Assessing episodes in verbalization process of EFL students’ collaborative writing

Ani Susanti, Utami Widiati, Bambang Yudi Cahyono, Tengku Intan Suzila Tengku Sharif


One of the ways to engage EFL students in writing is to assign them to work collaboratively. Collaborative writing requires a verbalization process resulting in episodes related to language, texts, and scaffolds. This study examined the use of episodes in collaborative writing of EFL students set in pairs by the teacher. It identified the most productive type of episodes which include language-related episodes (LREs), text-related episodes (TREs), and scaffolding episodes (SEs). It also scrutinized the categories of episodes within each type of episode. The study involved 20 pairs of Indonesian students from the English Department of a reputable university in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The students were given an integrated reading-writing task and asked to work in pairs. The results of the study showed that SEs were the most productive type of episode, followed by LREs in the moderate occurrence, and TREs, which were the least productive type of episode. The results also revealed that among the categories in each type of episode, lexis-focused (LREs), organization-focused (TREs), and repetition (SEs) were more productive than the other categories of episodes. These results imply that the most productive categories of episodes could be catalysts in the teaching of writing, which employs collaborative writing tasks either in pairs or in small groups. This study offers insights into creating activities to encourage writing activities that especially involve types of pairings.


collaborative writing; English as a foreign language (EFL); episodes; pairings; verbalization process

Full Text:



Adodo, S. O., & Agbayewa, J. O. (2011). Effect of homogenous and heterogeneous ability grouping class teaching on student’s interest, attitude and achievement in integrated science. International Journal of Psychology and Counseling, 3(3), 48-54.

Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge University Press.

Cahyono, B. Y., & Amrina, R. (2016). Peer feedback, self-correction, and writing proficiency of Indonesian EFL students. Arab World English Journal, 7(1), 178-193.

Chan, S., Inoue, C., & Taylor, L. (2015). Developing rubrics to assess the reading-into-writing skills: A case study. Assessing Writing, 26, 20-37.

Dabao, A. F., & Blum, A. (2013). Collaborative writing in pairs and small groups: Learners’ attitudes and perceptions. System, 41(2), 365-378.

Deveci, T. (2018). Student perceptions on collaborative writing in a project-based course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(4), 721-732.

DiCamilla, F. J., & Anton, M. (1997). Repetition in the collaborative discourse of L2 learners: A Vygotskian perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(4), 609-663.

Dirgeyasa, I. W. (2016). Genre-based approach: What and how to teach to learn writing. English Language Teaching, 9(9), 45-51.

Donato, R. (2004). Aspects of collaboration in pedagogical discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 284-302.

Fauziah, H., & Latief, M. (2016). The effect of working in heterogeneous and homogeneous pairs on the students’ writing skill. Arab World English Journal, 6(2), 174-188.

Hanjani, A. M., & Li, L. (2014). Exploring L2 writers’ collaborative revision interactions and their writing performance. System, 44(3), 101-114.

Hassaskhah, J., & Mozaffari, H. (2015). The impact of group formation method (student-selected vs. teacher-assigned) on group dynamics and group outcome in EFL creative writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 6(1), 147-156.

Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press.

Hyland, K. (2016). Teaching and researching writing (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Issacson, S. (1988). Assessing the writing product: Qualitative and quantitative measures. Exceptional Children, 54(6), 528-534.

Karim, S. M. S., Maasum, T. N. R. T. M. I., & Latif, H. (2017). Writing challenges of Bangladeshi tertiary level EFL learners. E-Bangi: Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 14(2), 296-306.

Khatib, M., & Meihami, H. (2015). Languaging and writing skill: The effect of collaborative writing on EFL students’ writing performance. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(1), 203-211.

Kim, Y. (2009). The effects of task complexity on learner - learner interaction. System, 37(2), 254-268.

Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2008). The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 211-234.

Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2011). Using pre-task modelling to encourage collaborative learning opportunities. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 183-199.

Kusumaningrum, S. R., Cahyono, B. Y., & Prayogo, J. A. (2019). The effect of different types of peer feedback provision on EFL students’ writing performance. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 213-224.

Leeser, M. J. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55-81.

Li, M., & Kim, D. (2016). One wiki, two groups: Dynamic interactions across ESL collaborative writing tasks. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 25-42.

Maftoon, P., & Ghafoori, F. N. (2009). A comparative study of the effect of homogeneous and heterogeneous collaborative interaction on the development of EFL learners’ writing skill. The Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 127-158.

McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge University Press.

McDonough, K. (2004). Learner-learner interaction during pair and small group activities in a Thai EFL context. System, 32(2), 207-224.

McDonough, K., & Fuentes, C. G. (2015). The effect of writing task and task conditions on Colombian EFL learners’ language use. TESL Canada Journal, 32(2), 67-79.

Mozaffari, S. H. (2017). Comparing student-selected and teacher-assigned pairs on collaborative writing. Language Teaching Research, 21(4), 496-516.

Neumann, H., & McDonough, K. (2015). Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27(1), 84-104.

Niu, R., Jiang, L., & Deng, Y. (2018). Effect of proficiency pairing on L2 learners’ language learning and scaffolding in collaborative writing. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27(3), 187-195.

Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (2007). Introduction to academic writing (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.

Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2012). A close investigation into source use in integrated second language writing tasks. Assessing Writing, 17(1), 18-34.

Rahayu, D. (2020). Interaction in collaborative writing between international and domestic students in an Indonesian university. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(1), 113-128.

Rezeki, Y. S. (2016). Indonesian English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners’ experiences in collaborative writing [Doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester]. UR Research.

Rosário, P., Högemann, J., Núñez, J. C., Vallejo, G., Cunha, J., Rodríguez, C., & Fuentes, S. (2019). The impact of three types of writing intervention on students’ writing quality. Plos One, 14(7), e0218099.

Shehadeh, A. (2011). Effects and student perceptions of collaborative writing in L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(4), 286-305.

Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153-173.

Storch, N. (2008). Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness, 17(2), 95-114.

Storch, N. (2018). Collaborative Writing. In J. I. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching. John Wiley & Sons.

Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2013). Pairing learners in pair work activity. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 31-48.

Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer-peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171-185.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320-337.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3-4), 285-304.

Swain, M., & Watanabe, Y. (2012). Languaging: Collaborative dialogue as a source of second language learning. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 3218-3225). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Vonna, Y., Mukminatien, N., & Laksmi, E. D. (2015). The effect of scaffolding techniques on students’ writing achievement. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 3(1), 227-233.

Watanabe, Y. (2014). Collaborative and independent writing: Japanese university English learners’ processes, texts and opinions [Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto].

Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121-142.

Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.

Weigle, S. C. (2004). Integrating reading and writing in a competency test for non-native speakers of English. Assessing Writing, 9(1), 27-55.

Williams, J. P. (2003). Preparing to teach writing: Research, theory, and practice (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Yi, J. (2009). Defining writing ability for classroom writing assessment in high schools. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 53-69.

Yoshida, R. (2008). Functions of repetition in learners’ private speech in Japanese language classrooms. Language Awareness, 17, 289-306.

Zamani, M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping of Iranian EFL learners in a writing context. Cogent Education, 3, 1-11.

Zhang, M. (2018). Collaborative writing in the EFL classroom: The effects of L1 and L2 use. System, 76(5), 1-12.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

View Journal Stats