ArticleHeliyon2023
An investigation into EFL pre-service teachers' academic writing strategies.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent research has shown writing strategies to have a substantial impact on language learners' writing performance but little is known about what strategies EFL learners use and how they use them in writing academic texts such as reports, final assignments, and project papers. The study reported in this paper extends this line of research by investigating the strategies Vietnamese EFL pre-service teachers use in academic writing. Data included document analysis of 17 pre-service teachers' final assignment papers (one paper per teacher) and individual semi-structured interviews with ten teachers. The study adopted a content-based approach to qualitative data analysis with reference to a comprehensive research-based taxonomy for L2 academic writing strategies, including rhetorical, metacognitive, cognitive, and social affective strategies. The results show that rhetorical, metacognitive, and cognitive strategies were most frequently used by the teacher participants. The results further show that self-efficacy and self-regulation determined the teachers' use of strategies during the writing process. Implications for the L2 writing classroom focused on academic writing strategies to enhance pre-service teachers' writing quality will be discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.