The Challenge of Teaching English Writing in Thailand: A Tri-ethnography of Thai University Lecturers
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Against a backdrop of increasing internationalization in higher education, students and teachers frequently move between learning-to-write and writing-to-learn. For example, in English as a foreign/second language (EFL/ESL) classrooms, learning-to-write would be a priority, whereas in English as a medium of instruction (EMI) classrooms, writing-to-learn may be a more appropriate goal. However, little is known about how teachers who move between such classrooms adjust their writing pedagogy as they do so. Accordingly, we bring together the views, beliefs, and experiences of three Thai university lecturers who teach across EFL, CLIL, and EMI platforms. Collectively, they serve as researchers/participants in the co-construction of joint autoethnographies on teaching English writing at Thai universities. Their emergent themes give valuable insights into how they navigate the complexities of moving between language and content concerns, expectations and realities, and idealism and pragmatism. Results also show how there is no one-size-fits-all approach for these researchers/ participants, and that both bottom-up and top-down constraints shape their actions and beliefs as writing teachers. Overall, by drawing on their combined experiences, we hope to raise awareness of the challenges placed upon English language teachers when teaching writing and provide useful guidance for those working in similar contexts.
Article Details
References
Allen, D., & Mills, A. (2016). The impact of second language proficiency in dyadic peer feedback. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 498‒513. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814561902
Allen, H. W. (2018). Redefining writing in the foreign language curriculum: Toward a design approach. Foreign Language Annals, 51(3), 513‒532. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12350
An, J., Macaro, E., & Childs, A. (2021). Classroom interaction in EMI high schools: Do teachers who are native speakers of English make a difference? System, 98, 102482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102482
Bennett, R. E., Zhang, M., Deane, P., & van Rijn, P. W. (2020). How do proficient and less proficient students differ in their composition processes? Educational Assessment, 25(3), 198‒217. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1804351
Boonyarattanasoontorn, P. (2017). An investigation of Thai students’ English language writing difficulties and their use of writing strategies. Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 111‒118. https://doi.org/10.26500/JARSSH-02-2017-0205
Bowen, N. E. J. A. (2019). Unfolding choices in digital writing: A functional perspective on the language of academic revisions. Journal of Writing Research, 10(3), 465‒498. http://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2019.10.03.03
Bowen, N. E. J. A. (2023). Essential knowledge and skills for essay writing: A practical guide for ESL and EFL undergraduates. Equinox.
Bowen, N. E. J. A., & Nanni, A. (2021). Piracy, playing the system, or poor policies? Perspectives on plagiarism in Thailand. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51, 100992, 1‒13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100992
Bowen, N. E. J. A., Satienchayakorn, N., Teedaaksornsakul, M., & Thomas, N. (2021). Legitimising teacher identity: Investment and agency from an ecological perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 108. 103519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103519
Bowen, N. E. J. A., & Thomas, N. (2020). Manipulating texture and cohesion in academic writing: A keystroke logging study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 50, 100773, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100773
Bowen, N.E.J.A, & Thomas, N. (2022). Self-regulated learning and knowledge blindness: Bringing language into view. Applied Linguistics, 43(6), 1207–1216. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amac062
Bowen, N. E. J. A., Thomas, N., & Vandermeulen, N. (2022). Exploring feedback and regulation in online writing classes with keystroke logging. Computers & Composition, 63. 102692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2022.102692
Breault, R. A. (2016). Emerging issues in duoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(6), 777‒94. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1162866
Chaisiri, T. (2010). Implementing a genre pedagogy to the teaching of writing in a university context in Thailand. Language Education in Asia, 1, 181‒199.
Cheng, X., & Zhang, L. W. (2021). Teacher written feedback on English as a foreign language learners’ writing: Examining native and nonnative English-speaking teachers’ practices in feedback provision. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 629921. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629921
Chien, T. F., & Yang, H. C. (2019). Arts in transformative learning: An arts-based duoethnography. Reflective Practice, 20(5), 619‒636. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2019.1651714
Chuenchaichon, Y. (2014). A review of EFL writing research studies in Thailand in the past 10 years. Journal of Humanities, 11(1), 13‒30.
Corbin, J.H. & Strauss, A. L. (Ed.). (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing Grounded Theory (3rd ed). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153
Crossley, S. A. (2020). Linguistic features in writing quality and development: An overview. Journal of Writing Research, 11(3), 415‒443. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2020.11.03.01
Deng, L., Chen, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Developing Chinese EFL learners’ generic competence: A genre-based and process-genre approach. Springer.
EF Education First. (2022). EF EPI 2021‒EF English Proficiency Index – Thailand. https://www.ef.co.th/epi/regions/asia/thailand/ -
ETS. (2018). 2018 Report of Test Takers Worldwide.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2018). An examination of the design principles underlying a self-regulated strategy development study. Journal of Writing Research, 10(2), 139‒187. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2018.10.02.02
Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Heinemann.
Hiranburana, K., Subphadoongchone, P., Tangkiengsirisin, S., Phoochaeoensil, S., Gainey, J., Thogsngsri, J., Sumonsriworakun, P., Somphong, M., Sappapan, P., & Taylor, P. (2017). A Framework of Reference for English Language Education in Thailand (FRELE-TH)--Based on the CEFR, the Thai Experience. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 10(2), 90‒119.
Hong, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2020). Incidental attention to academic language during content teaching in two EMI classes in South Korean high schools. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 48, 100921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100921
Hopper, D. & Bowen, N. E. J. A. (forthcoming). “If the answer is always given, we will not remember our mistakes”: Student and teacher beliefs about written corrective feedback.
Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(1), 17‒29. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00124-8
IELTS. (2018). Test taker performance 2018. https://www.ielts.org/teaching-and-research/test-taker-performance
Jampaklay, A., Penboon, B., & Lucktong, A. (2022). Internationalization of higher education in Thailand: Promises and reality. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 43(1), 183‒193. https://doi.org/10.34044/j.kjss.2022.43.1.25
Jantori, P., Tepsuriwong, S., & Darasawang, P. (2018). Is scoring helpful feedback for writing tasks? An examination of teachers’ beliefs. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(6), 1250‒1259. http://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0906.14
Junqueira, L. & C. Payant. (2015). “I just want to do it right, but it's so hard”: A novice teacher's written feedback beliefs and practices. Journal of Second Language Writing 27, 19‒36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.11.001
Ka-kan-dee, M., & Kaur, S. (2015). Teaching strategies used by Thai EFL lecturers to teach argumentative writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 208, 143‒156.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.191
Kongpetch, S. (2006). Using a genre-based approach to teach writing to Thai students: A case study. Prospect 21(2), 3‒33
Lee, I. (2019). Teacher written corrective feedback: Less is more. Language Teaching, 52(4), 524‒536. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000247
Loan, N, T. T. (2019). Reflective teaching in an EFL writing instruction course for Thai pre-service teachers. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(2), 561‒575.
https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.2.8.561
Lowe, R. J., & Lawrence, L. (Eds.). (2020). Duoethnography in English language teaching: Research, reflection, and classroom application. Multilingual Matters.
Macaro, E., Curle, S., Pun, J., An, J., & Dearden, J. (2018). A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching, 51(1), 36‒76. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444817000350
Mao, S. S., & Crosthwaite, P. (2019). Investigating written corrective feedback: (Mis)alignment of teachers’ beliefs and practice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 46‒60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.05.004
Martin, J. R. & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox.
McDonough, K., & De Vleeschauwer, J. (2019). Comparing the effect of collaborative and individual prewriting on EFL learners’ writing development. Journal of second language writing, 44, 123‒130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.04.003
Nanni, A., & Black, D. A. (2017). Student and teacher preferences in written corrective feedback. Journal of Asia TEFL, 14(3), 540‒547. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2017.14.3.11.540
Nguyen, C. T. (2011). Challenges of learning English in Australia towards students coming from selected Southeast Asian countries: Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia. International Education Studies, 4(1), 13‒20.
Norris, J. & Sawyer, R. (2012). Toward a dialogic method. In J. Norris, R. Sawyer, & D. Lund (Eds.), Duoethnography: Dialogic methods for social, health, and educational research. (pp. 9‒40). Left Coast Press.
Norris, J. (2017). Duoethnography. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopaedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 233‒236). SAGE Publications.
Office of the National Education Act. (1999). National Education Act of B.E. 2542 (1999) [PDF]. https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Thailand184.pdf
Prior, P. (2006). A sociocultural theory of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 54‒66). The Guildford Press.
Pun, J. K. H., Thomas, N., & Bowen, N. E. J. A. (2022). Questioning the sustainability of English-medium instruction policy in science classrooms: Teachers’ and students’ experiences at a Hong Kong secondary school. Sustainability, 14, 2168. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042168
Racelis, J. V., & Matsuda, P. K. (2013). Integrating process and genre into the second language writing classroom: Research into practice. Language Teaching, 46(3), 382‒393. https://doi.org//10.1017/S0261444813000116
Rakpa, S. (2014). Approaches, feedback and assessment in EFL writing course at undergraduate level at university of Phayao, Thailand: Teachers’ empiric experience. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences University of Phayao, 2(1), 2‒17.
Rosário, P., Núñez, J. C., Rodríguez, C., Cerezo, R., Fernández, E., Tuero, E., & Högemann, J. (2017). Analysis of instructional programs in different academic levels for improving self-regulated learning SRL through written text. In R. Fidalgo, K. R. Harris, & M. Braaksma (Eds.), Design principles for teaching effective writing (pp. 201‒230). Brill.
Rose, H. & Montakantiwong, A. (2018). A tale of two teachers: A duoethnography of the realistic and idealistic successes and failures of teaching English as an international language. RELC Journal, 49(1), 88‒101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688217746206
Rose, H., McKinley, J., Xu, X., & Zhou, S. (2020). Investigating policy and implementation of English-medium instruction in higher education institutions in China. British Council.
Sangnapaboworn, W. (2018). The evolution of education reform in Thailand. In G. W. Fry (Ed.), Education in Thailand (pp. 517‒554). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7857-6_21
Sinlarat P., Theerapijit S., & Chaodamrong W. (2009). National qualifications framework for Higher Education in Thailand from research to practice (2nd ed.). Chulalongkorn University Publishing.
Sudsomboon, W. (2010). Application of competency-based education: In the context of diversity and change. The Journal of KMUTNB, 20(2), 370‒378.
Tamronglak, A. (2020). Impacts of the Thailand qualification framework–Public administration on public administration education in Thailand. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 26(3), 276‒290. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2020.1771991
Tao, J., & Gao, X. (2017). Teacher agency and identity commitment in curricular reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 346‒355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.010
Thomas, N., Bowen, N. E. J. A., Louwe, S., Nanni, A. (2023). Performing a balancing act: A trioethnography of “foreign” EMI lecturers in Bangkok. In F. Fang., & K. P. Pramod. (Eds.), English-Medium Instruction Pedagogies in Multilingual Universities in Asia (pp. 138–154). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173137-12
Tight, M. (2021). Globalization and internationalization as frameworks for higher education research. Research Papers in Education, 36(1), 52‒74. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1633560
Wei, W., & Cao, Y. (2020). Written corrective feedback strategies employed by university English lecturers: A teacher cognition perspective. SAGE Open, 10(3), 1‒12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020934886