Keywords
longitudinal design
task motivation
model text
collaborative writing
How to Cite
Number of views: 47
Number of downloads: 26
Abstract
This study investigated how the inclusion of model texts as a feedback technique affected students’ task motivation and engagement in writing tasks. Adopting a longitudinal design, 60 English as a foreign language (EFL) children (aged 11-12) were divided into three groups: a treatment group, a long-term treatment group, and a control group. The treatment groups received feedback that incorporated model texts as examples of proficient writing, while the control group self-corrected their texts. Task motivation was assessed through self-report questionnaires and focus group interviews. The findings showed that the children responded positively to the use of model texts, particularly those children who had been exposed to this type of feedback over a longer period. While some expressed a preference for more explicit error correction, their overall enjoyment, improvement, as well as enthusiasm for collaborative work highlight the value of integrating model texts into the EFL classroom. Based on these findings, pedagogical implications will be discussed.
Funding
The financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) under grant FFI2016-74950-P (AEI/FEDER/UE) and by the Basque Government under grant IT904-16
References
Al Khalil, M. K. (2011). Second language motivation: Its relationship to noticing, affect, and production in task-based interaction (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University, USA.
Al Khalil, M. K. (2016). Insights from measurement of task-related motivation. In A. Mackey & E. Marsden (Eds.), Advancing methodology and practice: The IRIS repository of instruments for research into second languages (pp. 243-262). Routledge.
Azkarai, A., & Kopinska, M. (2020). Young EFL learners and collaborative writing: A study on patterns of interaction, engagement in LREs, and task motivation. System, 94, 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102338
Bae, J., & Lee, Y.-S. (2012). Evaluating the development of children’s writing ability in an EFL context. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9(4), 348-374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2012.721424
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The value of a focused approach to written corrective feedback. English Language Teaching Journal, 63(3), 204-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn043
Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783095056
Boo, Z., Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). L2 motivation research 2005-2014: Understanding a publication surge and a changing landscape. System, 55, 145-157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.10.006
Bryfonski, L., Ku, Y., & Mackey, A. (2024). Research methods for IDs and TBLT: A substantive and methodological review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263124000135
Calzada, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2020). Child learners’ reflections about EFL grammar in a collaborative writing task: When form is not at odds with communication. Language Awareness, 30(1), 1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2020.1751178
Cambridge Young Learners English Assessment. (2018). Cambridge English A2 Flyers. Volume 1. Cambridge English language assessment. https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/Images/young-learners-sample-papers-2018-vol1.pdf
Cánovas Guirao, J. (2017). The use of written models in the teaching of English in Primary (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad de Murcia, Spain.
Cánovas Guirao, J., Roca de Larios, J., & Coyle, Y. (2015). The use of models as a written feedback technique with young EFL learners. System, 52, 63-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.04.002
Coyle, Y., Cánovas Guirao, J., & Roca de Larios, J. (2018). Identifying the trajectories of young EFL learners across multistage writing and feedback processing tasks with model texts. Journal of Second Language Writing, 42, 25-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.09.002
Coyle, Y., & Roca de Larios, J. (2020). Exploring young learners’ engagement with models as a written corrective technique in EFL and CLIL set-tings. System, 95, 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102374
Criado, R., Garcés-Manzanera, A., & Plonsky, L. (2022). Models as written corrective feedback: Effects on young L2 learners’ fluency in digital writing from product and process perspectives. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(4), 697-719. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.4.8
Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2009). Learning experiences, selves and motivated learning behavior: A comparative analysis of structural models for Hungarian secondary and university learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 98-119). Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-006
Dörnyei, Z. (2002). The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 137-158). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.10dor
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual dif-ferences in second language acquisition. Erlbaum.
Dörnyei, Z. (2019). What makes an L2 task engaging? In E. Zhisheng & M. J. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching L2 task performance and tedagogy: In honour of Peter Skehan (pp. 53-66). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.13.04dor
Dörnyei, Z., & Dewaele, J.-M. (2022). Questionnaires in second language research: construction, administration, and processing. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003331926
Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 275-300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880000400305
Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181-201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490
García Mayo, M. P., & Loidi Labandibar, U. (2017). The use of models as written corrective feedback in English as a foreign anguage (EFL) writing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 110-127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190517000071
Hanaoka, O. (2007). Output, noticing, and learning: An investigation into the role of spontaneous attention to form in a four-stage writing task. Language Teaching Research, 11(4), 73-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807080963
Kang, E. Y. (2020). Using model texts as a form of feedback in L2 writing. System, 89, 1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102196
Kang, E. Y. (2023). EFL learners’ perceptions and their association with the effectiveness of model texts as a feedback tool. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 18(1), 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2023.2226144
Kim, T.-Y. (2005). Reconceptualising L2 motivation: Vygotskian activity theory approach. English Teaching, 60(4), 299-322.
Kopinska, M., & Azkarai, A. (2020). Exploring young EFL learners’ motivation: Individual versus pair work on dictogloss tasks. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 607-630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.10
Kormos, J., & Dörnyei, Z. (2004). The interaction of linguistic and motivational variables in second language task performance. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 9(2).
Lapkin, S., Swain, M., & Smith, M. (2002). Reformulation and the learning of French pronominal verbs in a Canadian French immersion context. Modern Language Journal, 86, 485-507. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00157
Lázaro-Ibarrola, A. (2021). Model texts in collaborative and individual writing among EFL children: Noticing, incorporations and draft quality. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 2, 329-359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2020-0160
Lázaro-Ibarrola, A. (2023). Child L2 writers: A room of their own. John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.32
Lázaro-Ibarrola, A., & Villarreal, I. (2021). Are EFL writers motivated or demotivated by model texts and task repetition?: Evidence from young collaborative writers. International Journal of English Studies, 21(2), 29-55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.466401
Legault, L., Green-Demers, I., & Pelletier, L. (2006). Why do high school students lack motivation in the classroom? Toward an understanding of academic amotivation and the role of social support. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 567-582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.567
Lewis, A. (1992). Group child interviews as a research tool. British Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 413-421. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192920180407
Luquin, M. (2025). Tracking language growth in child English learners: The role of model texts. De Gruyter Mouton.
Luquin, M., & García Mayo, M. P. (2020). Collaborative writing and feedback: An exploratory study of the potential of models in primary EFL students’ writing performance. Language Teaching for Young Learners, 2(1), 73-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.19007.luq
Luquin, M., & García Mayo, M. P. (2021). Exploring the use of models as a written corrective feedback technique among EFL children. System, 98(1), 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102465
Manchón, R. M. (Ed.). (2011). Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language. John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.31
Manchón, R. M., & Coyle, I. (2022). Introduction to the special issue on L2 writing and feedback processing and use in pen and paper and digital environments: Advancing research and practice. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(4), 541-550. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.4.1
Martínez Esteban, N., & Roca de Larios, J. (2010). The use of models as a form of written feedback to secondary school pupils of English. International Journal of English Studies, 10, 143-170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119241
Michel, M., Kormos, J., Brunfaut T, & Ratajczak, M. (2019). The role of working memory in young second language learners’ written performances. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 31-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.002
Muñoz, C. (2017). Tracing trajectories of young learners: Ten years of school English learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 168-184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190517000095
Murtiningsih, S. R. (2016). Collaborative writing in an EFL context. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 82-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18196/ftl.118
Roothooft, H., Lázaro-Ibarrola, A., & Bulté, B. (2022). Task repetition and corrective feedback via models and direct corrections among young EFL writers: Draft quality and task motivation. Language Teaching Research. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221082041
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
Shak, J. (2006). Children using dictogloss to focus on form. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 5, 47-62.
Storch, N. (2019). Collaborative writing. Language Teaching, 52, 40-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000320
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2007). Writing tasks: The effects of collaboration. In T. Pattison (Ed.), IATEFL 2006 Harrogate conference selections (pp. 181-183). International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language.
Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 215-228). Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-012
Villarreal, I., & Lázaro-Ibarrola, A. (2022). Models in collaborative writing among CLIL learners in primary school: Linguistic outcomes and motivation matters. System, 110(4), 1-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102922
Villarreal, I., & Munarriz-Ibarrola, M. (2021). “Together we do better”: The effect of pair and group work on young EFL learners’ written texts and attitudes. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Working collaboratively in second/foreign language learning (pp. 89-116). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501511318-005
Waller, L., & Papi, M. (2017). Motivation and feedback: How implicit theories of intelligence predict L2 writers’ motivation and feedback orientation. Journal of Second Language Writing, 35, 54-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.01.004
Williams, J. (2012). The potential role(s) of writing in second language development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 321-331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.007
Yang, L., & Zhang, L. (2010). Exploring the role of reformulations and a model text in EFL students’ writing performance. Language Teaching Research, 14, 464-484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375369
License
Copyright (c) 2024 María Luquin, María del Pilar García Mayo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.