STRATEGIES OF PROCESS APPROACH TO GUIDE STUDENTS’

WRITTEN PRODUCTION

INSTITUCION EDUCATIVA DISTRITAL REPÚBLICA DEL ECUADOR

ZONE 4th

Presented by: Ana Virginia Ariza Martínez

Group C
To: Melba L. Cárdenas
Támara Cháves

UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE COLOMBIA

PFPD RED PROFILE
Bogotá, December, 2004
 STRATEGIES OF PROCESS WRITING APPROACH TO GUIDE STUDENTS’
WRITTEN PRODUCTION

1. JUSTIFICATION

A generalized discouraging attitude towards our educational system has taken

position of students in public schools. English classes are not the exception. The
causes of this growing problem are a lot and diverse, they are not a secret for
anybody but I do not intend to go deeply on them.

English level at school is very low, and writing is the least developed of skills. Many
reasons can be the cause of this: we do not know how to work with this
tremendously complex process, it demands a great amount of time, students’
written compositions discourage us and we do not know how to deal with the
problem, etc. That is why I want to make emphasis on it and help students to
improve compositions. Teachers must struggle every day looking for the best
alternatives to motivate our learners and try to improve the learning process. As
there is a constant search for different strategies, methodologies, activities etc. to
get the goal, I have found this interesting aspect to focus on. I know that writing is a
very complex process that gathers different skills, in other words it is a challenge
for me to improve it..

On the other hand, writing makes part of the communicative competence, main
goal of English subject, which Savignon (1997, p.14) describes as “a continuous
process of expression, interpretation and negotiation of meaning”.

2. FOCUS

 What happens with students’ written production when they apply

 How can I guide students to write by following process writing

process writing strategies?

 How are students’ reactions to process writing experiences?

strategies?

3. OBJECTIVE

Two main objectives have driven me to start this research:

  To redress the imbalance that exists at school as in most schools in
Bogotá, with respect to the attention that teachers devote to the
language skills. I mean, we usually pay much more attention to listening,
reading and speaking than to writing (see fig. 1)

Figure 1.

 To improve the students’ written compositions by using strategies of the

process-writing approach

4. TYPE OF PROJECT

It is a combination of research and innovation. A research one because it is a

process that is going to be carried out to solve the problem of students’ written
compositions, and innovation because this process implies several changes in
order to improve.

Writing is a problem that has been identified into a specific context. English
composition at I.E.D. Rep. Ecuador is a daunting task for our students. As I
mentioned before, teachers keep struggling to improve this practice. However, if
we do not undertake a substantial change, the results will continue the same. As
the change is involved, a consistent evaluation and a reflection about the process
is a need.

This research is also co-operative action research since ideas and expectations of
all participants in the community can be involved.

5. CONTEXT

Institución Educativa Distrital República del Ecuador is located in zone 4th in the
south east of Bogotá City. It has two branches: A and B and two shifts: morning
and afternoon, with about 500 students per shift and branch. I work for branch A
with teenagers –aged 12 to 20.

Our ELT curriculum is based on communicative approach according to “estándares

curriculares”. We know it is necessary to foster the students’ communicative
competence in English in spite of the several difficulties we must face, i.e. large
classes, social and familiar circumstances and the little interest students have got
in learning.

PEI is a matter of work right now. Mission and Vision are being reconsidered but
the final work is not finished yet. So I can say that we have not got any PEI so far.
However, the development of communicative competence in English is
contemplated in the Vision.

With respect to participants, there are important aspects to bear in mind. First of
all, we, as teachers are not used to writing, so we can not expect so much from
students unless there is substantial change, mainly when we do not have even
adopted a systematic process for writing lessons. With these former aspects and
what is more with so large classes, so little interest in learning, few hours of
English classes a week (2 or 3), waste of time because of different activities, and
discourage, among others, the result is obvious. Students are low-achievers in
general, but the least developed skill is writing.

I selected a group of 36 students from 9th grade (901) to work on the project. They
are boys and girls aged 14 to 16.

From this group I took a sample of five pupils who are average students but they
rarely miss classes, they work in class, and make big efforts to improve.
Fortunately this group is collaborative, students accept suggestions in a positive
way and work in class as well as in the house. These students’ literacy is not well
developed, as I have just mentioned. Sometimes I get compositions from controlled
practice. For free practice they are used to producing just simple ideas and some
of them dare to group these into a supposed paragraph. Connecting ideas and
getting coherence in a text is a daunting task.

The other participant is just me, and I hope I will count on the coordinator and the
principal.

6. LITERATURE REVIEW

Writing for ESL students is not an easy matter, mainly when the students’ English
competence is not very well developed. On the other hand, there is reading, which
carries out a big problem in comprehension. Students are not used to “thinking” in
English, they are not used to infering meanings from context and they forget
vocabulary, structures or chunks which had supposedly been learned. As reading
and writing are two hand-and-hand processes, it makes even more difficult the
writing process. However, since the human being has the competence to think,
there will be a possibility to write.

The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of previous findings about the
writing process for ESL students, and mainly about the process writing approach.
Although I am conscious that the most important principle of process pedagogy is
that writing is the result of a very complex, highly individualized process, the need
to investigate or innovate on this topic is significant, because the more time
passes, the poorer ESL students’ production at school is. That is why I have posed
one general and two specific questions about process writing approach:

 What happens with students’ written production when they apply

 How can I guide students to write by following process writing

process writing strategies?

 How are students’ reactions to process writing experiences?

strategies?

Writing is something I have always felt excited about. Hence, I have been trying
with a personal project during the last three years. This experience has been both,
a little successful with respect to results, and a little unsuccessful with respect to
the process. I mean, it has sometimes been exhausting, and many times I have
found myself paraphrasing what the students want to pose in order to get
coherence in their productions. I will briefly comment about this empirical try.

Many times, the process towards writing starts by reading, because as Frías
(1996:7) suggests, “reading and writing are creative and interactive processes”.
That is what I did, so students started to read (per groups) some short stories, i.e.
“The Ugly Duckling”, “Cinderella”, and so on. I helped them with certain structures,
vocabulary, and expressions. Once the text had been understood, I elicited from
the learners paraphrases of the story. Later they started the process of writing
summaries of these stories. I helped them with kind of controlled composition to
write the main ideas. Finally, they were able to write acceptable summaries after
having given feedback and corrected errors and were asked to edit them.

The next year I wanted them to create their own short story. First of all, we
brainstormed for possible topics. Each student decided his/her own. Then they
were asked to focus on characters, places, and so on. The creation part started,
there were permanent drafts with their corresponding feedback. The results were
good in some way as I previously indicated, but I think I made many mistakes
during the process. I looked anxiously for good productions, but I overlooked the
process. Now I would like to try a different approach, the process one, to improve
process as well as results.

Santoyo and Morales (Profile, 2000) also connected written production to their
project on reading. They stated relevant aspects to count on in the process such
as: teamwork, motivation, vocabulary and the fact of writing ideas before speaking.
Their project is a proof that listening, speaking, reading and writing must work in an
integrated way. They got interesting results in interaction, motivation and oral and
written production from reading.

I found some other interesting proposals such as Ortega and Rodriguez’s one
(Profile, 2000) in “Improvement of writing proficiency through creation of
homogeneous groups in the classroom”, where they state that there is a lot of
theory about writing skills, but these do not bear in mind the learners’ likes,
interests, problems, age, attitude, etc., and I agree with them. It was interesting to
create different working groups to establish the kind of work that functions better.
However, it is noticeable that all the activities carried out based on a controlled
writing situation provided good results, while freer compositions did not.

Silva, (2003:28) presents a transition of ESL writing throughout the time in his
article ESL Writing: Past, Present, and Future. He focuses on the four most
influential approaches: controlled composition, current-traditional rhetoric, the
process approach, and English for academic purposes. In his article he refers to
the process approach as a “non-linear exploratory and generative process whereby
writers discover and reformulate their ideas as they attempt to approximate
meaning” according to Zamel (1983, p.165).

Precisely this research is based on this approach: the process-oriented one. White
and Arndt (1991) propose a model for working with writing (see fig. 2), where we
can see it is a certainly not linear but cyclical process, and offers a great variety of
activities for each of the stages proposed. Below There is a brief explanation
about each of this framework stages.

Drafting

Structuring Re-viewing Focusing

Generating Evaluating
Ideas

Fig. 2

The focusing stage has to do with the purpose for writing, the real reasons for
writing. Structuring deals with the organization of ideas in an acceptable way for
the reader. Drafting shows the transition from writer-based into reader-based text,
because multiple drafts are produced and each one has feedback from the teacher
or from peers. Re-viewing means standing back from the text and looking at it with
fresh eyes and ask oneself: Is it right? . Evaluation is given on the process to assist
students permanently and not merely at the end.

To summarize, I will mention some of the advantages offered by this approach :

 It focuses on the process (not on the final product)

 It is reader-based (not writer-based)
 It counts with a real audience
 It offers a variety of techniques
 The teacher plays the role of guide, facilitator, reader
 The student’s role is the one of sharing and collaborating
 Grammar is a tool (a means, not an end)
 Meaning is essential (not form)
 It is a creative process
 Evaluation and feedback are given permanently (not only at the end)
Some of the literature found deals with the process approach itself. Now I will
report some findings about works based on it.

As the state of art at my work place is based on the communicative approach, I will
mention Calvache (HOW, 2003), who explains important aspects of the
communicative approach, the task-based approach and the development of
competence in foreign languages. I liked Calvache’s article and I agree with the
point of view that the learner is the center of the process, so, for any educational
action we must bear in mind his/her previous knowledge, his/her daily struggle,
his/her needs and interests, his/her abilities and his/her attitudes, which are
aspects to take advantage from.

Task-Based Instruction (TBI) has also a lot to do with the development of my

project, since my work will be focused on tasks, where learners will interact and
cooperate continuously to learn by doing.

I found a reflection and a proposal to L2 writing from Ortiz (HOW, 2003), where she
demonstrates that questions can be used in writing activities to generate ideas.
The topic and the kind of texts will depend on the students’ age, interests and level.
She probably based her innovation on White and Arndt’s (1991) suggestion in
order to focus on the concept of “shared knowledge” between reader and writer.
She asked questions related to friends, families, relative, teachers, etc. in order to
generate short texts about these specific topics. I think her proposal is interesting
but I would like to go further than merely writing as a responses product.

Holmes, (2004) in his article “The use of a process-oriented approach to facilitate

the planning and production stages of writing for adult students of English as a
Foreign or Second Language” identifies some features of this approach and
provides some suggestions to develop activities in order to humanize and make a
more positive and effective experience from writing. He also involves White and
Arndt’s (1991, p5) remark that “activities include pair and group work, not to
mention discussion and collaboration, so that the writing class becomes, in a very
genuine sense, a communicative experience in which much more than skill in
writing is practiced and developed.”

Myers, (2004) from Texas University in her work “Teaching Writing as a Process
and Teaching Sentence-Level Syntax: Reformulation as ESL Composition
Feedback”, describes the procedures for using reformulation as composition
feedback, aimed at improving sentence level grammar. I understand reformulation
as one of the alternatives for correcting errors in a more human way. It seems to
me an interesting work, but I am not sure it would work with my students, since
they are not the same age, are lower-level and are not equally mature.
We can find lots of information about the writing process and specifically the
process writing approach. I have found different aspects which I think would work
according to the characteristics of my students and there are some others that
would work with higher-level students or with students from a different culture. I
have found that process writing offers a positive, motivating and collaborative
atmosphere for students to write. It focuses on reader-based texts instead of writer-
based texts. Besides, this approach gives extreme importance to the learners’
needs, interests, problems, age, motivation, and so on, which makes the student
the center of the process. It requires real or authentic context and real readers.

I have learned a lot from all the articles and texts mentioned. I think all researches
and innovations are important and we can take advantage of several aspects form
each one.

7. MODE

This action-research and innovation project will be conducted using the following
stages:

- Identification and formulation of the problem

- Planning
- Data collection
- Analysis and Reflection
- Hypothesis and Speculation
- Intervention
- Observation
- Writing
- Presentation

At the beginning, the students will receive an introduction about this project
development. They will be asked to take active part and a consent form will be
sent to their parents. (see annex 1)

Some strategies to guide the students to write will be systematically applied,

beginning by the ones White and Arndt (1991) suggest to generate ideas such as
brainstorming, question-based, using pictures and cartoons, etc. The process will
be cycling among structuring, drafting, focusing, re-viewing and evaluating
continuously.

Data will be collected from collection of drafts and final products, and surveys. The
teacher will play the role of observer and facilitator.
8. CHRONOGRAM

STAGE MONTH
Identification and formulation of the problem June/July
Planning August/Sept.
Data Collection Sept./Oct./Nov.
Analysis Oct./Nov.
Hypothesis/Speculation November
Intervention November
Observation Oct./Nov.
Writing July-Dec.
Presentation December

9. RESOURCES

For the implementation of the project I will need documents on process writing
approach, paper, handouts, pictures, realia, readings, computers, printer, tape
recorder, video beam.
I will be the direct responsible for each stage of the project.

10. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In order to write about the first findings, let us recall the main and related questions
that brought me to this research.

 What happens with students’ written production when they apply

process writing strategies?
  How can I guide students to write by following process writing


strategies?
How are students’ reactions to process writing experiences?

Before beginning to collect data, the students from 901 grade were told about the
project and were asked to participate in a volunteering manner. Everybody agreed
and liked the idea, and consent forms (see annex 1) were given to ten students
who decided to be part of the sample. Next class they should bring them back with
the corresponding information and signatures. From these 10 students I decided
upon selecting five of them to be the sample, I chose those who rarely miss class
and who attend suggestions and recommendations with great interest. Their
names and ages are Ivan , (15), Fernando, (15), Mark (fictitious name), (14),
Liliana, (16), and Darwin, (14).

Data began to be collected in September in the classroom of 901 grade. To start

with the process of generation of ideas, I applied an unguided technique, in order
to help students to generate ideas and observe their reactions towards these
activities from process oriented approach. I recorded field notes in a chart. See
table 1

DATE ISSUE/ ACTION REFLECTION/COMMENTS

QUESTION
Sept.1/04 Does I modeled a Students understood the idea
brainstorming brainstorming of brainstorming.
help to activity. They showed interest and
generate I wrote the word participated a lot, making
ideas? “love”, (on purpose jokes among them, laughing
of the month), in and enjoying.
the middle of the Some of them didn’t talk,
board and asked (Liliana and Darwin), so they
the students to give just listened to the others and
related ideas. The observed.
board finished full of The others, Fernando, Mark
ideas. Most of them and Ivan gave ideas to the
were given in L1 but other members of the group,
I wrote them in but most of them were in
English and made Spanish, in spite of that they
emphasis on them. know a lot of vocabulary
related to this main topic.
Table 1

Another brainstorming activity began to be carried out. (See table 2)

 DATE ISSUE/ ACTION
QUESTION
Sept.1/04 What I distributed slips of paper
topics do (one per student).
teenagers I explained the
like development of a “snow-
reading ball” activity, proceeding
the most? from individual 
pairgroupclass with an
accumulation of ideas at
each stage.
They spent 2 min. silently
writing down ideas related
to the question given. Then
they worked in pairs (2
min.) sharing and
completing the list, and
finally in groups. I took
advantage of cooperative
learning. They had to
prepare a poster giving a
name to the group, listing
the most important five
topics on which they
agreed, helping each other
to express ideas in English,
and appointing a speaker,
who would present briefly
the information.
Table 2
REFLECTION/COMMENTS
Some students were very
lazy and waited for others
do the work.
Most of students didn’t
show interest about not
making mistakes. They
simply didn’t worry about it.
Time allotted for group work
was not enough.
Posters were well
decorated in general.
Presentations were O.K..
However some students
didn’t pay attention to the
speakers.
Groups presented very
similar ideas with respect to
their topics of interest.
Next class the same groups
were asked to produce
charts on the topic of their
preference using “El
Tiempo” newspaper. They
should read about a topic
and generate a text on their
own.

Notes:

Some productions were fantastic. Some others were just copy of parts of the news.
A lot of creativity was demonstrated. The students with the best handwriting was
chosen to do the final product. Others were chosen to draw. They used several
materials, felt-tip pens of several colors, silhouette paper, etc. I reviewed their
compositions before doing the final charts, since they were to stick on the principal
hall at school. (see photograph of sample # 1)

Some other activities for generation of ideas were worked with students. See
tables 3, 4 and 5.
 DATE ISSUE/ ACTION
QUESTION
Sept.8/04 Does a I modeled an activity of
sequence using a picture sequence
of for a narrative text. I
pictures organized the class into
help the groups of five and issued a
students different picture from the
to sequence to each group.
generate Each group should
ideas? generate a few sentences
which told the story. Then a
speaker from each group
should display their picture
and give their ideas. When
all groups had presented
theirs, I asked the other
students to suggest an
order in which the pictures
should go so as to make a
story. Then the speakers
read their corresponding
ideas in order and a story
was created. A model was
written on the board.
Then each student was
given a sequence of
pictures for them to create
a narrative story.
Table 3
REFLECTION/COMMENTS
Students’ motivation raised
when I showed them the
pictures. Everybody raised
their hands and wanted to
participate.
They showed great interest
and gave good ideas.
They were eager to see
what was going to happen
next.
When we identified a
possible coherent order for
the sequence they were still
happy.
Things seemed to turn
bored when I began to write
on the board a possible
narrative text.
Some students yawned,
others looked at different
parts, the enchantment had
disappeared.
When they were given the
papers individually, they
again showed interest for
finding the logical or
possible sequence, but at
the moment of writing,
again things changed. They
realized they needed new
vocabulary but most of
them do not have a
dictionary.
It was difficult for them to
create a text. They intended
to write simple ideas
describing what happened
in each picture. They had
tot give coherence and
connect ideas properly.
Notes: the principal and most common errors in writing were: bad use of verb
forms (past, past participles), ex: … getsed, …finded, omission of subjects, ex:
…but had …, bad use of prepositions ( or sometimes two prepositions followed,
ex: … and but….), bad use of past ideas in negative form, ex: .. .he not had
coins…. (See sample # 2)
I decided upon giving the following codes for feedback on their first compositions:

gr: grammar
sp: spelling
w.o: word order
: omission
w.w: wrong word
X: over
w.e: wrong expression
t.r: tense review

DATE ISSUE/ ACTION REFLECTION/COMMENTS

QUESTION
Sept. How does A sequence of Mafalda’s Some students didn’t
13/04 un story was given to students. understand the story.
unscramb They had to create a Probably they had never
led narrative text following the read Mafalda before.
sequence sequence. Anyhow, they managed to
of create their own based on
pictures their perception. They
help the needed to ask for specific
students vocabulary according to
to what the pictures showed.
generate They showed interest.
ideas? Pictures liked a lot and
some asked for color them.
The students wrote good
compositions from the
sample. In my opinion,
these compositions were
much better than the
previous ones. (see sample
# 3)
Table 4
 DATE ISSUE/ ACTION REFLECTION/COMMENTS
QUESTION
Oct.20/ How can Students were given a More creativity and
04 a comic comic strip (Mafalda’s imagination is needed.
strip help again), with blank speech The comic strip does not
students bubbles to fill in. show a very clear situation.
to However, Ivan and Darwin
compose fell on the spot of the
dialogues matter. They ended the
? story making Felipe, the
character, feel frustrated.
Probably it was their
perception according to
Felipe’s face expression.
The students’ productions
in general were not
excellent. However
several ideas were
generated and pictures
helped a lot.

Again, too many grammar

and coherence mistakes.
(see sample # 4)
Table 5

I decided to stop the activities related to generation of ideas and give place to the
focusing stage. An only activity was carried out to make the students notice that
writers must have a clear purpose for writing what they do. In order to detect the
writer’s reasons for writing a pool of suitable newspapers letters (in Spanish) and
task sheets were given to them. (see table 6)
 DATE ISSUE/ ACTION
QUESTION
Oct.27/ How can I The class had to suggest
04 make the reasons of why people
students write letters to newspapers.
realize The results were: to
about the congratulate, thank,
reasons complain, oppose, advise,
for etc. Then they had to look
writing? at the pool of letters given
and evaluate how well the
ideas and language chosen
by the writers served their
purpose. They had to
complete the task sheet
given. I wrote on the board
some ideas related to
attitudes and language
devices and explained
them a little bit.
Then they had to write a
letter to the principal of the
school who had taken the
decision of eliminating the
right to receive the snack
offered by the ICBF
because some students
had been frittering it away.
REFLECTION/COMMENTS
Letters were a good
example to understand the
writers’ purpose. When the
students received the news
of elimination of the snacks,
they reacted with different
attitudes and immediately
started writing their letters.
In a very respectful way
they showed their
disapproval and argued the
reasons for which they
should continue receiving
the snacks. They
complained for the decision
and suggested the principal
to take a different one.
(see sample 5)

Table 6

INTERPRETATIONS:

According to White and Arndt’s model of writing (1991), based on process-writing

approach, generation of ideas is a clearly crucial part of the writing process (see
figure 2)
Since getting started is the most difficult part of any process, this research is just a
starting point of the complex process of writing.
Most of the activities here presented have to do with generation of ideas. Some of
them are guided and some others are not. There is one more activity which has to
do with the focusing stage.

Brainstorming, (an unguided technique), first modeled by the teacher, and then by
the students, was useful to produce many individual ideas or words related to a
specific topic quickly. Later on they were enlarged through cooperative work as I
explained in the field notes. Students showed a positive attitude towards these
activities. They had fun and showed great creativity. However, English language
was not used at all and there was difficulty for developing ideas. When students
perceive that the task is getting complicated, most of them give up and start getting
bored, frustrated or unable. They do not make much effort.

On the other hand, the other activities, I mean, using picture sequences and
cartoons, fostered personal expression since each student perceived and
interpreted these visual aids differently. They were a great stimulus for vocabulary
development.

Learners liked the activities where they did not have to write so much, which were
creative and where they could express their feelings and emotions without having
to write very much. They discovered ideas, but it was not easy to develop them. If
they were not pressed, they did not make any effort, or simply evaded doing things.

Some activities for generation of ideas provided more successful results than
others. It is necessary to implement the ones where students have to exercise their
creativity and imagination since it is quite difficult for them although they are
interested. They are used to following patterns and it is hard for them to go beyond.
In general they showed great interest and better outcomes with pictures than with
words.

Errors in grammar, syntax and coherence are frequently presented, but I will not try
to focus on them but in the process itself. It is hard for me because I am always
trying to correct mistakes at first sight. I am also trying to change my mind.

With respect to the focusing activity I could notice that the students really
understood that every body writes with a specific purpose. With the pool of letters
taken from “El Tiempo” newspaper they could observe the different purposes, the
different writers’ attitude, and the different language devices the writer uses to
make their letters really effective.
FINDINGS

With these aspects mentioned, I can establish the following categories for this
research:

CATEGORIES DESCRIPTION
Pictures help more than words For ideas generation several activities were
posed. From these ones, students showed
much more interest, creativity and discovering
of ideas when the starting point was a picture
or sequences of pictures, or cartoons, than
when the starting point was just words.
The simpler the task, the better Students’ attention time is very short. If After
written outcomes 15 minutes of having started an activity they
haven’t finished, they get tired, bored,
frustrated and feel unable. So, tasks must be
short, clear and simple, according to their
proficiency. So the students will work in a
positive manner, they will feel confident and
encouraged to write their own ideas.
Letters: a good resort to When learners receive news about decisions
complain that can harm their life conditions, they
immediately react. Letters help them to
express their disagreement, protest, complain,
etc. and they know that most of letters are
effective if language is used properly. It was a
good device to make the students understand
what focusing means.
Teacher’s role The teacher must be essentially a model and a
facilitator. A model because students need
examples to do anything for the first time, it is
the teacher who must guide them with clear
instructions, and a facilitator because students
will need help either with vocabulary or any
other aspect of organizational competence
(cohesion, syntax, coherence, etc).
 CONCLUSIONS

This is a study related to how English teachers can help or guide our students to
write or improve their compositions in this foreign language. As I have said, writing
is the most neglected of the skills and I have wanted to return to its practice. So I
have planned the use of different strategies and activities that White and Arndt
pose in their work about the process-writing approach.

For this study I identified one main pedagogical question and two more related
ones which had to do with the way I could guide my students to improve their
written compositions and what their reaction to process-writing approach activities
was. In spite of the short time I had to implement this study I managed to prove two
of White and Arndt’s proposed stages: generation and focusing.

With both of these stages and in the different activities carried out I could realize
that it is not really very difficult to guide the learners towards a good output. For
generation I applied several activities where I could notice that the best products
were those in which pictures were involved to help the students generate ideas.
Students began to get bored or discouraged when the activities turned too long, or
when they had to write a lot. So the activities for these types of groups should be
short, visually aided and clear. For the focusing stage, it was important to make
the students realize that nobody writes without a specific purpose or for a specific
audience. With the use of letters from a newspaper they understood that the
writer’s attitude and the different kind of language he/she uses is very related to
his/her purpose. The teacher’s role is also an important cue. We must be guides
and facilitators instead of judges or linguistic elements correctors. These type of
corrections should be left for subsequent studies.

In summary, everything is a matter of creativity and presentation of motivating

activities in a step-by-step pace. The student’s reactions in general were quite
positive. They liked the activities and did their best even giving ideas in Spanish.
Motivation was clear in some activities in particular. I observed a raise of interest
for writing, and the idea of being working for a research helped a lot.

I think this study was very important for me because I learned a lot of process-
writing approach, I understood the importance of being systematic for a research
and it has created a great expectation for future research. I plan to go ahead and
take the best advantage of what I learned.
 PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS

Working with White and Arndt’s proposal implies that the students are high
achievers and that they have a good competence in the English language.
However, the group of students of this study are neither high achievers nor have a
good English competence. Nevertheless things resulted to be a positive
experience and this proposal can also function with low achievers. Obviously it
would be nicer and better if things were different.

This study helped to create anxiety of learning in the students, most of them
wished to be able to deal with a lot of vocabulary, structures and coherent
elements. We noticed how low the achievements has been so far, but unfortunately
there are not one’s own circumstances that have produced these results.

In order to do this kind of work, it is necessary to count on first of all the will. Once
the problem or the situation has been identified, it is important to start learning from
the literature about this topic. It is necessary to motivate the students with nice
activities and have copies of the different activities available.

It is important that teachers do not feel discouraged or afraid of working with writing
since there are really good alternatives to work with. What is more, there is a lot of
information about this process-writing approach which I suggest since activities are
clear, motivating and overall effective.

LIMITATIONS:

I had some difficulties specially with material, because of little support from the
principal. Another important difficulty was the low level of achievement of the
students. I counted on very short time to apply all the activities I would have liked
to. Data analysis is not an easy matter to work with, so I had some problems to
understand how I could analyze them.
 POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTIONS OR RESEARCH

 It would be nice to be able to cover all White and Arndt’s proposal stages
covered in a school year. I mean, not only generation or focusing but
reviewing, structuring, drafting and evaluating.

 An interesting aspect would be digging into the results of this proposal with
high achievers and with other social condition students.

 Another important aspect to study in the future would be the way of

correcting and/or evaluating the students’ written compositions.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Frías, M. (1996). Procesos Creativos para la Construcción de Textos. Cooperativa

Editorial Magisterio: Colombia

Furneaux, C. (1998). Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Process

writing. Oxford

Holmes, N. (2004). The use of a process-oriented approach to facilitate the

planning and production stages of writing for adult students of English as a Foreign
or Second Language. Retrieved from:
http://www.developingteachers.com/articles_tchtraining//processw2_nicola.htm on
August 2, 2004

Myers, S. (2004). Teaching Writing as a Process and Teaching Sentence-Level

Syntax: Reformulation as ESL Composition Feedback. Texas Tech University

Nunan, D. (1992) Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press

Ortega, L. and Rodríguez V, (2000) Improvement of writing proficiency through

creation of homogeneous groups in the classroom. Profile Journal, 1, 48-51

Ortiz, R.. (2003). Question-Based writing Process: A reflection and a proposal to

L2 writing. HOW 10, 35-43

Santoyo, B. and Morales L. (2000). Reading: a motivating and interactive process.

Profile Journal 1, 59-60

Silva, T, Ph. D. (2003). ESL Writing: Past, Present, and Future. HOW, 10, 28-39

The Process Approach to Teaching Writing (2004). Retrieved from:

http://www.askjeeves.com, on August 8, 2004

White, R. and Arndt, V. (1991) Process Writing. Longman: London and New York