Investigating the Effect of Mentor Texts on Learners ...
Transcript of Investigating the Effect of Mentor Texts on Learners ...
The People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria
Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research
Larbi Ben Mhidi University, Oum El Bouaghi
Faculty of Letter and Languages
Department of English
Investigating the Effect of Mentor Texts on Learners’ Writing
Achievement
The Case of Second Year Pupils at Abdelhamid Ibn Badis Middle
School, Tebessa
A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Master in Language Sciences and Teaching English as
a Foreign Language
By: Abd-el-Kader AYADI
Supervisor: Mrs. Khadidja ZAIDI EXaminer: Mr. Haroun MELGANI
2016-2017
DEDICATION
In the name of Allah, the most Mercifull and the most Gracefull
All gratitude goes to him for helping his weak servant I dedicate
this modest work to my parents
and To my friends
I dedicate this humble work to my teachers who replaced my family
to my classmates who always supported me, laughed with me and
supported me, to Mrs. Bechoua who has been a mom for me and the
shoulder that i always needed
To Mr Taibi whom I consider my grandpa for his wisdom and precious
moments i spent with him
To the dorm rooms principles who cared about my safety and
security when i was away from home
To Mrs. Bouaziz, Ms. Guendouz who granted me with their friendship
and undivided attention
To Mrs. Bouricha and Mrs. Merrouche
i
Acknowledgement
My sincere respect to my supervisor Mrs. KHADIDJA ZAIDI, I want to thank you but
thank you is not enough, her guidance was a pillar to my work, her trust in me made this work
possible, i will never forget who wished good for me, who was patient and wise when i lost
faith in me, when i was lost and had no faith in completing my work, thank you will never be
enough, may Allah grant you paradise and light that will enlighten your life. I also want to
present my unlimited joy and happiness to my examiner Sir MELGANI Whom i Respect and
had the chance to be his student. Being a student a in the department of English was a gift, it
was the place where I leaned, lived, loved
ii
Abstract With the recent development of language teaching, researches in language methodology have
become prominent in a foreign language teaching and learning. Therefore, teachers of English
as a foreign language took the responsibility of developing effective strategies to encourage
learners develop their writing skills in the target language. The present research investigates
the effect of mentor texts on the writing achievements through a quasi-experimental design.
The sample of this study is second year middle school pupils at Abdelhamid Ibn Badis middle
school. The sample was split into two groups (experimental and control groups) of 20 students
out of 100 students. Both groups were pretested and went through the treatment periods.
Students of the experimental group performed the task with the reading aloud session of the
mentor text, while the ones in the control group worked individually. At the end of the
treatment, the two groups were post-tested. To add more validity to the results of the study, t
tests were administered. The results showed that mentor texts method was significantly
effective in improving learners’ writing achievement. Thus, the hypothesis of this study was
confirmed.
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: The Experimental and Control Groups’ Frequency of Scores on the Task
Table 2: Experimental Group’s Pre-test, Post-test, and Difference Scores on the Test
iv
LISTE OF FIGURES
Figure1: The Schematic Representation of the Different Phases of the Quasi- Experiment
Figure2: Control Group and Experimental Group’s Scores (Pre-test)
Figure3: Frequency of Control and Experimental Group’s Scores (post-test)
v
Table of the Content
Page
Dedication ……………………………………………………………………………….. i Acknowledgement ………………………………………………………………………. ii Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………. iii List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………………. iv List of Figures …………………………………………………………………………… v Table of Content ……………………………………………………................................. vi 1. Statement of The Problem ……………………………………………………………. 1 2. Aims of The Study …………………………… ……………………………………… 1 3. Research Question and Hypothesis ……………………………………………………. 1 4. Means of the Research .................................................... ……………… ................................1 5. Structure of the Study ................................................ …………………… .............................2
Chapter One: Theoretical Background
Section One: Mentor Texts Introduction ...................................................................... …………………… ..............................5 1.1.1 Mentor……………………………………………………………………………… 5 1.1.2 Mentoring … …….............. ..................................................................................................6 1.1.3 Mentor Texts Definition…….......... ....................................................................................8 1.1.4 The Use of Mentor Texts .......................................................................................................9 1.1.5 Types of Mentor Texts ............................................................................................................9
1.1.5 1 Mentor Texts for Questioning ........ ... ....................................................................9
1.1.5.2 Mentor texts to Teach Narrative Writing......……… .......................................10
1.1.5.3 Informative/Explanatory Mentor Text Questions ................................................10
1.1.5.4 Opinion Mentor Text Questions/Prompts.....………………………………. 13
1.1.5.5 Narrative Mentor Text Questions……………………………………………. 14
vi
1.1.6 The effect of Mentor Texts on Writing …………………... ........................................15
Conclusion
Section Two: Writing Introduction 20 1.2.1 Definition of Writing ...............................................................................................................20 1.2.2 History of Writing ....................................................................................................................21 1.2.3 Theories of Writing ........................................... ……………………................................21 1.2.4 Approaches to Teaching Writing…………………………………………………... 24
1.2. 4.1 The Controlled-to-free Approach .................... …………… .................................25
1.2. 4.2 The free Writing Approach ...................................................................................25
1.2. 4.3 The Pattern Paragraph Approach ........................................................................25
1.2.4.4 The Grammar Syntax Organization Approach .................................................25
1.2.4.5 The Communicative Approach .............................................................................25
1.2. 4.6 The Process Approach ............................................................................................25
1.2.4.7 The Writing Task ......................................................................................................26 1.2. 5 Stages of Writing .....................................................................................................................27
1.2. 5.1 Awareness Raising .................................................................................................27
1.2. 5.2 Awareness Raising Procedures ...........................................................................27
1.2.5.3 Support ...................................................................................................................27
1.2. 5.4 Support Procedures ................................................................................................28
1.2. 5.5 Practise ................................ ...………………………… ..................................28
1.2. 5.5 Process Feedback ............................ …………………… ...................................28
1.2.6 The Importance of Writing ..........................................................................................29
Chapter Two: The Practical Framework Introduction
vii
2.1 Choice of the Method .................................................................................................................33 2.2 The Sample .......... ..........................……………………………….. ..............................33 2.3 Research Design ...........................................................................................................................34 2.4 Procedures ......................................................................................................................................35 2.4.1 Pre-testing ...................................................................................................................................35 2.4.2 Treatment ....................................................................................................................................35 2.4.2.1 Experimental Group Instruction .......................................................................................36 2.4.2.2 Control Group Instruction ..................................................................................................36 2.4.3 Post-Testing ...............................................................................................................................37 2.5 Instruments .....................................................................................................................................37 2.5.1 Test Used in Pre-Testing and Post-Testing .......................................................................37 2.6. Scoring ...........................................................................................................................................37 2.7 Statistical Analysis ......................................................................................................................38 2.8 Results .............................................................................................................................................38 2.8.1 Results of The Task .................................................................................................................38 2.8.1.1 Results of the Control Group .............................................................................................39 2.8.1.2 Results of The Experimental .............................................................................................40 2.8.1.3 Results of Both Experimental and Control Group ......................................................42 2.8.1.1. Control Group Versus Experimental Group Scores on The Pre-test ....................42 2.8.1.2. Control Group Post-test /Pre-test Scores ...... ………………… ..............................43 2.8.1.3. Experimental Group Post-test versus Pre-test scores ................................................44 2.8.1.4 general discussion .......................................................................................... Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................45 General Conclusion ............................................................................................................................46 Limitation of The Study ……………………………………………….. ...........................46
viii
Suggestions for Further Research …………………………………… ...............................46 References Appendixes
Résumé ص�����خلم�
ix
General introduction
Statement of the Problem
For many learners of English as a foreign language, writing is very difficult, as they have
to come up with words and ideas in addition to organization, and they are usually asked to
be creative and write a well structured piece of writing. However learners find it so hard to
achieve such a task. Actually, helping learners to improve their writing achievement is one
of the teachers’ jobs via using some of the best strategies that help them in writing. In other
words, teachers have to be creative and seek the success of their learners. The use of mentor
texts is considered as one of the strategies that can be effective to help learners improve
their writing achievement.
Aim of the Study
Tutoring is a matter of hard work and creative ideas to help learners in their learning
process. One of the techniques that can be used by teachers in order to help learners improve
their writing achievement is mentor texts .This study is carried out to examine the
effectiveness of mentor texts as a teaching technique in improving learners writing
achievement.
Research Question and hypothesis
For the sake of conducting this research and providing prominent data, the following
question is asked:
Do mentor texts have an effect on pupils’ writing achievement?
Therefore, this study is based on the following hypothesis: There is a significant difference in writing achievement between pupils who are
taught using mentor texts and those who are not?
1
Means of the Research
This study follows a quasi-experimental design. Thus, there are two groups, experimental
and control groups.
The instruments that were used in this study are namely: The pre-test and the post-test.
The pre-test is conducted in the first meeting session where students were asked to write a
paragraph about something exiting that happened to them in a form of storytelling. Then,
students had explicit instructions and scaffolding where they are more guided by multiple
examples and models of the writing focus. Thus, reading was aloud followed by a writing
frame. They were also given the chance to imitate the structure.
Finally, after the treatment period a post-test was used to check student`s improvement in
writing achievements. Structure of the Study
The study includes two main chapters. The first chapter includes two sections, The first
section is about mentor texts, starting with mentor and mentoring definition, mentor texts
definition, types, in addition to its effect on writing. The second section is about the writing
in general, definition, history of writing, approaches, theories, stages and finally, importance
of writing.
The second chapter is the practical framework. It includes detailed procedures and steps
that will take place in the field, in addition to a precise description of the data and analysis
of the results.
2
Chapter One: Theoretical Background
Section One: mentor texts Introduction ...................................................................... …………………… ............................. 5 1.1.1. Mentor……………………………………………………………………………... 5 1.1.2. Mentoring … ……................................................................................................... 6 1.1.3 Mentor texts Definition……............................................ ............................................ 8 1.1.4 The Use of Mentor Texts ....................................................................................................... 9 1.1.5 Types of Mentor Texts ........................................................................................................... 9 1.1.5.1 Mentor texts for Questioning…………………... ....................................................... 9 1.1.5.2 Mentor texts to teach narrative writing.........................………………………. 10 1.1.5.3 Informative/Explanatory Mentor Text Questions ....................................................... 10 1.1.5.4 Opinion Mentor Text Questions/Prompts................………………………….. 13 1.1.5.5 Narrative Mentor Text Questions………………………………………………… 14 1.1.6 The Effect of Mentor Texts on Writing …………………………............................ 15 Conclusion 19
Section Two: Writing Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 20 1.2.1 Definition of Writing .............................................................................................................. 20 1.2.2 History of Writing ................................................................................................................... 21 1.2.3 Theories of Writing ........................................... ……………………... ........................... 21 1.2. 4.1 The Controlled-to-free Approach...........................…………………………….. 25 1.2. 4.2 The Free Writing Approach ............................................................................................. 25
1.2. 4.3 The Pattern Paragraph Approach ............................................................................ 25
1.2.4.4 The Grammar Syntax Organization Approach ..................................................... 25
1.2.4.5 The Communicative Approach ................................................................................. 25
1.2.4.6 The process approach ................................................................................................... 25 1.2.5 Stages of Writing ..................................................................................................................... 26
1.2.5.1 Awareness Raising ........................................................................................................... 27
1.2. 5.2 Awareness Raising Procedures .................................................................................. 27
1.2. 5.3 Support ............................................................................................................................. 27
1.2. 5.4 Support Procedures ........................................................................................................ 27
1.2. 5.5 Practise..............................................………………………… ......................... 28
1.2. 5.5 Process Feedback ............................................ …………………….......................... 28 1.2.6 The Importance of Writing ................................................................................................... 28
Section One: Mentor texts
Introduction
Reading can help students improve their writing but unfortunately most of them have no
interest in reading books. The only solution to face this problem is mentor texts, a type of
texts that are made especially for this kind of problem. the whole concept about this method is
using literacy texts to model their writing skill writing workshops helped a lot of students
improving their writing achievements.
In this section, I will tackle some of the elements namely, mentor, mentoring, definition of
mentor texts, types, use of mentor texts, and its effect on writing achievements. 1.1.1. Mentor
A mentor is a guide who can support the student to find the right direction and who can
help them to develop solutions to their issues. Mentors count on their past experience to win
the students understanding of their issues. Mentoring provides the students with an
opportunity to think about career options and progress.
A mentor should help the learner to believe in himself and build his confidence. A mentor
should ask questions and challenge, while providing guidance and encouragement. Mentoring
allows the learner to explore new ideas with more confidence. It is a chance to look more
closely at opportunities and what they want in life. Mentoring is about becoming more self
aware, taking responsibility for your life and directing your life in the direction you decide,
rather than leaving it to chance. Parsloe (1943, p.34) said "Mentoring is to support and
encourage people to manage their own learning in order that they may maximise their
potential, develop their skills, improve their performance and become the person they want to
be."
Mentor teachers are recommended to use predetermined standards to guide their work with
mentees. According to Carver and Catz (2004), mentors in the BTSA programme use
5
professional teaching standards developed in 1997 by the California commission on teacher
credentialing “prompt reflection about students learning and teaching practises, formulate
professional goals for improving teaching practise, and guide the progress of teachers
developing practise towards his or her goal” (p. 451) .
The mentor teacher develops a relationship with the students, this relationship is an
important aspect of productivity tutoring by daily communications and interaction. Different
communities have different culture which the teacher needs to be familiar with. Hollins said
“listening to students voices is often an overlooked factor in teacher preparation and
professional development” (p.171). 1.1.2. Mentoring
A big number of people interpret mentoring as processes. It is commonly agreed that the
process includes the various developmental phases of the mentoring relationship, the
dynamics of the mentoring relationship itself, and the application of cognitive developmental
theory to the mentoring process (Bey & Holmes, 1992).
It is also imposing order on his or her environment and providing an explanation for
successful and unsuccessful elements in the classroom, It is also engaging in an intellectual
journey from a particular to a general form of theorizing. Levinson. (1978) described the
mentor's function as guide, counselor, and sponsor. Ragins and Scandura (1999, p.496)
referred to mentors as" influential individuals with advanced experience and knowledge who
are committed to providing upward mobility and support to their protégé” careers. “Mentoring
is the process of serving as a mentor, someone who facilitates and assists another’s
development. The process includes modeling because the mentor must be able to model the
messages and suggestions being taught to the beginning teacher” (Gay, 1995). Also, as
indicated, the mentor must be able to serve as a model of the teacher’s role. In education,
mentoring is a complex and multi-dimensional process of guiding, teaching, influencing and
6
supporting a beginning or new teacher. It is generally accepted that a mentor teacher leads,
guides and advises another teacher more junior in experience in a work situation characterized
by mutual trust and belief.
mentoring programs pair novice teachers with more experienced teachers who can ably
explain school policies, regulations and procedures; share methods, materials and other
resources, help solve problems in teaching and learning provide personal and professional
support, and guide the growth of the new teacher through reflection, collaboration, and shared
inquiry (Feiman-Nemser and Parker, 1992).
The mentoring process includes coaching as an instructional technique used in endeavors
such as sports or apprenticeship at the work place. In addition, it includes “cognitive
coaching,” a term gaining wider familiarity in education. To be effective, the mentor must be
able to demonstrate a range of cognitive coaching competencies, such as posing carefully
constructed questions to stimulate reflection, paraphrasing, probing, using wait-time, and
collecting and using data to improve teaching and learning. Mentoring, like coaching, is a
collaborative process (Gay, 1995). However, as a function—a special duty required of a
person—mentoring has considerably more dimensions than coaching or modeling. Therefore,
it is more complex and demanding (Head, Reiman & Thies-Sprinthall, 1992).
1.1.3. Mentor Texts
Mentor texts or anchor texts are any text that can be used as an example of good writing for
writers. Writers use a mentor text to inform their own writing. Fletcher (1999) explained that
mentor texts are "...any texts that you can learn from, and every writer, no matter how skilled
you are or how beginning you are, encounters and reads something that can lift and inform
and infuse their own writing, I'd say anything that you can learn from - not by talking about
but just looking at the actual writing itself" (p.490). Reading is crucial for writers, and reading
aloud becomes critical in the classroom and with adult writing groups, as well as it is through
7
reading what others have written that we are able to visualize direction for our own writing. It
is through reading that we are able to learn about writing, to ask what words structure
techniques, and strategies the writer has used to achieve her desired effect. As we begin to
read like writers, deconstructing texts, noticing, identifying, and naming what authors have
done, and turning the texts inside out, we are able then to identify the same features in other
books or texts and begin to use those moves in our own writing. We can try on the styles and
strategies of the writer we are reading. In this way, we are learning to write directly from
those who write the authors of the books and other texts we read.
A mentor text can be a sentence, a picture book, an article or an essay a poem, or a longer
work, such as a novel or informational text, it can be any text we imitate or use as a model for
our own writing. These texts are intentionally and carefully chosen. favour short texts or
excerpts because they can easily be used in one sitting Ray (2002, p. 66) explained that "as we
develop teaching relationship with authors, we will find that certain texts seem to surface as
very important to teaching. These are texts that are just full of curriculum potential" Leaving
room for several texts to be shared with the feature(s) to be modelled, easily identified, and
discussed, while still having time to write. An appropriate mentor text is well-written, with
genre, topic, format, ideas or structures those clearly challenging students to do. The ultimate
goal is that student writers begin to choose their own mentor texts that they begin to recognize
which texts can help them do what they are trying to do in writing.
1.1.4. The Use of Mentor Texts
The use of M has previously been described by teams in some of the universities of the
United Kingdom. Students who used mentor texts needed clearly professional help and
objectives for their use of the mentor text materials, the difference that was clearly taking
place is between the use of mentor text and other learning activities, the activity needs to be
made explicitly. Mentors should never forget to have a clear discussion with the member of
8
the stuff providing specific timetabled sessions for mentor text access encourages its use there
is no clear association between times spent using the mentor text materials and exam
performance. There is, however, one significant difference; all three of the mentor text
modules used more material syllabus for that topic, so the students' showed significant
performance. all in all the mentor text should be chosen with care and wisdom and as
mentioned in Hoyt (2007), Teacher’s Guide to Interactive Read-Aloud “A mentor text must
be chosen carefully to ensure that it can establish a model of quality that is worthy of guiding
our learners by opening children’s eyes to the inner workings of the selection to promote
active listening, encourage deep thinking, and support learning more about the world around
us.” (p. 4).
1.1.5. Types of Mentor Texts
1.1.5.1. Mentor Texts for Questioning
This type of mentor text is actually a strategy that a teacher in a school may use throughout
reading aloud. Of course every student in schools asks herself/himself questions about what
they are learning about what he/she is listening to, by doing that they are tuning their brains
into what they are reading in addition to every single one of the details appearing in the
illustrations. By doing that the story will look a little bit interesting and of course curiosity
about finding more about the whole subject is the concentration that a teacher is seeking to
have with his students. Sharing these details with the whole classroom will make reading
more interesting.
1.1.5.2. Mentor Texts to Teach Narrative Writing
Teachers use this strategy all the time whenever writing workshops take place. It allows
students to have the opportunity to analyse the text and think like writers. and more
importantly to notice what great writers do, so that they can use that into their writing, while
9
using this type of technique is important to isolate the writing skill which they will be looking
for. The prominent characteristic that leads to this subject is the focus that students will have
about that specific skill during the whole process and that is crucial to the lesson. Since
reading has a purpose, the main purpose out of this strategy is to teach all the possible skills
about narrative writing, Ideas, organization, sentence, fluency, work choice convictions, etc.
1.1.5.3. Informative/Explanatory
Mentor Text Questions
Check grade level reading/writing standards when choosing which questions/prompts to
address. Create additional prompts/questions based on the standards for your grade level.
To answer the questions or address the prompts, students should use evidence from the text to
support their answers. These Resource questions were adapted by Boyles (2004).
Illustrations
Did the author include illustration with the book? Who is the illustrator?
What kinds of illustrations were included? (diagrams, photos, maps, charts, graphs, tables)
What is the purpose of the illustrations or other media? Is there anything that could be added or done to improve these?
Did the illustrations help to understand the text better? Why or why not?
Were labels and captions used? If so, did they help to understand the information better?
Why or why not? Text Structure
Did you use the table of contents or the index? For what? Was the information located
quickly?
10
Are there headings and subheadings in this text? Did they help you “see” how information
is presented?
What is the topic of this piece/section/page? Is it easy to locate?
Are there other ways information is presented in the book, chapter, or passage? Examples
include:
o Information is chronologically
ordered o Information is listed
o Information is shown in comparison or contrasted
o Information is written in cause and effect relationship o
Information is narrated as a problem and solution
o Information is presented as a main idea or topic and then has ideas have supporting details
How does the author introduce the topic? What techniques does the author use to hook the reader?
How does the author develop the topic? (With facts, definitions, details, questions or other
information and examples?)
How did the author close the piece/section/book?
Content :
What does the author teach about the topic? Do we have
questions? What topic(s) does this book or chapter describe?
Is the information easy to understand? Why or why
not? What facts were easiest to learn about? Why?
What else would you like to know about this topic? How can you find it?
Was the title misleading? Did you expect to discover information that wasn’t there?
Did the book/chapter/passage give you enough information? If not, what else do you need
to know?
11
What vocabulary is important within this piece? What is provided to help determine the
definitions?
What linking words are used to create clarity and flow? Are there places in which the
sequence is not clear?
Does this book provide recent information? Is there a better source of information?
What qualifies the author to write this information? What kind of research did that author
have to do to write the text? Style :
Do you understand what the author is saying? What information is the easiest/hardest to
understand? Why?
What could the author have done to make the information easier to understand?
Would this book or information be different if it were written 10 years ago? Why?
By reading, did you discover anything that could help you outside of school? Was the
information well organized? Give an example of why or why not.
Is the information told straight to you or is it in story form?
1.1.5.4. Opinion Mentor Text Questions/Prompts
Check grade level reading/writing standards when choosing which questions/prompts to
address. Create additional prompts/questions based on the standards for your grade level.
To answer the questions or address the prompts, students should use evidence from the text to
support their answers. Resource questions were adapted from Owocki, G. (2013).
Sample Questions:
Can you tell how the author feels about the topic? How?
How is the opinion stated or shown?
12
What reasons are given or shown for the opinion? Are there other reasons or details the
author could include?
What key words and phrases are used to express the opinion?
How does the author introduce the piece? Does the introduction begin to draw the reader
toward the opinion? How? If not, what other ideas could the author try?
What reasons does the author use to help convince? Who would be drawn toward these
reasons?
How did the author close the piece? If the closing doesn’t move you, what other ideas
could the author try?
How is this piece organized?
What linking words are used?
I agree/disagree with the writer about…
Sample Prompts:
The most important thing about this book is…
I think the main thing the writer was trying to say was…
In my opinion, the most important (word, sentence, paragraph) in the book would be…
I would/wouldn’t recommend this book to a friend because…
What happened in this book was very realistic/unrealistic because… :
1.1.4.5. Narrative Mentor Text Questions
Check grade level reading/writing standards when choosing which questions/prompts to
address. Create additional prompts/questions based on the standards for your grade level.
To answer the questions or address the prompts, students should use evidence from the text to
support their answers. Author/Illustrator
Who are the characters or people in the piece? How does the illustrator show this?
13
How does the author help us get to know the characters?
What might the author had to have known to write this book?
Setting/Tone
Where does this story take place? Is there more than one place?
What is the place like?
When and where did this story take place? How do you know?
Could there be a place like this? What evidence/proof/background knowledge do you
have? Which part of the story best describes the setting?
Characters
Who are the main characters in the story?
Do you like or dislike them? Why? (Have they done something to make you feel this way?)
Do any of the characters change in the story? How? Support with evidence from text.
Does a character do things that are good/bad? What? Support with evidence from text.
Choose a character. Why is the character important to the story? Use the text to support answer.
Plot/Problem/Solution
What are the main things that have happened in the story? How does the illustrator show
this? How does the author show this?
How does the author feel about what happened? How can you tell? Is
there a challenge/goal/problem? Is there more than one problem?
What do the characters/people do to solve the challenge/goal/problem?
How do you know that the problem was solved in this way?
What would you have done differently if you had been one of the characters?
Can you think of another way that something in the story might have happened?
14
What might have happened if a certain action had not taken place?
How did the author close the piece?
Theme/Tone
Is there a message/lesson the author is trying to teach in this story? What is it? Use
evidence from text to describe it.
Why did the author write this book? Use evidence from the text.
Does the book make you feel a certain way? Are there words that the author uses that make
you feel that way?
Is there a part of the story that describes the atmosphere? How does the writer do that?
(words) 1.1.6. The Effect of Mentor Texts on Writing
The writing skill is hard to be improved, especially with young EFL middle school pupils, in
order to intervene and bring something new to their learning process. Something that scholars
still try to find about. According to Lee (2007), "Cultural Modelling (CM) takes the position
that one cannot imagine points of leverage between everyday experience and subject matter
learning without understanding the structure of disciplines in terms of both breadth and
depth"(p. 87). Applebee and Purvis (1992) cite content knowledge about authors, and said that
limited range of literary works and literary movements drives English teachers and the high
school literature curriculum to see coverage of these topics and exposure as the primary aim
of instruction rather than the process of becoming a strategic reader of any literary text.
Lee (2007) promotes engagement in literary reasoning with an emphasis on narratives that
students encounter across many media (television, film, music, as well as print literature).
Cultural Modelling draws on in the design and selection of cultural data sets used to elicit
15
students’ prior knowledge and the promotion of habits of mind or dispositions required to
engage in fundamental aspects of content knowledge of a discipline over a single focus on
authors, particular texts and literary movements. From the perspective of CM, conceptualizing
resources that students already bring with them from their experiences outside of school is a
fundamental element in the teachers Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) toolkit. Lee’s
(2007) research has consistently found in CM classrooms that students who would be
designated as seriously challenged readers, effortful processors, knowledge reliant readers,
nonstrategic processors, and resistant readers show astounding progress in engaging in literary
reasoning with very complex texts when they work with cultural data sets that make domain-
specific reading strategies public, use cultural data sets that demonstrate the relevance of the
cognitive work entailed in the literary reasoning in the everyday lives of youth, sequence texts
in ways that build on the knowledge of the text and makes the new use of existing strategies a
safer enterprise because students’ existing prior knowledge is privileged, and design
instruction in ways that privilege contextualization cues regarding language use that students
already value that provides incentives to be effortful and actively participate. When teachers
immerse students in reading and studying the kind of writing they want them to do, they are
actually teaching at two levels (Ray, 2006). They teach students about the particular genre or
writing issue that is the focus of the study, but they also teach students to use a habit of mind
experienced writers use all the time. They teach them how to read like writers (Ray, 1999
Smith, 1983), noticing as an insider how things are written. Given enough time, they will
learn to notice things about writing that other novices who do not write do not notice, and this
will help them develop a vision for the writing they will do in the future. They adopt a stance
that professional writers take and read the kind of texts that they are getting ready to write
themselves. This discipline-based stance is an inquiry approach to writing that teaches
students to read and write like writers. In order to authentically address this inquiry approach
16
to writing instruction, the students must be exposed to real-world texts that ensure that the
writing they study and notice are for the most part true to form. When teachers approach
writing instruction without real-world writing attached to it, using preconceived graphic
organizers or static grammar rule fixations, they end up teaching things about writing that are
not true 100% of the time and therefore inauthentic in their very nature. Mentor texts, or one
text, serve as a model for what the students will write. But when teachers work from an
inquiry stance, they have decided that the model for writing will come from a variety of
quality published texts that anchor the writing instruction for a particular genre. These
exemplar published texts are often referred to in pedagogical textbooks as either “touchstone”
or “mentor” texts. For the purpose of this study, the term “mentor text” has been adopted for
future reference to any published text used to model exemplar writing with students during
writing instruction. Gallagher (as cited in Anderson & Spandel, 2005) described his own
process coming to terms as a high school teacher with the understanding that placing quality
mentor texts in the hands of students and asking them to read is not enough to make them
better writers. Although he admits that reading widely often does enable students to get a feel
for crafting more sophisticated sentences and a deeper understanding of how authors approach
different genres, alone it does not necessarily guarantee quality writing. It is the pedagogical
combination of extensive reading paired with explicit writing instruction that generates
effective writing and writers. His reference to published author, King (2000) who stated that:
“If you want to be a writer, you must do two things above all else: read a lot and write a lot.
There’s no way around these two things that I’m aware, no shortcut” (p. 145). Strengthening
his stance that educators must put a number of exemplary mentor texts in front of students for
both reading and writing purposes. These models are allowing all students on the continuum
of writing development from novice to expert the same access to learning how to write from
professional writers. Allowing students the time and opportunity to internalize
17
what good writers do is critical, and for students to have any chance to do this, they need
modeling, modeling, and more modeling (Anderson & Spandel, 2005).
In writing, it is important that we start with a pillar of social and cultural perspective of
language used in and out of school. We must be able to simplify the function and features of
academic language that we expect our students to use in their own writing. When students
learn these conventions, they gain access to their comprehension and writing abilities.
Educators should always model and scaffold academic language with their students.
Classroom talk is a tool for working with information, such that it becomes knowledge and
understanding (Mercer, 2000). However, classroom talk as an instructional tool is ineffective
if it is only viewed as linear and static in nature. Nystrand, Gamoran, Kachur, and Prendergast
(1997) found that 85% of all instructional time in a sample of eighth- and ninth-grade English
classrooms was a combination of lecture, recitation, and seatwork. This type of transactional
discourse between teacher and students does not explore the type of authentic discourse that
students will meet in the real world that is often exploratory rather than didactic by nature.
Ideally, classroom discussions allow for the repetition of linguistic terms and thinking
processes that lead to language acquisition, internalization, and appropriation by students
(Bakhtin, 1981; Vygotsky, 1978).Thus, Zwiers (2008) promotes classroom discussion as a
way to push learners to think quickly, respond, organize their thoughts into sentences,
negotiate meaning, back claims with evidence, ask for clarification, and construct meaning in
real time as the dialog develops. This discussion also provides a format to make hidden
thought processes more.
Conclusion
Mentoring remains a viable policy option in education. However, for purposeful mentoring
to occur, a prerequisite is the acceptance of its complexity in carrying out the mentoring
function. This implies careful planning. Teachers are valuable resources in education, and
18
high quality performance in teaching is an essential ingredient of educational improvement or
reform. To assist beginning teachers, it is necessary to support their performance in the
classroom from the very beginning of their teaching careers. Support in the form of well-
designed mentoring programs can be pivotal in inducting new teachers into the profession and
keeping them in education. The stakes are high. Quality teaching is essential if the mission of
education is to be fulfilled. Mentoring can play a critical role in continually improving the
professional knowledge and skills that teachers need to instruct and prepare students for the
next century. However, to be effective, mentoring programs must be developed.
19
Section Two: Writing
Introduction
Writing in its many forms, is the signature means of communication in the 21st
century.
Writing is also arguably the most complex and difficult challenge facing all students in
school. It is a piece of quality literature text that students can use as an exemplar text to model
their own attempts for writing. Writing is a very demanding task, requiring the orchestration
of a variety of cognitive resources. For developing writers, it can be especially demanding, as
they have not yet mastered important writing processes, skills, and knowledge involved in
planning, drafting, and revising text. In the present study, middle school students were
directly taught strategies that facilitated the execution of each of these processes.
1.2.1. Definition of Writing
According to Tarigan (1985,p.5) writing is productive skills for writing an indirect
communication and the nature of the character is very different from that expressed by
speaking directly, therefore writing is included as an ability, According to Harmer (2001, p.
79) writing is a form of communication to deliver through or to express feeling through
written form. Jonah (2006, p 14) argues that writing is a series of activities, and involve
several phases, the preparatory phase, the content development and review, as well as
revisions or improvements posts. Jonah (2006, p. 29) argues that writing can be used as an
indirect means of communication to others to convey information. Activities are not easy to
write because writing should be able to produce something new and can give you an idea or
ideas to the reader through writing. Another definition of writing is proposed by Nation (2009,
p. 112) who states that writing is an activity that can usefully be preferred for by work in other
skills of listening, speaking, and reading. This preparation can make it possible for words that
have been used receptively to come into productive use.
20
1.2.1.2. History of Writing
Humans invented two important systems of visual signs to communicate with others: art
and writing. These two different communicative systems are independent from each other and
play different roles in the community. Writing uses a system of graphic marks that represent
units of a specific language structure, while simultaneously representing the needs and
traditions of the society that use that language system and the capacities of the human brain.
The appearance of writing transformed existing social systems by making the
communication easy across space and time, by making communications concrete (Bazerman,
2007). Writing has played a major role in the development and expansion of all social systems
in our society including the economy, government, religion, entertainment, and academia.
Writing has not only helped form these systems that serve to function in human society, but it
helps carry out fundamental processes that cut across social spheres as well. Writing can be an
avenue for individual expression, and, at the same time, it can serve to construct or proclaim
the individual author’s membership in a social group (Dyson, 2003).
According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO, 1995), one’s ability to receive an education is a universal human right. In a
society that values education, it is widely assumed that if one is successful in our education
system, then he/she will more than likely function successfully as a literate adult in society
1.2.1.3. Theories of Writing
The writing process is a crucial activity that the writer must respect, an activity that has
multiple meanings attached to its concept from both a researcher’s and a practitioner’s point
of view. Those who view the writer as the source of written text, and put the focus on the
process by which a writer exert a purpose for writing and determines the type of writing being
assembled for an audience goes within the process camp. There are two distinct groups, the
expressivists and the cognitivists. Although there is not a distinct and universal definition that
21
can be given for the term “writing process” considering classroom practice, it can offer us a
common vocabulary for talking about the nature of writing—planning, revising, editing—and
insight in to how these processes work for isolated writers in particular situations (Flood et al.,
2003). Pioneers of the expressivist movement—Donald Murray, Ken Macrorie, William
Coles, Peter Elbow and others—have published widely, advocating classroom techniques that
encourage students to take power in their own prose (Kroll, 1990). Expressivists defined
writing by the essential qualities of Romantic expressive—integrity, spontaneity, and
originality. Teachers who mentioned expressivism in their own writing instruction are
nondirective; they facilitate classroom activities designed to promote writing fluency and self-
expression in writing. Students in expressivists’ classrooms are encouraged to write freely and
uncritically and place great value on quantity. Cognitivists suggest planning and problem
solving in the writing process. Pioneers of this cognitive view include Janet Emig, James
Britton, and the work of Linda Flower and John R. Hayes.
The Flower and Hayes model of composing (1980a, 1980b, & 1981) makes strong
theoretical claims in assuming relatively simple cognitive operations produce, enormously
complex actions and, like Emig (1971) research, the Flower and Hayes model helped promote
a “science consciousness” among writing teachers. Even though cognitive researchers have
warned that “novice writers cannot be turned into experts simply by tutoring them in the
knowledge expert writers have” (Scardamalia, 1981, p. 174). Many writing teachers believed
cognitive research could provide a “deep structure” theory of the composing process, which
could in turn specify how writing should be taught (Faigley, 1986). According to the cognivist
view of writing, planning begins with identifying a rhetorical problem and then students
continue the writing process by translating their plans and thoughts into words, and by
reviewing their work through revising and editing(Kroll,1990). although it was never intended
to be a linear process, unfortunately in pedagogical practice, many classroom teachers
22
interpreted this planning stage to be a set of hard activities that are to be dictated by days of
the week such that the classroom schedule dictates Monday is planning day, Tuesday is
drafting day, Wednesday is peer response, Thursday is revision and so forth. In this sense,
students wrongly come to view writing as a static response to the teacher’s demands for
classroom unity and conformity rather than a complex individualized problem-solving process
that demands flexibility and values recycling through various subprocesses of composition
without time constraints. The work of cognitive researchers such as Emig (1971) and Hayes
and Flower (1983) attempted to dispel the need for rigid whole group writing instruction by
revealing that complex writing processes are not linear or formulaic but rather individual and
recursive. However, many researchers still find fault with pursuing a cognitive view of
composing because they accuse cognivists of neglecting the content of writing and
downplaying conflicts inherent in acts of writing. As a consequence pedagogies assuming a
cognitive view tend to overlook differences in language use among students of different social
classes, genders, and ethnic background (Faigley, 1986). The lesser well known of the
approaches, the interactive approach, sees the writer as a person involved in a conversation
with his or her audience. The text itself is the documentation between the writer and the
reader, who both share responsibility for its coherency. According to schema theory, the
coherence of a text is established through the fit between the schemata of the reader (or
audience) and the organization, content, and argument of the text made by the writer. Both the
writer and the reader are bound by language limitations. The writer should either acknowledge
the language of the reader or provide considerable schemata for the reader to assist with
comprehension, allowing for gradual revision of the reader’s previously held schemata. In this
version of interactivity between writer and text, the writer attempts to apply to the reader
through a reality upon which the writer and the reader can agree, and to convince the reader of
a particular argument within this reality (Kroll, 1990). If the writer is unable to appeal to the
23
reader, then the reader may reject the text itself. Social constructivists believe that knowledge,
language, and the nature of discourse are determined for the writer by the discourse
community for whom the writer writes and that Human language including writing can be
understood only from the perspective of a society Rather than a single individual. It rejects the
assumption that writing is the act of a private Consciousness and that everything else readers,
subjects and texts is exposed in the world the focus of a social view of writing.
1.2.1.4. Approaches to Teaching Writing
The most important difference between teaching L1 writing and L2 writing is mastery of
language expression, in native language instructions the teacher assumes that the students
have fundamental control of the language in second language writing instructions on the other
hand students command of the language plays a critical role Raimes(1983) points out that
there are many features that writers have to deal with when writing in second language
Mechanics ,word choice grammar and syntax are added to features such as content
organization the writing process and the audience given the constraints of the second language
most approaches to teaching writing includes a focus on both forms and content.
In her book Techniques in teaching writing, Raimes (1983) discusses six different
approaches to teaching writing
1) The controlled-to-free approach
2) The free writing approach
3) The pattern paragraph approach
4) The grammar syntax organization approach
5) The communicative approach
6) The process approach All of these approaches include some concentration on second language development
24
1.2.1.4.1. The Controlled to Free Approach
The approach stresses the importance of grammar and syntax generally taught sequentially
teaching writing first involves sentences exercises and then paragraph manipulation. ,most of
the writing is strictly controlled by having students change words or clauses or combine
sentences when students achieve mastery of these exercises typically at an advanced level of
proficiency they are permitted to engage in autonomous writing.
1.2.1.4.2. The Prewriting Approach
In this approach teachers value quantity over quality in writing and do minimal errors
correction. The focus of instruction is on content and audience. Students are encouraged to be
concerned about fluency and content and give cursory attention to form. Proponents of this
approach consider that grammatical accuracy will develop over time.
1.2.1.4.3. The Pattern Paragraph Approach
This approach deals with analysis and imitation of mentor texts and stresses organisation
over all. By imitating mentor texts, putting scrambled sentences in order, identifying or
writing topic sentences and inserting or deleting sentences. Students are taught to develop an
awareness of English features of writing.
1.2.1.4.4. The Grammar Sentence–Syntax-Organisation Approach
This approach requires students to focus on several features of writing at once. The
writing tasks are designed to make students pay attention to grammar and syntax while giving
them opportunities to organise their texts with word like First, then, after, finally.
1.2.1.4.5. The Communicative Approach
In this approach of writing the purpose and audience are main and of a great importance
Students are engaged in real life tasks such as writing formal and informal writing.
25
1.2.1.4.6. The Process Approach
Like in L1 writing instruction, there has been a shift, in EFL writing instruction from
product to process, rather than concentrating on the final form of the draft and errors
committed. Teachers are facilitating in helping students discover ideas and plan draft revise
and edit. The first draft is not expected to be error free. And teacher’s feedback is designed to
help students form new ideas, sentences, to use in the future drafts.
1.2.1.4.7. The Writing Task
The basics when teaching writing involves assigning topics relevant to students’ lives in
order to engage interest and motivate them to exchange ideas and thoughts and feelings.
However, just because the topic is important to students does not mean that they will write
about it.
Whether the topic is “summer vacation”, “abortion”, “women’s right”, “violence on TV”
or “premarital sex”, it is equally inert and undynamic even if names a potentially significant
range of students experience as long as unaccompanied by incentives to personal engagement
beyond the requirement to produce a certain number of pages for a teachers’ scrutiny
(Knoblauch & Brannon, 1984, 106). Motivating students to write can be elusive because the
assigned topic is often arbitrary and artificial. However, Knoblauch and Brannon (1984)
contend that when the teachers plays collaborative roles, never dominated nor insisting on
their personal views, it is imperative that the students sense that the teacher is genuinely
interested in what is being said and not only how it is being said. While it can be critical in
motivating students to write, the writing task itself plays an equally important role in
determining the success of the writing experience. Above all, the writing task must serve as A
prompt to activate students background knowledge and personal experience, (Kroll & Reid,
1994). Kroll and Reid (1994) stressed the importance of designing prompts that will allow
students writers to demonstrate their ability to write rather than to decipher writing prompt.
26
1.2.1.5. Stages of writing There are many stages Raimes (1983) provided the following.
1.2.1.5.1. Awareness-raising
In this stage learners are guided to discover/identify specific elements of good writing
previous issue and features of different text types. In a writing programme, the awareness-
raising stage always involves reading. In fact, the development of reading skills is
indispensable for the development of writing skills. The procedures marked by an asterisk (*)
below can also be used for the development of reading skills. After learners have been
familiarised with awareness-raising procedures, teachers can set awareness-raising tasks as
homework. Such practice can free valuable classroom time for 'Support' and 'Feedback'
procedures.
1.2.1.5.2. Awareness-Raising Procedures
In this stage, learners analyze a text regarding one or more elements of good writing. They
analyze a poorly formulated text in order to identify problems and propose remedies and
reformulations. analysing learner texts for merits & short comings. Comparing two texts in
terms of style/register.*Ordering jumbled sentences to create a paragraph/text.*Ordering
jumbled paragraphs to create a text.*Inserting additional or missing information into a text
(linking & signposting expressions, Sentences, paragraphs).* Diving a text into sections/
Paragraphes. *
1.2.1.5.3. Support
In this stage learners are helped to clarify/consolidate the points raised and discussed
during the Awareness-raising stage, and/or guided in their efforts to produce a text. Support
procedures can be of three different types according to the learners' needs. Firstly, learners
may be given explicit and general information and guidelines, as well as illustrative examples,
27
regarding the organisation, layout and style of specific text-types. Secondly, the teacher may
provide help regarding the specific task at hand. For example, learners can be guided to
identify the intended reader, the purpose of writing and the points to be covered, and can be
helped to generate ideas regarding organisation, vocabulary and grammar. Thirdly, the teacher
may elicit and/or pre-teach one or more of the following: relevant vocabulary, grammar, and
background information.
1.2.1.5.4. Support Procedures
Grammar input/revision and exercises, Elicitation and input of relevant vocabulary
Elicitation and or input regarding relevant ideas items of content, Elicitation or input
regarding elements of good writing. Planning guidelines (content, layout, organisation, style).
1.2.1.5.5. Practice
The Practice stage offers students the chance to use and experiment with the features of
good writing discussed in the 'awareness' stage. In turn, the product of the Practice stage will
be used in the Feedback stage. Practice procedures can be categorised according to their focus
and the amount of control. In terms of focus, practice can be of two types, focused and global
(Cook, 1989) In focused practice learners concentrate on one element of writing. In global
practice learners are given a writing task to achieve. In terms of control, practice can be
controlled or free. In controlled practice the aim is the development of accuracy. Acceptable
responses are pre-determined, or there are limitations as to the content of the text to be
written. In free practice the aim is effective communication through writing (i.e. achievement
of a writing task), and the range of acceptable responses is much greater. The teacher can
choose the focus of activities and manipulate the amount of control depending on the learners'
needs. For example, the teacher may give learners a writing task (global practice), but also
impose some control over the content by asking them to use a specified number of
words/expressions or structures in the text.
28
1.2.1.5.6. Process Feedback
It seems that Feedback is the part of a writing programme which is either underused or
misunderstood. Feedback need not be limited to the overt correction of errors and the
provision of comments and/or grades by the teacher. Feedback can (and should) be a learning
experience, which provides the link between consecutive writing lessons. During feedback,
learners are invited to identify the merits and shortcomings of their writing performance,
understand the reasons for these short comings and discuss possible improvements. When
learners have become familiar with feedback procedures, feedback activities can also be set as
homework. In order to make optimal use of the Feedback stage, teachers need to be aware of
three basic aspects of feedback procedures. These aspects can be seen as answers to the
following three questions: Who provides comments/corrections? What is the focus of
feedback? How is feedback given?
1.2.1.6 The importance of writing
The importance of writing stems from the fact that writing is the primary basis upon
which communication, history, record keeping, and art is begun. Writing is the frame work of
our communication. We are encountered with writing every day of our lives. Whether it be an
office memo, restaurant menu, or a love letter. Writing is incredibly pliable; you can use it to
give information, an opinion, a question, or poetry. Words can take a bounty of forms within
writing. The words you use can show who you are as a person, the things writing has done in
our lives and the world is profound. I cannot imagine a life That didn’t involve writing.
Writing is extremely important in today’s society. Communication is transmitted more
through writing than any other type of media. The most binding contracts and agreements are
written and signed. Writing is part of a creative project, whether it is a film, building, or a
piece of literature. Without writing, the flow of ideas halted shortly beyond the source.
29
There is a problematic trend spotted in our country and in many other countries."American
students today are not meeting even basic writing standards, and their teachers are often at a
loss of how to help them" (Gregorian, 2007, p. 2). Nowadays, learning a foreign language has
become a challenge especially with learners of English language. Today teachers and
educators noticed that learners learning English as a second language face difficulties in
speaking as well as writing, Student’s luck of motivation and interest in writing lead to a
considerable number of failure in classroom tasks, writing skills present 50% of language
competence, it is imperative that action should be taken. Writing is a lifelong skill that
students need to develop early in their schooling to carry with them throughout the reminder
of their education and career. Gregorian (2007) explains how this writing deficit can lead to
other downfalls as well: "young people who do not have the ability to transform thought.
Ideas into written words are in danger of losing touch with the joy of inquiry, the sense of
intellectual curiosity, and inestimable satisfaction of acquiring wisdom that are the
touchstones of humanity"(p. 1)
1.2.1.7 Conclusion
As you now know, writing isn’t just something you do in a sudden burst of activity
when the essay deadline starts to loom. Such a last-minute approach usually produces poorly
organized and incoherent essays, because it eliminates the idea of writing as a process, and
focuses only on the product. When it comes to writing, we are used to seeing, and reading,
finished works: books, course materials, online content. We aren’t often exposed to all of the
preparation and elbow grease that goes into the creation of those finished works.
30
Chapter Two: The Practical Framework
Introduction
2.1. Choice of the Method............................................................................ ………………………… 33
2.2. The Sample ...................................……………………………………… 33
2.3. Research Design.................................................................................................................................... 34
2.4. Procedures.............................................................................................................................................. … 35
2.4.1 Pre-Testing........................................................................................................................................ … 35
2.4.2. Treatment........................................................................................................................................ 35
2.4.2.1. Experimental Group Instruction .................................................................................................... 36
2.4.2.2. Control Group Instruction ................................................................................................................ 36
2.4.3. Post-Testing ......................................................................................................................................... 37
2.5. Instruments......................................................................................................................................... 37
2.5.1. Test Used in Pre-Testing and Post-Testing.................................................................................... 37
2.6. Scoring.......................................................................................................................................... 37
2.7. Statistical Analysis.................................................................................................................................. 38
2.8. Results.................................................................................................................................................... 38
2.8.1. Results of the Task.......................................................................................................................... 38
2.8.1.1 Results of the control group........................................................................................................ 39
2.8.1.2 Results of the Experimental........................................................................................................ 40
2.8.1.3 Results of both Experimental and control group.......................... 42
2.8.1.4. Control Group Post-test /Pre-test Scores..... …………………... 43
2.8.1.5. Experimental Group Post-test versus Pre-test scores.................. 44
Conclusion................................................................................................ …………………….. 45
General Conclusion.................................................................................. ……………………… 46
Limitation of the Study ……………………………………………….. 46
Suggestions for Further Research …………………………………… 46
References ……………………………………………………………. 48
Chapter Two: Field Work Introduction
The previous chapter tackled the idea that mentor texts are an effective strategy for
teachers to carry out in EFL classes since it stimulates learners’ involvement in the class and
they foster writing achievements through literacy, as well as it strengthens the grammar, style
skills. Furthermore, it discussed the importance of mentor texts in EFL classrooms along with
some teaching and learning strategies.
In addition, the fostering technique as a successful instruction methodology in a variety of
EFL classes might have a positive result on developing learners’ writing skills. In addition to
discussing the methodology followed in this study, this chapter deals with the specification of
the population and the sample, and the different procedures starting from data collection to the
analysis moving to the findings.
2.1. Choice of the Method
The study followed quasi experimental design. Two groups (Experimental and Control)
were chosen to represent the whole population. The two groups were already divided by the
administration at the beginning of the year. Moreover, the aim behind the study is to
investigate the effect of mentor texts on learner’s writing achievement.
2.2. The Sample
In the Algerian educational system, EFL teaching and learning starts basically in the
middle school, adopting the competency based approach as a standard methodology of
teaching (Benadla, 2012). On this basis, the current study put under light third year EFL
learners at Abdelhamid Ibn Badis middle school in Tebessa in the academic year 2016-2017.
Therefore, from a total of 113 learners, 40 were randomly selected in respect of the current
research, 19males and 21 females between the age of 13 and 17, divided into two groups
(experimental and control group). The reason behind choosing third year pupils is that they do
meet the Characteristics of the pre-intermediate level since they studied EFL for two years at
33
Least.
2.3. Research Design
The present study is performed with an experimental design where two Variables were under
scope: Mentor Texts and Writing Achievements. the research question, is stated as follows:
Do mentor texts have an effect on pupils’ writing achievement?
Statistically speaking, this question is read in the way below: Is there a significant difference in writing achievements between learners who were
taught using mentor texts and those who do not?
Thus, the following hypotheses can be formulated:
H ׃1 There would be a significant difference in writing achievements between the Learners,
who were taught using mentor texts and those who do not.
H ׃0 There would be no significant difference in writing achievements between the Learners
who were taught using mentor texts and those who do not.
Moreover, the study followed a quasi experimental design that can be represented as
follow: Figure1: The Schematic Representation of the Different Phases of the Quasi-
Experiment
Experimental group/ pre-test Treatment (Mentor Texts) Post-test
Control Group/Pre-test Treatment (Ordinary Method) Post-test
34
2.4. Procedures
2.4.1 Pre-testing
Both groups (experimental and control group) were pre-tested though their actual
competence in writing; short story as it was instructed and given in the pre-test. The pupils
were informed that the pre-test is just part of teacher’s evaluation and is given for their own
benefit. Thus, and the results will not be included in their real evaluation so that to avoid
copying their friends answers and to put them in a comfortable atmosphere. In addition to
that, the story was about something that happened to them in the past in order to trigger their
imagination.
2.4.2. Treatment
After conducting the pre-test, learners in the the experimental group received the treatment
in 4 sessions Learner were all listening to the teacher reading aloud the short story written by
Eileen Spinelli illustrated by Anne Wilsdorf and the pigeon book of Patrick suskind they were
given a cheat of paper with a space to draw and write a story about something they did in the
past or happened with them in a form of an accident, the teacher’s assistance was always
present for guidance through the writing task. However, learners of the control group were
taught using the ordinary method, the usual instructions with no teacher assistance, the task
were course performed individually.
2.4.2.1. Experimental Group Instruction
The Experimental group was provided with a book chosen specially for the writing
workshop to teach them structure, style, as well as form and word choice. The pupils were
also given a simple story convenient to their linguistic and cognitive competence.
Students started with writing expectations about what they are supposed to do for instance;
listen think, share ,write and illustrate ,after that the teacher gave oral questions about the
writer’s story structure, the teacher trying to draw the parts of the story on the board for the
35
students to have another visual image about the story and that will help them organize their
own story in their heads. Of course, the story illustrations made the story more interesting and
easy to remember. The first sessions, the teacher’s assistance was required because of the new
method and breaks the routine through multiple examples. After that, learners were expected
to draw the parts of the story depending on their own understanding of the teacher’s
illustrations and modelling.
2.4.2.2. Control Group Instruction
The control group learners were taught with the old way of teaching used by their
instructors; therefore, they accomplished the tasks given to them individually. Then with the
help of the teacher, the task will be solved.
2.4.3. Post-Testing
The treatment period finished with the post-test. The later was of treatment after 4 sessions
to ensure that learners will not remember their answers in the pre-test.
The post-test contained the same tasks as the pre-test to indicate whether learners have
learned new vocabulary items used by the author and to see also if they grasped the way of
story-telling in through the use of mentor texts, or whether their texts did not have much
effect on learners progress progress in the EFL classroom. Therefore, the results of both
groups on the (pre-test and post-test) were compared and analysed in the section related to
findings. This was meant to accept or reject the two hypothesis stated.
2.5. Instruments
2.5.1. Test Used in Pre-testing and Post-testing
The pre-test and post-test was in a form of instructions simply given to pupils, the
Writing workshop session, learners were asked to write a small story just like the one the
teacher was reading aloud, the mentor text that was read was a story of the pigeon written by
Patrick suskind.
36
2.6. Scoring
The test was scored out of 20 points. Ten points were distributed on grammar, accuracy,
word choice, vocabulary, structure, and style. The first thing that received the major amount
of points is the pupil’s personal efforts. The sheet of paper represented two parts, one part was
reserved to drawing and the second part represented the written part of the story that was
scored on ten points.
2.7. Statistical Analysis
To confirm one of the hypothesis, and depending on the research question. The first
Test used to confirm whether mentor texts had an effect on learner’s writing achievements
was the T-test, after receiving the treatment of course. Through the calculation of both pre-test
and post- test of the Experimental group, the results showed a significant improvement. In
order to compare between results of the post test for the experimental and the control group
After the treatment period.
2.8 Results
The following section deals with the statistical analysis of the results of in the pre-test and the
post-test. 2.8.1.1 Results of the Control Group pre-test and post-test
Control Group Mean N Std. Std.Error
Deviation Mean
Pair 1
pretest 4.4000 20 1.69830 .37975
posttest 6.2000 20 1.60918 .35982
37
Paired Samples Test of The Control Group
Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-
Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence tailed)
Deviation Error Interval of the Mean Difference
Lower Upper Pair pretest - -
1.10501 .24709 -2.31716 -1.28284 -
19 .000 1 posttest 1.80000 7.285
2.8.1.2 Results of the Experimental Group pre-test and post-test Experimental Group
Mean N Std. Std.Error
Deviation Mean
Pair 1
pretest 5.7500 20 1.80278 .40311
posttest 10.5500 20 1.95946 .43815
Paired Samples Test of The Experimental Group Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-
Mean Std. Std. 95% Confidence tailed)
Deviation Error Interval of the Mean Difference
Lower Upper Pair pretest - -
1.57614 .35244 -5.53766 -4.06234 -
19 .000 1 posttest 4.80000 13.620
38
2.8.1.3 Results of Experimental Group and Control Group pre-tests
Group Statistics N Mean Std. Std.Error
Deviation Mean
pretest of 20 4.4000 1.69830 .37975 control group
pretests pretest of experimental 20 5.7500 1.80278 .40311 group
Independent Samples Test
Levene's t-test for Equality of Means
Test for Equality of Variances
F Sig. t df Sig. Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval of
(2- Difference Difference the Difference
tailed) Lower Upper
Equal -
-
variances .420 .521 38 .020 -1.35000 .55381 -.22886
assumed 2.438 2.47114
pretests Equal variances -
37.865 .020 -1.35000 .55381 -
-.22873 not 2.438 2.47127 assumed
The results of the control and Experimental group post-tests
39
Independent Samples Test
Levene's t-test for Equality of Means Test for Equality of Variances
F Sig. t df Sig. Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence
(2- Difference Difference Interval of the
tailed) Difference
Lower Upper
Equal -
variances .463 .500 38 .000 -4.35000 .56696 -5.49776 -3.20224
assumed 7.672
posttests Equal variances -
36.616 .000 -4.35000 .56696 -5.49918 -3.20082not 7.672 assumed
Table 1: The Experimental and Control Groups’ Frequency of Scores on the Task
scores C pré-test C post- E pré- E post- test test test
1 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 3 4 0 2 0 4 3 1 5 0 5 5 7 2 1 6 3 7 2 0 7 1 1 6 0 8 1 1 2 0 9 0 2 1 4 10 0 1 0 5 11 0 0 0 4 12 0 0 0 3 13 0 0 0 2 14 0 0 0 1 15 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 N 20 20 20 20
40
2.8.1.1. Control Group Vs Experimental Group Scores on the Pre-test
Table 1 exhibits the results of both groups performance in the task (writing workshop using
mentor texts) before and after the application of the treatment. In the pre-test, the calculated
mean of the control group was e= 4.4000, and for the experimental group it was e= 5.7500.
For a total number of 20 scores in the control group and 20 scores in the experimental group,
we have:
Control group: 20 ≥ 8 100% ≥ 8
Experimental group: 20 ≥ 9 100% ≥ 9
2.8.1.2 Control Group Vs Experimental Group Scores in the Pre-test
Frequency Polygon (figure2): control group and experimental group’s scores (Pre-
test)
45
40
35
30
25 E pré-test
20 C pré-test
15
10
5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 N
From frequency polygon 1, it could be noted that the control group’s scores polygon starts at
1 (the lowest score) and ends at 9(the highest score) .On the other hand, the experimental
group’s scores polygon begins at 3(the lowest score) and ends at 9(the highest score).
Comparing the most frequent scores of both groups, the control group most frequent score is 5
while the experimental group most frequent score is 7 (Figure 1).
41
2.8.1.3 Experimental Group Vs Control Group in the (Post-test)
Figure 3: Frequency of Control and Experimental Group’s Scores (post-test)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
E post-test
C post-test
From frequency polygon 4, it could be noted that the control group’s frequency polygon
starts at 4 (the lowest score) and ends at 10 (the biggest score). On the other hand, the
experimental group’s frequency polygon begins at 5 (the lowest score) and ends at 14(the
biggest score). with. Comparing the most frequent scores of both groups, the control group
most frequent score is 6 and 5 those of the experimental group are 10.11 and 9. (See figure2).
42
Experimental Group Pre-test Vs Experimental Group Post –test
Table 1: Experimental group’s pre-test, post-test, and difference scores on the test
Individual E pre-test E post-test différence students 1 6 12 6
2 7 10 3
3 7 13 6
4 7 12 5
5 6 11 5
6 4 11 7
7 8 11 3
8 7 14 7
9 4 10 6
10 9 13 4
11 7 12 5
12 7 11 4
13 4 9 5
14 3 9 6
15 3 9 6
16 8 10 2
17 4 9 5
18 5 10 5
19 5 10 5
20 4 5 1
43
Figure 3: Experimental group’s pre-test, post-test scores
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 N
E post-test
E pré-test
From table 1 and figure 3 we can notice that the experimental group’s scores improved
significantly between pre- and post-test. All post-test scores are above the average whereas
nearly all pre-test scores are below the average.
Conclusion
The writing skill is considered as important and not detachable from the language
learning process. To master this skill of new methods have been put into practise to see
whether there has been a sort of improvement in this field of research or not. Starting from
middle school pupils, mentor texts were suggested to bring effective results. Thus, Literacy
texts were chosen especially for the purpose of mentoring learners in writing workshops. and
were a positive presence in the classroom. It was proved after the treatment period that mentor
texts improved learner’s writing achievements.
General Discussion
1) The non-significant improvement of the control group was due
to: Luck of guidance No experience of the story telling task 2) Significant improvement of the experimental group was because of:
44
The reading aloud method that helps with listening attentively
[The high level of concentration during the story telling
The Modeling and sharing of the story parts as group with the guidance of the teacher the
mentor text taught them the structure and style of how to write like writers
The pigeon story of Susskind chosen purposefully for teaching the story telling
45
General conclusion
The debate over improving middle school learners of EFL in middle schools hasn’t been
settled yet. On the one hand there are researchers who support the idea of using mentor texts
in their writing workshops and they recognized many significant potential in their writing it
and on the other hand, there are those who believe that using mentor texts it is not effective as
a teaching technique. Results of the present study indicate that the use of mentor texts in EFL
classes affect positively learners writing skills. In the other hand, the alternative hypotheses
which states that using mentor texts had a significant effect on learners writing achievement
was confirmed.
Limitations of the Study
While there were problems with this study, its design worked fairly well, for the most part.
However, Because of the circumstances in which it was carried out, it was not possible to
design the experiment exactly as it was planed. For example, it would be better if the
experiment was conducted in the secondary school. Time constraints too were among the
serious difficulties we faced because it would have been better if we could had a
The period of treatment was longer.
Suggestions for Further Research
After examining the results of the study, some suggestion can be stated as follow:
It would be amazing and of a great importance if this method is to be applied in high school
Thus, further researches can depend on conducting experiment in secondary or high schools to
bring about better results. Moreover, the college teachers can start using mentor books to
teach subjects related to numerous fields of study. In addition, it would be so useful to use
mentor texts in professional areas of learning professional maybe, to help more in modelling
and teaching professional subjects.
46
Appendix B: Treatment Period Instruction
Topic: write a paragraph in which you will tell a story like the story of the pigeon and draw al
the parts of the story.
References
Adler, E. M., & Schwartz, P. J. (2006). Teaching resources. The Sherlock Holmes lab: investigations in neurophysiology. Sci.STKE., 2006(334), tr6. https://doi.org/10.1126/stke.3342006tr6
Allen, T. (2007). Mentoring Relationships from the perspective of the Mentor. The
Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, …, 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1997.1596
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2008). Mentor commitment in formal mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(3), 309–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.016
Anderson, D. R. (2005). The Importance of Mentoring Programs to Women’s Career Advancement in Biotechnology. Journal of Career Development, 32(1), 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845305277039
Anderson, G. (2004). How to write a paper in scientific journal style and format. Copyright Bates College, 1–17. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:How+to+Write+a+Paper+in+Scientific+Journal+Style+and+Format#3
Anderson, L., Silet, K., & Fleming, M. (2012). Evaluating and Giving Feedback to Mentors: New Evidence-Based Approaches. Clinical and Translational Science, 5(1), 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-8062.2011.00361.x
Anderson, N. D. (2001). Gnosticism and Later Platonism: Themes, Figures, and Texts (review). Journal of Early Christian Studies, 9(4), 600–601. https://doi.org/10.1353/earl.2001.0051
Applebee, A. N. (2000). Alternative Models of Writing Development. In Perspectives on
writing: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 90–110).
Applebee, A. N. (1977). A sense of story. Theory Into Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405847709542723
Attokaran, M. (2011). Parsley. In Natural Food Flavors and Colorants (pp. 333–335). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470959152.ch83
Avery, R. J. (2011). The potential contribution of mentor programs to relational permanency for youth aging out of foster care. Child Welfare, 90(3), 9–26.
B, P. (2004). Becoming a good mentor. Nursing Standard, 19(13), 2p–2p. Retrieved from http://zh8wk8vq8w.search.serialssolutions.com/?genre=article&issn=00296570&title=Becoming a good mentor.&volume=19&issue=13&date=20041208&atitle=Becoming a good mentor.&spage=2p&pages=&sid=EBSCO:CINAHL Plus with Full Text&au=Price B
Bailey, J. E. (2010). Virtual Mentor. Ethics, 12(7), 197–201. https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2010.12.8.medu1-1008
Bennetts, C. (2002). Traditional mentor relationships, intimacy and emotional intelligence. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 15(2), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390110111893
Bradbury, L. U. (2010). Educative mentoring: Promoting reform-based science teaching through mentoring relationships. Science Education, 94(6), 1049–1071. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20393
Brown & Levinson, S. (2011). Politeness ( Brown and Levinson 1987 ). Reading, 1–2.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Studies
in Interactional Sociolinguistics 4, 55–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587263
Bullough, R. V. (2005). Being and becoming a mentor: School-based teacher educators and teacher educator identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.002
Caldas-Coulthard, C. R., & Coulthard, M. (1996). Texts and Practices. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.2307/3737104
Caldeira, S. M. G., Petit Lobão, T. C., Andrade, R. F. S., Neme, A., & Miranda, J. G. V. (2006). The network of concepts in written texts. European Physical Journal B, 49(4), 523–529. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2006-00091-3
Campbell, J. (2012). Hoyt memorial lecture - Stop pouring, start casting. International
Journal of Metalcasting, 6(3), 7–18.
Christy, T. C. (2013). Vygotsky , Cognitive Development and Language. Historiographia
Linguistica, 40((1/2)), 199–227. https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.40.1.07chr
Davydov, V. V, & Kerr, S. T. (1995). Vygotsky on Education. Educational Researcher, 24(3), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01378_6.x
Escobar Alméciga, W. Y., & Evans, R. (2014). Mentor texts and the coding of academic writing structures: A functional approach. HOW, A Colombian Journal for Teachers
of English, 21(2), 94–111. Retrieved from http://howjournalcolombia.org/index.php/how/article/view/6%5Cnhttps://www.academia.edu/8769480/Mentor_Texts_and_the_Coding_of_Academic_Writing_Structures_A_Functional_Approach
Everson, B. (1991). Vygotsky and the Teaching of Writing. The Quarterly.
Feiman-nemser, S. (2003). What New Teachers Need to Learn. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 25–29.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Parker, M. B. (1993). Mentoring in context: A comparison of two U.S. programs for beginning teachers. International Journal of Educational
Research, 19(8), 699–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(93)90010-H
Fletcher, S. (1997). “From Mentor to Mentored.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in
Learning, 5(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968465970050105
Fletcher, S. (2012). Mentor education: challenging mentor’ beliefs about mentoring. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 1(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/20466851211231585
Fletcher, S., Strong, M., & Villar, A. (2008). An Investigation of the Effects of Variations in Mentor-Based Induction on the Performance of Students in California. Teachers
College Record, 110(10), 2271–2289. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1926.0099
Gainer, J. (2013). 21st-century mentor texts: Developing critical literacies in the information age. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.210
Gallagher, K. (2014). Making the Most of Mentor Texts. Educational Leadership, 71(7), 28–33. Retrieved from http://proxy.geneseo.edu:2094/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=2d46c57b-e371-4d95-aedb-b445768d86ae%40sessionmgr4006&hid=4203&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=EJ1043767&db=eric%5Cnhttp://proxy.geneseo.edu:2094/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=2d46c57b
Gay, B. (1994). What is mentoring? Education & Training, 36(5), 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400919410062257
Gay, G. (1995). Modeling and mentoring in urban teacher preparation. Education and
Urban Society, 28, 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124595028001008
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher
Education, 53(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053002003
Gay, G. (2013). Teaching To and Through Cultural Diversity. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(1), 48–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12002
Gay, T. (1970). Effects of filtering and vowel environment on consonant perception. The
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 48(4), 993–8. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5480393
Gewin, V. (2005). Learning to mentor. Nature, 436(7049), 436–437. https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7049-436a
Gopen, G., & Swan, J. (1990). The science of scientific writing. American Scientist, 78, 550–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77415-2
Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). Assessing Writing: Introduction. Assessing Writing, 8(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1075-2935(02)00030-2
Hoel, T., & Hollins, P. (2008). Learning technology standards adoption - how to improve process and product legitimacy. In Proceedings - The 8th IEEE International
Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, ICALT 2008 (pp. 587–589). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2008.14
Holley, K. A., & Colyar, J. (2009). Rethinking Texts: Narrative and the Construction of Qualitative Research. Educational Researcher, 38(9), 680–686. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09351979
Hollins, E. R. (2011). Teacher Preparation For Quality Teaching. Journal of Teacher
Education, 62(4), 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487111409415
Hollins, E. R. (2015). Culture in School Learning: Revealing the Deep Meaning: Third
Edition. Culture in School Learning: Revealing the Deep Meaning: Third Edition. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315813615
Hollins, E. R. (1993). Assessing Teacher Competence for Diverse Populations. Theory
Into Practice, 32(2), 93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849309543581
Hynd, C. R. (1999). Teaching Students to Think Critically Using Multiple Texts in History. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(6), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.2307/40014056
Itzkovich, M., Tamir, A., Philo, O., Steinberg, F., Ronen, J., Spasser, R., … Catz, A. (2003). Reliability of the Catz-Itzkovich Spinal Cord Independence Measure assessment by interview and comparison with observation. American Journal of
Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation / Association of Academic Physiatrists, 82(4), 267–72. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PHM.0000057226.22271.44
Ivey, G., & Broaddus, K. (2001). “Just plain reading” : A survey of what makes students want to read in middle school classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 350–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21593
Jaspers, W. M., Meijer, P. C., Prins, F., & Wubbels, T. (2014). Mentor teachers: Their perceived possibilities and challenges as mentor and teacher. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 44, 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.08.005
Johnson, W. B. (2007). Transformational supervision: When supervisors mentor. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38(3), 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.3.259
Koppel, M. (2002). Automatically Categorizing Written Texts by Author Gender. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 17(4), 401–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/17.4.401
Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the Mentor Relationship. Academy of Management
Journal, 26(4), 608–625. https://doi.org/10.2307/255910
Lavelle, E., Smith, J., & O’Ryan, L. (2002). The writing approaches of secondary students. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(Pt 3), 399–418. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1348/000709902320634564
Lee, I. (2007). Feedback in Hong Kong secondary writing classrooms: Assessment for learning or assessment of learning? Assessing Writing, 12(3), 180–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2008.02.003
Lee, I. (2010). Writing teacher education and teacher learning: Testimonies of four EFL teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.05.001
Lee, J. (2013). Can Writing Attitudes and Learning Behavior Overcome Gender Difference in Writing? Evidence From NAEP. Written Communication, 30(2), 164–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313480313
Leibniz, G. W., Franks, R., & Woolhouse, R. S. (1998). Philosophical Texts. Oxford
Philosophical Texts.
Lewis, L. L., Kim, Y. A., & Ashby Bey, J. (2011). Teaching practices and strategies to involve inner-city parents at home and in the school. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 27(1), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.005
Mercer, N. (2010). The analysis of classroom talk: methods and methodologies. The
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(Pt 1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X479853
Mertz, N. T. (2004). What’s a Mentor, Anyway? Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 541–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04267110
Morgan, B., & Smith, R. D. (2008). A Wiki for Classroom Writing. The Reading
Teacher, 62(1), 80–82. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.62.1.10
Mulcahy, M., Dalton, S., Kolbert, J., & Crothers, L. (2016). Informal mentoring for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students. The Journal of Educational
Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.979907
Nelson, B., Christensen, L. M., Lan, J. A., Anderson, J., & Sheridan, K. (2004). Transforming the Topography of Teaching with Technology: A PT3 Holmes Partnership Project. Journal of Interactive Online Learning. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/2.4.1.pdf
Newman, B. M. (2012). Mentor texts and funds of knowledge: Situating writing within our students’ worlds. Voices from the Middle, 20(1), 25–30.
Nokes, J. D., Dole, J. a., & Hacker, D. J. (2007). Teaching high school students to use heuristics while reading historical texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 492–504. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.492
Nolen, S. B. (1995). Effects of a Visible Author in Statistical Texts. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 87(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.87.1.47
Norman, P. J., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2005). Mind activity in teaching and mentoring. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(6), 679–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.006
O’Brien, M. J., & Meehan, W. P. I. (2014). Virtual Mentor. American Medical
Association Journal of Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2010.12.8.medu1-1008
Odell, S. J., & Schwille, S. a. (2008). Effects of Teacher Induction on Beginning Teachers’ Teaching: A Critical Review of the Literature. Journal of Teacher
Education, 59, 132–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487107314002
Pawson, R. (2003). Nothing as practical as (a) good theory. Evaluation, 9(4), 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305276176
Pytash, K. E., & Morgan, D. N. (2014). Using mentor texts to teach writing in science and social studies. Reading Teacher, 68(2), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1276
Ragins, B. R., Cotton, J. L., & Miller, J. S. (2000). Marginal mentoring: The effects of type of mentor, quality of relationship, and program design on work and career attitudes. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 1177–1194. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556344
Ragins, B. R., & McFarlin, D. B. (1990). Perceptions of mentor roles in cross-gender mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37(3), 321–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(90)90048-7
Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1994). Gender Differences in Expected Outcomes of Mentoring Relationships. The Academy of Management Journal Academy of
Management Journal, 37(4), 957–971. https://doi.org/10.2307/256606
Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1994). GENDER AND THE TERMINATION OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS. In Academy of Management Best Papers
Proceedings (Vol. 82, pp. 361–365). https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.1994.10345888
Reckelhoff, J. F. (2008). How to choose a mentor. The Physiologist, 51(4), 152–154.
Rosen-Zvi, M., Griffiths, T., Steyvers, M., & Smyth, P. (2004). The author-topic model for authors and documents. Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Uncertainty in
Artificial Intelligence, 487–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2010.11.062
Rowley, J. B. (1999). The good mentor. Educational Leadership 56(8), 56(May), 20–22. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/818448211?accountid=10344
Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The effects of sex and gender role orientation on mentorship in male-dominated occupations. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 43(March 2016), 251–265. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1046
Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The effects of sex and gender role orientation on mentorship in male-dominated occupations. Journal of Vocational Behaviour. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1046
Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The Effects of Sex and Gender Role Orientation on Mentorship in Male-Dominated Occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 43(3), 251–265. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1046
Scheerer, E. W. (2002). The benefits of mentoring. Hawaii Dental Journal, 37(1), 8–9, 11. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.36719956607
Serafini, F. (2012). Reading multimodal texts in the 21st Century. Research in the
Schools, 19(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506200710779521
Shing, S. (2012). Politeness in mentor-mentee talk. International Journal of Human
Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/2332
Smith, G. (2013). Dream Writing: A new creative writing technique for secondary schools? English in Education, 47(3), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/eie.12020
Smith, R. (1998). The big picture: Writing psychology into the history of the human sciences. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 34(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6696(199824)34:1<1::AID-JHBS1>3.0.CO;2-X
Smith, S. (2003). The Role of Technical Expertise in Engineering and Writing Teachers’ Evaluations of Students’ Writing. Written Communication, 20(1), 37–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088303253570
van der Veer, Rene; Valsiner, V. (1994). The Vygotsky Reader. PsycCRITIQUES, 40(6), 1–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/003765
Vance, C. N. (1982). The Mentor Connection. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 12(4), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1986.4282688
Viator, R. E. (1999). An analysis of formal mentoring programs and perceived barriers to obtaining a mentor at large public accounting firms. Accounting Horizons, 13(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.1999.13.1.37
Walker, D. F., Ahmed, S., Milevsky, A., Quagliana, H. L., & Bagasra, A. (2013). Sacred texts. In Spiritual interventions in child and adolescent psychotherapy. BT -
Spiritual interventions in child and adolescent psychotherapy. (pp. 155–180). https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/13947-008
Wang, J., Odell, S. J., & Schwille, S. A. (2008). Effects of Teacher Induction on Beginning Teachers’ Teaching: A Critical Review of the Literature. Journal of
Teacher Education, 59(2), 132–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487107314002
Weinberg, F. J., & Lankau, M. J. (2010). Formal Mentoring Programs: A Mentor-Centric and Longitudinal Analysis. Journal of Management, 37(6), 1527–1557. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309349310
Zwiers, F. W., & Hegerl, G. (2008). Attributing cause and effect. Nature, 453, 296–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0632-1
Zwiers, J. (2008). Academic Classroom Discussions. In Building Academic Language:
Essential Practices for Content Classrooms, Grades 5-12. (pp. 101–133).
Adler, E. M., & Schwartz, P. J. (2006). Teaching resources. The Sherlock Holmes lab: investigations in neurophysiology. Sci.STKE., 2006(334), tr6. https://doi.org/10.1126/stke.3342006tr6
Allen, T. (2007). Mentoring Relationships from the perspective of the Mentor. The
Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, …, 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1997.1596
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2008). Mentor commitment in formal mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(3), 309–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.016
Anderson, D. R. (2005). The Importance of Mentoring Programs to Women’s Career Advancement in Biotechnology. Journal of Career Development, 32(1), 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845305277039
Anderson, G. (2004). How to write a paper in scientific journal style and format. Copyright Bates College, 1–17. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:How+to+Write+a+Paper+in+Scientific+Journal+Style+and+Format#3
Anderson, L., Silet, K., & Fleming, M. (2012). Evaluating and Giving Feedback to Mentors: New Evidence-Based Approaches. Clinical and Translational Science, 5(1), 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-8062.2011.00361.x
Anderson, N. D. (2001). Gnosticism and Later Platonism: Themes, Figures, and Texts (review). Journal of Early Christian Studies, 9(4), 600–601. https://doi.org/10.1353/earl.2001.0051
Applebee, A. N. (2000). Alternative Models of Writing Development. In Perspectives on
writing: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 90–110).
Applebee, A. N. (1977). A sense of story. Theory Into Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405847709542723
Attokaran, M. (2011). Parsley. In Natural Food Flavors and Colorants (pp. 333–335). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470959152.ch83
Avery, R. J. (2011). The potential contribution of mentor programs to relational permanency for youth aging out of foster care. Child Welfare, 90(3), 9–26.
B, P. (2004). Becoming a good mentor. Nursing Standard, 19(13), 2p–2p. Retrieved from http://zh8wk8vq8w.search.serialssolutions.com/?genre=article&issn=00296570&title=Becoming a good mentor.&volume=19&issue=13&date=20041208&atitle=Becoming a good mentor.&spage=2p&pages=&sid=EBSCO:CINAHL Plus with Full Text&au=Price B
Bailey, J. E. (2010). Virtual Mentor. Ethics, 12(7), 197–201. https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2010.12.8.medu1-1008
Bennetts, C. (2002). Traditional mentor relationships, intimacy and emotional intelligence. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 15(2), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390110111893
Bradbury, L. U. (2010). Educative mentoring: Promoting reform-based science teaching through mentoring relationships. Science Education, 94(6), 1049–1071. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20393
Brown & Levinson, S. (2011). Politeness ( Brown and Levinson 1987 ). Reading, 1–2.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Studies
in Interactional Sociolinguistics 4, 55–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587263
Bullough, R. V. (2005). Being and becoming a mentor: School-based teacher educators and teacher educator identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.002
Caldas-Coulthard, C. R., & Coulthard, M. (1996). Texts and Practices. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.2307/3737104
Caldeira, S. M. G., Petit Lobão, T. C., Andrade, R. F. S., Neme, A., & Miranda, J. G. V. (2006). The network of concepts in written texts. European Physical Journal B, 49(4), 523–529. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2006-00091-3
Campbell, J. (2012). Hoyt memorial lecture - Stop pouring, start casting. International
Journal of Metalcasting, 6(3), 7–18.
Christy, T. C. (2013). Vygotsky , Cognitive Development and Language. Historiographia
Linguistica, 40((1/2)), 199–227. https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.40.1.07chr
Davydov, V. V, & Kerr, S. T. (1995). Vygotsky on Education. Educational Researcher, 24(3), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01378_6.x
Escobar Alméciga, W. Y., & Evans, R. (2014). Mentor texts and the coding of academic writing structures: A functional approach. HOW, A Colombian Journal for Teachers
of English, 21(2), 94–111. Retrieved from http://howjournalcolombia.org/index.php/how/article/view/6%5Cnhttps://www.academia.edu/8769480/Mentor_Texts_and_the_Coding_of_Academic_Writing_Structures_A_Functional_Approach
Everson, B. (1991). Vygotsky and the Teaching of Writing. The Quarterly.
Feiman-nemser, S. (2003). What New Teachers Need to Learn. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 25–29.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Parker, M. B. (1993). Mentoring in context: A comparison of two U.S. programs for beginning teachers. International Journal of Educational
Research, 19(8), 699–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(93)90010-H
Fletcher, S. (1997). “From Mentor to Mentored.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in
Learning, 5(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968465970050105
Fletcher, S. (2012). Mentor education: challenging mentor’ beliefs about mentoring. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 1(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/20466851211231585
Fletcher, S., Strong, M., & Villar, A. (2008). An Investigation of the Effects of Variations in Mentor-Based Induction on the Performance of Students in California. Teachers
College Record, 110(10), 2271–2289. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1926.0099
Gainer, J. (2013). 21st-century mentor texts: Developing critical literacies in the information age. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.210
Gallagher, K. (2014). Making the Most of Mentor Texts. Educational Leadership, 71(7), 28–33. Retrieved from http://proxy.geneseo.edu:2094/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=2d46c57b-e371-4d95-aedb-b445768d86ae%40sessionmgr4006&hid=4203&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=EJ1043767&db=eric%5Cnhttp://proxy.geneseo.edu:2094/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=2d46c57b
Gay, B. (1994). What is mentoring? Education & Training, 36(5), 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400919410062257
Gay, G. (1995). Modeling and mentoring in urban teacher preparation. Education and
Urban Society, 28, 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124595028001008
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher
Education, 53(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102053002003
Gay, G. (2013). Teaching To and Through Cultural Diversity. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(1), 48–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12002
Gay, T. (1970). Effects of filtering and vowel environment on consonant perception. The
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 48(4), 993–8. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5480393
Gewin, V. (2005). Learning to mentor. Nature, 436(7049), 436–437. https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7049-436a
Gopen, G., & Swan, J. (1990). The science of scientific writing. American Scientist, 78, 550–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77415-2
Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). Assessing Writing: Introduction. Assessing Writing, 8(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1075-2935(02)00030-2
Hoel, T., & Hollins, P. (2008). Learning technology standards adoption - how to improve process and product legitimacy. In Proceedings - The 8th IEEE International
Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, ICALT 2008 (pp. 587–589). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2008.14
Holley, K. A., & Colyar, J. (2009). Rethinking Texts: Narrative and the Construction of Qualitative Research. Educational Researcher, 38(9), 680–686. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09351979
Hollins, E. R. (2011). Teacher Preparation For Quality Teaching. Journal of Teacher
Education, 62(4), 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487111409415
Hollins, E. R. (2015). Culture in School Learning: Revealing the Deep Meaning: Third
Edition. Culture in School Learning: Revealing the Deep Meaning: Third Edition. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315813615
Hollins, E. R. (1993). Assessing Teacher Competence for Diverse Populations. Theory
Into Practice, 32(2), 93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849309543581
Hynd, C. R. (1999). Teaching Students to Think Critically Using Multiple Texts in History. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(6), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.2307/40014056
Itzkovich, M., Tamir, A., Philo, O., Steinberg, F., Ronen, J., Spasser, R., … Catz, A. (2003). Reliability of the Catz-Itzkovich Spinal Cord Independence Measure assessment by interview and comparison with observation. American Journal of
Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation / Association of Academic Physiatrists, 82(4), 267–72. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PHM.0000057226.22271.44
Ivey, G., & Broaddus, K. (2001). “Just plain reading” : A survey of what makes students want to read in middle school classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 350–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21593
Jaspers, W. M., Meijer, P. C., Prins, F., & Wubbels, T. (2014). Mentor teachers: Their perceived possibilities and challenges as mentor and teacher. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 44, 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.08.005
Johnson, W. B. (2007). Transformational supervision: When supervisors mentor. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38(3), 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.3.259
Koppel, M. (2002). Automatically Categorizing Written Texts by Author Gender. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 17(4), 401–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/17.4.401
Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the Mentor Relationship. Academy of Management
Journal, 26(4), 608–625. https://doi.org/10.2307/255910
Lavelle, E., Smith, J., & O’Ryan, L. (2002). The writing approaches of secondary students. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(Pt 3), 399–418. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1348/000709902320634564
Lee, I. (2007). Feedback in Hong Kong secondary writing classrooms: Assessment for learning or assessment of learning? Assessing Writing, 12(3), 180–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2008.02.003
Lee, I. (2010). Writing teacher education and teacher learning: Testimonies of four EFL teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.05.001
Lee, J. (2013). Can Writing Attitudes and Learning Behavior Overcome Gender Difference in Writing? Evidence From NAEP. Written Communication, 30(2), 164–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313480313
Leibniz, G. W., Franks, R., & Woolhouse, R. S. (1998). Philosophical Texts. Oxford
Philosophical Texts.
Lewis, L. L., Kim, Y. A., & Ashby Bey, J. (2011). Teaching practices and strategies to involve inner-city parents at home and in the school. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 27(1), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.005
Mercer, N. (2010). The analysis of classroom talk: methods and methodologies. The
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(Pt 1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X479853
Mertz, N. T. (2004). What’s a Mentor, Anyway? Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 541–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04267110
Morgan, B., & Smith, R. D. (2008). A Wiki for Classroom Writing. The Reading
Teacher, 62(1), 80–82. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.62.1.10
Mulcahy, M., Dalton, S., Kolbert, J., & Crothers, L. (2016). Informal mentoring for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students. The Journal of Educational
Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.979907
Nelson, B., Christensen, L. M., Lan, J. A., Anderson, J., & Sheridan, K. (2004). Transforming the Topography of Teaching with Technology: A PT3 Holmes
Partnership Project. Journal of Interactive Online Learning. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/2.4.1.pdf
Newman, B. M. (2012). Mentor texts and funds of knowledge: Situating writing within our students’ worlds. Voices from the Middle, 20(1), 25–30.
Nokes, J. D., Dole, J. a., & Hacker, D. J. (2007). Teaching high school students to use heuristics while reading historical texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 492–504. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.492
Nolen, S. B. (1995). Effects of a Visible Author in Statistical Texts. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 87(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.87.1.47
Norman, P. J., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2005). Mind activity in teaching and mentoring. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(6), 679–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.006
O’Brien, M. J., & Meehan, W. P. I. (2014). Virtual Mentor. American Medical
Association Journal of Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2010.12.8.medu1-1008
Odell, S. J., & Schwille, S. a. (2008). Effects of Teacher Induction on Beginning Teachers’ Teaching: A Critical Review of the Literature. Journal of Teacher
Education, 59, 132–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487107314002
Pawson, R. (2003). Nothing as practical as (a) good theory. Evaluation, 9(4), 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305276176
Pytash, K. E., & Morgan, D. N. (2014). Using mentor texts to teach writing in science and social studies. Reading Teacher, 68(2), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1276
Ragins, B. R., Cotton, J. L., & Miller, J. S. (2000). Marginal mentoring: The effects of type of mentor, quality of relationship, and program design on work and career attitudes. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 1177–1194. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556344
Ragins, B. R., & McFarlin, D. B. (1990). Perceptions of mentor roles in cross-gender mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37(3), 321–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(90)90048-7
Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1994). Gender Differences in Expected Outcomes of Mentoring Relationships. The Academy of Management Journal Academy of
Management Journal, 37(4), 957–971. https://doi.org/10.2307/256606
Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1994). GENDER AND THE TERMINATION OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS. In Academy of Management Best Papers
Proceedings (Vol. 82, pp. 361–365). https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.1994.10345888
Reckelhoff, J. F. (2008). How to choose a mentor. The Physiologist, 51(4), 152–154.
Rosen-Zvi, M., Griffiths, T., Steyvers, M., & Smyth, P. (2004). The author-topic model for authors and documents. Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Uncertainty in
Artificial Intelligence, 487–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2010.11.062
Rowley, J. B. (1999). The good mentor. Educational Leadership 56(8), 56(May), 20–22. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/818448211?accountid=10344
Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The effects of sex and gender role orientation on mentorship in male-dominated occupations. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 43(March 2016), 251–265. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1046
Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The effects of sex and gender role orientation on mentorship in male-dominated occupations. Journal of Vocational Behaviour. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1046
Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The Effects of Sex and Gender Role Orientation on Mentorship in Male-Dominated Occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 43(3), 251–265. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1046
Scheerer, E. W. (2002). The benefits of mentoring. Hawaii Dental Journal, 37(1), 8–9, 11. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.36719956607
Serafini, F. (2012). Reading multimodal texts in the 21st Century. Research in the
Schools, 19(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506200710779521
Shing, S. (2012). Politeness in mentor-mentee talk. International Journal of Human
Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/2332
Smith, G. (2013). Dream Writing: A new creative writing technique for secondary schools? English in Education, 47(3), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/eie.12020
Smith, R. (1998). The big picture: Writing psychology into the history of the human sciences. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 34(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6696(199824)34:1<1::AID-JHBS1>3.0.CO;2-X
Smith, S. (2003). The Role of Technical Expertise in Engineering and Writing Teachers’ Evaluations of Students’ Writing. Written Communication, 20(1), 37–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088303253570
van der Veer, Rene; Valsiner, V. (1994). The Vygotsky Reader. PsycCRITIQUES, 40(6), 1–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/003765
Vance, C. N. (1982). The Mentor Connection. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 12(4), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1986.4282688
Viator, R. E. (1999). An analysis of formal mentoring programs and perceived barriers to obtaining a mentor at large public accounting firms. Accounting Horizons, 13(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.1999.13.1.37
Walker, D. F., Ahmed, S., Milevsky, A., Quagliana, H. L., & Bagasra, A. (2013). Sacred texts. In Spiritual interventions in child and adolescent psychotherapy. BT -
Spiritual interventions in child and adolescent psychotherapy. (pp. 155–180). https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/13947-008
Wang, J., Odell, S. J., & Schwille, S. A. (2008). Effects of Teacher Induction on Beginning Teachers’ Teaching: A Critical Review of the Literature. Journal of
Teacher Education, 59(2), 132–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487107314002
Weinberg, F. J., & Lankau, M. J. (2010). Formal Mentoring Programs: A Mentor-Centric and Longitudinal Analysis. Journal of Management, 37(6), 1527–1557. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309349310
Zwiers, F. W., & Hegerl, G. (2008). Attributing cause and effect. Nature, 453, 296–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0632-1
Zwiers, J. (2008). Academic Classroom Discussions. In Building Academic Language:
Essential Practices for Content Classrooms, Grades 5-12. (pp. 101–133).
47
List of Appendices Appendix A: The Pre-test and the Post-test Appendix B: The Treatment Given to the Experimental Group
Resumé
Avec le développement récent de l'enseignement des langues, les recherches en méthodologie
linguistique sont devenues importantes dans l'enseignement et l'apprentissage des langues
étrangères. Par conséquent, les enseignants de l'anglais en tant que langue étrangère ont pris la
responsabilité d'élaborer des stratégies efficaces pour encourager les apprenants à développer
leurs compétences en écriture dans la langue cible. La présente recherche étudie l'effet des
textes de mentor sur les réalisations de l'écriture à travers une conception quasi expérimentale.
L'échantillon de cette étude est l'école secondaire de deuxième année à l'école secondaire
Abdelhamid Ibn Badis. L'échantillon a été divisé en deux groupes (groupes expérimental et
témoin) de 20 élèves sur 100 élèves. Les deux groupes ont été prétestés et ont subi les
périodes de traitement. Les élèves du groupe expérimental ont effectué la tâche avec la lecture
à haute voix du texte du mentor, tandis que ceux du groupe de contrôle ont travaillé
individuellement. À la fin du traitement, les deux groupes ont été post-testés. Pour ajouter
plus de validité aux résultats de l'étude, les tests t ont été administrés. Les résultats ont montré
que la méthode des textes de mentor était significativement efficace pour améliorer la réussite
de l'écriture des apprenants. Ainsi, l'hypothèse de cette étude a été confirmée.
Mots clés: textes de mentor, réalisation d'écriture
ملخص
لذلك، فإن المعلمين من اللغة . دريس اللغة، أصبحت األبحاث في منھجية اللغة بارزة في تعليم اللغة األجنبية والتعلمومع التطور الحديث في ت
يبحث ھذا . اإلنجليزية كلغة أجنبية أخذت مسؤولية وضع استراتيجيات فعالة لتشجيع المتعلمين على تطوير مھاراتھم في الكتابة باللغة المستھدفة
وتكونت عينة الدراسة من تالميذ المرحلة اإلعدادية الثانية . نصوص الموجه على اإلنجازات الكتابية من خالل تصميم شبه تجريبيالبحث في تأثير
. طالب 100طالبا من أصل 20من ( المجموعتين التجريبية والضابطة)تم تقسيم العينة إلى مجموعتين . في مدرسة عبد الحميد بن باديس المتوسطة
قام طالب المجموعة التجريبية بمھمة القراءة بصوت عال لنص الموجھة في حين أن . تم اختبار كلتا المجموعتين وذھبت خالل فترة العالج
نتائج وإلضافة المزيد من الصالحية إلى. في نھاية العالج تم اختبار المجموعتين بعد االختبار. المجموعة في المجموعة الضابطة عملت بشكل فردي
وھكذا، تم تأكيد . وأظھرت النتائج أن أسلوب النصح الموجه كان فعاال بشكل ملحوظ في تحسين تحصيل الطالب. الدراسية تم إجراء االختبارات
.فرضية ھذه الدراسة
النصوص معلمه، وتحقيق الكتابة :كلمات البحث