate Diploma Students Can Identify in Their Writings (Unpublished graduate diploma thesis). Dublin International Foundation College, Dublin, Ireland.

[10] Alghizzi, T. M. (2012). The Role of English Writing Instruction Methodologies on  the Types of Written Mistakes/Errors Saudi EFL Pre-university Students Can Identify in Their Writings (Unpublished master’s thesis). University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.

[11] Alghizzi, T. M. (2017). Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency (CAF) Development in  L2 writing: The Effects of Proficiency Level, Learning Environment, Text Type, and Time among Saudi EFL learners. (Doctoral thesis, University College Cork). Retrieved from https://cora.ucc.ie/handle/10468/4815

[12] Alghizzi, T. M., & Alshahrani, T. M. (2020). Determining the Effectiveness of the Process Genre Approach in Increasing and Decreasing Saudi EFL University Students’ Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency in Reaction Essays. International Journal of English Linguistics, 10(1), 424–448.

[13] Al-Hammadi, F. (2011). The Effectiveness of Using a Multi-media Software in Developing Some Listening Skills among Saudi Secondary School Students. Damascus University Journal, 27(3/4), 43–86.

[14] Al-Jarf, R. (2009, April). Enhancing Freshman Students’ Writing Skills with a Mind Mapping Software. Paper presented at the ESL Conference of eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest, Romania.

[15] Al-Khairy, M. A. (2013). Saudi English-major Undergraduates’ Academic Writing Problems: A Taif University Perspective. English Language Teaching, 6(6), 1–12.

[16] Alkhezzi, F., & Al-Dousari, W. (2016). The Impact of Mobile Learning on ESP Learners’ Performance. The Journal of Educators Online, 13(2), 73–101.

[17] Allam, M., & Elyas, T. (2016). Perceptions of Using Social Media as an ELT Tool among EFL Teachers in the Saudi Context. English Language Teaching, 9(7), 1–9.

[18] Allen, D., & Katayama, A. (2016). Relative Second Language Proficiency and the Giving and Receiving of Written Peer feedback. System, 56, 96–106. doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.12.002

[19] Alsaleem, B. I. A. (2013). The Effect of “WhatsApp” Electronic Dialogue Journaling on Improving Writing Vocabulary Word Choice and Voice of EFL Undergraduate Saudi Students. Arab World English Journal, 4(3), 213–225.

[20] Alsamdani, H. A. (2010). The Relationship between Saudi EFL Students’ Writing Competence, L1 Writing Proficiency, and Self-regulation. European Journal of Social Sciences, 16(1),53–63.

[21] Al-Seghayer, K. (2011). English Teaching in Saudi Arabia: Status, issues, and Challenges. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Hala.

[22] Al-Seghayer, K. (2015). Salient Key Features of Actual English Instructional  Practices in Saudi Arabia. English Language Teaching, 8(6), 89–99. doi:10.5539/elt.v8n6p89

[23] Andújar-Vaca, A., & Cruz-Martínez, M.-S. (2017). Mobile Instant Messaging: WhatsApp and its Potential to Develop Oral Skills. Media Education Research Journal, 25(50), 43–52. doi: 10.3916/C50-2017-04

[24] Arteaga-Lara, H. M. (2017). Using the Process-Genre Approach to improve Fourth-Grade EFL Llearners’ Paragraph Writing. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 10(2), 217–244. doi: 10.5294/laclil.2017.10.2.3

[25] Azodi, N., & Lotfi, A. (2020). E-collaborative Tasks and the Enhancement of Writing Performance among Iranian University-level EFL Learners. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 165–180.

[26] Babalola, H. A. L. (2012). Effects of Process-Genre Based Approach on the Written English Performance of Computer Science Students in Nigerian Polytechnic. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(6), 1–5.

[27] Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A Process Genre Approach to Teaching Writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153–160.

[28] Badri, A. (2015). The Effects of Technology on Idioms: With a Focus on Law Terms (A Study in Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran). International Journal of  Educational Investigation, 2, 43–53.

[29] Beers, S., & Nagy, W. (2011). Writing Development in Four Genres from Grades Three to Seven: Syntactic Complexity and Genre Differentiation. Reading and Writing, 24, 183–202. 10.1007/s11145-010-9264-9.

[30] Behzadi, A. (2015). Information and Communication Technology as the Teaching and Learning Space among Iranian EFL teachers. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 5(S3), 677–684.

[31] Belachew, M., Getinet, M., & Gashaye, A. (2015). Perception and Practice of Self-Assessment in EFL Writing Classrooms. Journal of Languages and Culture, 6(1), 1–8.

[32] Browker, D. N. (2007). Academic Writing: A Guide to Tertiary Level Writing.Palmerston North, New Zealand: Massey University.

[33] Brown, D. H. (2006). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Newark, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

[34] Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. (4th ed.).White Plains, NY: Longman.

[35] Bulut, D., & Abuseileek, A. (2007). Learner Attitude Toward CALL and Level of Achievement in Basic Language Skills. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi  Sayt, 2, 103–126.

[36] Chang, C. C. (2014). Exploring the Determinants of e-Learning Systems Continuance Intention in Academic Libraries. Library Management, 34(1/2), 40–55. doi: 10.1108/01435121311298261

[37] Chuah, K.-M. (2014, August). Word’s up With WhatsApp: The Use of Instant Messaging in Consciousness Raising of Academic Vocabulary. Paper presented at the 23rd MELTA and 12th Asia TEFL International Conference.

[38] Deng, L., Chen, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Developing Chinese EFL learners’ Generic Competence: A Genre-based and Process Genre Approach. New York, NY: Springer.

[39] Dennen, V. P., Darabi, A. A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor-learner Interaction in Online Courses: The Relative Perceived Importance of Particular Instructor Actions on Performance and Satisfaction. Distance Education, 28(1), 65–79.

[40] Der Vyver, A. G. V & Marais, M. A. (2015). Using Social Media as a Managerial Platform for an Educational Development Project: Cofimvaba. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(12), 910–913. doi: 10.7763/IJIET.2015.V5.636

[41] Ezza, E. S. (2010). Arab EFL Learners’ Writing Dilemma at Tertiary Level. English Language Teaching, 3(4), 33.

[42] Fadda, H. A. (2012). Difficulties in Academic Writing: From the Perspective of King Saud University Postgraduate Students. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 123–130.

[43] Fareh, S. (2010). Challenges of Teaching English in the Arab world: Why Can’t EFL Programs Deliver as Expected?  Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3600–3604.

[44] Fattah, S. F. E. S. A. (2015). The Effectiveness of Using WhatsApp Messenger as One of Mobile Learning Techniques to Develop Students’ Writing Skills. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(32), 115–127.

[45] Feez, S. (2001). Heritage and Innovation in Second Language Education. In A. M. Johns (Ed.), Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives (pp. 43–72). New York, NY: Routledge.

[46] Friesen, N. (2012). Report: Defining Blended. Learning Spaces. Retrieved from: http://learningspaces.org/papers/Defining_Blended_Learning_NF.pdf

[47] Frigaard, A. (2002). Does the Computer Lab Improve Student Performance on Vocabulary, Grammar, and Listening Comprehension? (Unpublished master’s thesis). Winona State University, Winona, MN, United States.

[48] Gao, J. (2007). Teaching Writing in Chinese University: Finding an Eclectic  Approach. The Asian EFL Journal, 18, 1–2.

[49] Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended Learning: Uncovering its Transformative Potential in Higher Education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95–105 Perceptions toward Learning. Cogent Education, 1-26.

[50] Ghaemi, F., & Golshan, N. S. (2017). The Impact of Telegram as a Social Network on Teaching English Vocabulary among Iranian Intermediate EFL learners. International Journal of Media and Communication, 1(1), 23–29.

[51] Ghavifekr, S., & Rosdy, W. A. W. (2015). Teaching and Learning with Technology: Effectiveness of ICT Integration in Schools. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(2), 175–191.

[52] Ghufron, A. (2018). Process-genre Approach, Product Approach, and Students’ Self-Esteem in Teaching Writing. Indonesian EFL Journal: Journal of ELT, Linguistics, and Literature, 2(1), 37–54.

[53] Godfrey, L., Treacy, C., & Tarone, E. (2014). Change in French Second Language Writing in Study Abroad and Domestic Contexts. Foreign Language Annals, 47(1), 48–65.

[54] Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions. In Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R., Handbook of blended  learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–18). San Francisco, CA:  Pfeiffer.

[55] Grami, G. M. A. (2010). The Effects of Integrating Peer Feedback into University-Level ESL Writing Curriculum: A Comparative Study in a Saudi Context (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom.

[56] Hailu, S., & Rustaman, N. (2012). Final Exam Report on First-semester Biology Teaching and Experience Gained from Indonesia. Bandung, Indonesia: Indonesia University of Education.

[57] Hamad, M. M. (2015). Blended Learning Outcome vs. Traditional Learning Outcome. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 3(4), 75–78.

[58] Hammond, J., and Derewianka, B. (2001). Genre. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

[59] Harmer, J. (2001). English Language Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Longman

[60] Hasan, M. K., & Akhand, M. M. (2010). Approaches to Writing in EFL/ESL Context: Balancing Product and Process in Writing Class at Tertiary Level. Journal of NELTA, 15(1), 77–88.

[61] Haswani, F. (2014). The Role of Technology in EFL Classroom. Indonesian Journal of English Education, 1(2), doi: 10.15408/ijee.v1i2.1303.

[62] He, L., Shi, L. (2008). ESL Students’ Perceptions and Experiences of Standardized English Writing Tests. Assessing Writing, 13(2008), 130–149.

[63] Heidar, D. M., & Kaviani, M. (2016). The Social Impact of Telegram as a Social Network on Teaching English Vocabulary among Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners (Payam Noor Center). Sociological Studies of Youth, 7(23), 65–76.

[64] Hidayati, H. K. (2018). Teaching Writing to EFL Learners: An Investigation of Challenges Confronted by Indonesian Teachers. Langkawi, 4(21), doi:10.31332/lkw.v4i1.772.

[65] Horn, M., & Staker, H. (2015). Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve Schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

[66] Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge             University Press.

[67] Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

[68] Hyland, K. (2007). Genre Pedagogy: Language, Lliteracy and L2 Writing Instruction . Journal of Second Language Writing,
16(3), 148–164.

[69] Iksan, Z. H., & Saufian, S. M. (2017). Mobile Learning: Innovation in Teaching and Learning Using Telegram. International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education, 1(1), 19–26.

[70] Jackson, R. J. (2006). Genre Process Writing and Testing. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(3), 12–18.

[71] Jagaiah, T. (2017). Analysis of Syntactic Complexity and its Relationship to Writing Quality in Argumentative Essays (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Mansfield, CT, United States.

[72] Jang, E. (2009). Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment of L2 Reading Comprehension`ability: Validity Arguments for Fusion Model Application to Language Assessment. Language Testing, 26(1), 31–73.

[73] Javid, C. Z., & Umer, M. (2014). Saudi EFL Learners’ Writing Problems: A Move towards Solution. Proceedings of the Global Summit on Education GSE, 2014, 4–5.

[74] Javid, C. Z., Farooq, M. U., & Umer, M. (2013). An Investigation of Saudi EFL Learners’ Writing Problems: A Case Study along Gender Lines. Kashmir   Journal of Language Research, 16(1), 179–203.

[75] Justina, M. (2016). Use of WhatsApp to Enhance Reading and Writing Skills at Undergraduate College Level. Language in India, 16(11), 47–60.

[76] Kasanen, K., & Räty, H. (2002). “You be Sure Now to Be Honest in Your Assessment”: Teaching and Learning Self-assessment. Social Psychology of Education, 5(4), 313–328.

[77] Kellog, R. T. (2008). Improving the Writing Skills of College Students. Journal of Writing Research, 1(1), 1–26.

[78] Knoch, U., Rouhshad, A., & Storch, N. (2014). Does the Writing of Undergraduate ESL Students Develop after One Year of Study in an English-medium University? Assessing Writing, 21, 1–17.

[79] Knoch, U., Rouhshad, A., Oon, S. P., & Storch, N. (2015). What Happens to ESL Students’ Writing after Three Years of Study at an English Medium  university? Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 39–52.

[80] Larkin, T. L., & Belson, S., I. (2005). Blackboard Technologies: A Vehicle to Promote Students’ Motivation in Physics. Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 14–27.

[81] Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The Emergence of Complexity, Fluency, and Accuracy in the Oral and Written Production of Five Chinese Learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27, 590–619.

[82] Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012). Complex, Dynamic Systems: A New Transdisciplinary  Theme for Applied Linguistics?
Language Teaching, 45, 202–214. doi: 10.1017/S0261444811000061

[83] Lee, I. (2011). Formative Assessment in EFL Writing: An Exploratory Case Study. Changing English, 18(1), 99–111.

[84] Lee, S. (2015). L2 Writing Instruction in Blended Learning for the Development of Fluency, Complexity, and Accuracy in Higher Education. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 18(4), 121–147. doi: 10.15702/mall.2015.18.4.121

[85] Leki, I., Cumming, A., & Silva, T. (2008). A Synthesis of Research on Second Language Writing. New York, NY: Routledge.

[86] Li, X. (2008). Cognitive Transfer and English Writing. English Language Teaching, 1(1), 113–115. doi: 10.5539/elt.v1n1p113

[87] Liaw, S. (2008). Investigating Students’ Perceived Satisfaction, Behavioral Intention, and Effectiveness of e-learning: A Case Study of the Blackboard System. Computers and Education, 51(2), 864–873. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.005

[88] Liss, R., & Davis, J. (2006). Effective Academic Writing. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

[89] Lorenzo, F., & Rodríguez, L. (2014). Onset and Expansion of L2 Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency in Bilingual Settings: CALP in CLIL. System, 47, 64–72.

[90] Ministry of Education. (2004). The Development of Education: National Report of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2000-2004). Riyadh: Dar Al-Hilal Press.

[91] Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Integrating Technology in Teacher Knowledge. Teachers  College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.

[92] Motaghian, H., Hassanzadeh, A., & Moghadam, D. K. (2013). Factors Affecting University Instructors’ Adoption of Web-based Learning Systems: Case Study of Iran. Computers & Education, 61, 158–167.

[93] Mouakket, S., & Anissa, B. (2015). Investigating the Factors Influencing Continuance Usage Intention of Learning Management Systems by University Instructors: The Blackboard case. International Journal of Web Information Systems, 11(4), 491–509. doi: 10.1108/IJWIS-03-2015-0008

[94] Muncie, J. (2002). Process Writing and Vocabulary Development: Comparing Lexical Frequency Profiles across Drafts. System, 30(2), 225–235. doi: 10.1016/S0346 251X(02)00006-4

[95] Myles, J. (2002). Second-language Writing and Research: The Writing Process and Error Analysis in Student Texts. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign      Language, 6(2), 1–18.

[96] Nabati, A. (2018) Teaching Grammar through Social Networks and its Effect on Students’ Writing Accuracy (Unpublished master’s thesis). Islamic Azad   University, Qom, Iran.

[97] Navés, T., Torras, M. R., & Celaya, M. L. (2003). Long-term Effects of an Earlier Start: An analysis of EFL Written Production. In S. Foster-Cohen & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), EUROSLA yearbook: Annual Conference of the European Second Language Association (pp. 103-130). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.

[98] Nedal, A., & Hani, B. (2014). The Impact of WhatsApp Group’s Utilization of EFL Students’ Vocabulary Writing Amelioration. International Journal of University Teaching and Faculty Development, 5(2), 73–87.

[99] Otroshi M. H., & Bourdet J. F. (2012, November). ICT and the Problem of Integration in the Teaching/learning of French as a Foreign Language in Iran. Paper presented at the Fifth Annual International Conference on ICT for Language Learning, Florence, Italy.

[100] Pan, X. (2018). Investigating the Development of Syntactic Complexity in L2 Chinese Writing (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States.

[101] Panadero, E., Brown, G., & Courtney, M. (2014). Teachers’ Reasons for Using Self-Assessment: A Survey Self-report of Spanish Teachers. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 21(4), 365–383.

[102] Pasand, P. G., & Haghi, E. B. (2013). Process-product Approach to Writing: The Effect of Model Essays on EFL Leaners’ Writing Accuracy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 2(1), 75–79.

[103] Perin, D. (2013). Best Practices in Teaching Writing for College and Career Readiness. In Graham, S., MacArthur, C. A., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Best Practices in Writing Instruction (pp. 48–70). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

[104] Poon, J. (2013). Blended learning: An Institutional Approach for Enhancing Students’ Learning Experiences. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 271–288. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/poon_0613.htm

[105] Qarajeh, M., & Abdolmanafi, J. (2015). The Impact of Social Networking on the Oral Performance of EFL Learners. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(2), 51–56.

[106] Rababah, G. (2003). Communication Problems Facing Arab learners of English: A Personal Perspective. TEFL Web Journal, 2(1), 15–30.

[107] Rahma, N., Bandjarjani, W., & Andanty, F. D. (2018). The Influence of Using Telegram on the Writing Achievement of XI Grade Students at SMKN 8 Surabaya. Prosodi, 12(2), 206–210 . Retrieved from: https://journal.trunojoyo.ac.id/prosodi/article/view/4223/3147

[108] Reza K., Elaheh M., & Laleh K. (2018). The Effect of Task-based Language Teaching on Analytic Writing in EFL Classrooms. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1496627, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2018.1496627

[109] Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge  University Press.

[110] Rosmawati, M.  (2019). Syntactic Complexity in Second Language Academic Writing in English: Diversity on Display. In: Wright, C., Harvey, L., & Simpson, J. (Eds.), Voices and practices in applied linguistics: Diversifying a discipline (pp. 251–270). York, UK: White Rose University Press. doi: 10.22599/BAAL1.o

[111] Rosmawati, M. (2014). Dynamic Development of Complexity and Accuracy: A case Study in Second Language Academic Writing. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 37(2), 75–100.

[112] Saeidi, M., & Sahebkheir, F. (2011). The Effect of Model Essays on Accuracy and Complexity of EFL Learners’ Writing Performance. Middle-East Journal of  Scientific Research, 10(1), 130–137.

[113] Sarvari, S., & Ezzati, E. (2019). Teaching Writing through Telegram Social Network and its Effect on EFL learners’ Writing Performance. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 7(25), 87–100.

[114] Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students. 6th ed. New York, NY: Pearson Education.

[115] Scott, P. & Mouza, C. (2007). The impact of professional development on teacher learning, practice and leadership skills: A study on the integration of technology in the teaching of writing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(3), 229–266.

[116] Servonsky, W. L., Daniels, W. L., & Davis, B. L. (2005). Evaluation of Blackboard as a Platform for Distance Education Delivery. The ABNF Journal, 16(6), 132–135.

[117] Shirinbakhsh, S., & Saeidi, F. (2018). The Effectiveness of Telegram for Improving Students’ Reading Ability. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 4(5), 118–129.

[118] Singh, K. (2007). Quantitative Social Research Methods. New Delhi: SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd doi:10.4135/9789351507741

[119] Storch, N. (2009). The Impact of Studying in a Second Language (L2) Medium University on the Development of L2 Writing. Journal of Second   Language Writing, 18(2), 103–118.

[120] Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y.-Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What Drives a Successful el-earning? An Empirical Investigation of the Critical Factors             Influencing Learner Satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183–1202.
doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007

[121] Tang, R. (2012). Academic Writing in a Second or Foreign Language: Issues and Challenges Facing ESL/EFL Academic Writers in Higher Education Contexts. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing.

[122] Tangpermpoon, T. (2008). Integrated Approaches to Improve Students Writing Skills for English Major students. ABAC Journal, 28(2), 1–9.

[123] Telegram (2020). Statistics of Monthly Users. Retrieved from: www. Telegram. Org

[124] Tella, A. (2012). System-related Factors that Predict Students’ Satisfaction with the Blackboard Learning System at the University of Botswana. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, 22(1), 41–52.

[125] Thewissen, J. (2013). Capturing L2 Accuracy Developmental Patterns: Insights from an Error-tagged Learner Corpus. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 77–101.

[126] Thuy, N. H. (2009). Teaching EFL writing in Vietnam: Problems and Solutions—A Discussion from the Outlook of Applied Linguistics. Journal of Science, Foreign Languages, 24(2009), 61–66.

[127] Timucin, M. (2006). Implementing CALL in the EFL Context. ELT Journal, 60(3), 262–271.

[128] Tribble, C. (1996). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[129] Tuan, L. T. (2011). Teaching Writing through Genre-based Approach. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(11), 1471–1478.

[130] Tze, Y. S., Dewika, N., & Devandran, A. (2014). Improving Students’ Engagement through Social Media: A Case Study of a Private University in Malaysia using FaceBook. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Managementand e-Learning,
4(6), 396–409.

[131] Wall, J., & Ahmed, V. (2008). Lessons Learned from a Case Study in Deploying Blended Learning Continuing Professional Development. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 15(2), 185–202.

[132] Wang, W. (2014). Students’ Perceptions of Rubric-referenced Peer Feedback on EFL Writing: A Longitudinal Inquiry. Assessing Writing, 19(2014) 80–96.

[133] WhatsApp (2020). Statistics of Monthly Users. Retrieved from: www.WhatsApp. Org

[134] Wind, A. M. (2013). Second Language Writing Development from a Dynamic Systems Theory Perspective. In B.-P. Olmos-López, J. Huang, & J. Almeida (Eds.), Papers from the 8th Lancaster University postgraduate conference in Linguistics & Language Teaching 2012 (pp. 90–123). Lancaster, UK: Lancaster University.

[135] Xodabande, I. (2017). The Effectiveness of Social Media Network Telegram in Teaching English Language Pronunciation to Iranian EFL learners. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1–14. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2017.1347081

[136] Yan, G. (2005). A Process Genre Model for Teaching Writing. English Teaching Forum, 43(3), 18–26.

[137] Yang, W., Lu, X., & Weigle, S. C. (2015). Different Topics, Different Discourse: Relationships among Writing Topic, Measures of Syntactic Complexity, and Judgments of Writing Quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 53–67. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.02.002

[138] Yinka, A. R. & Queendarline, N. N. (2018). Telegram as a Social Media Tool for Teaching and Learning in Tertiary Institutions. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 5(7), 95–98.

[139] Yitong, W., Yinghui, S., Hao Y. H., & Jianqing, L. (2017). Blended Learning Versus Traditional Learning: A Study on Students’ Learning Achievements and Academic press. Conference Proceedings: 2017 International Symposium on Educational Technology, volume 1 (pp. 219–223). doi: 10.1109/ISET.2017.57

 

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Tumblr
Reddit
Email
StumbleUpon
Digg
https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/th.282

Lamyaa Falah AlMohaya, Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University
Saudi Arabia, ORCiD ID:  https://orcid.org/ 0000-0002-4753-2296