Students' use of writing strategies and their English writing achievements in Taiwan
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the role of students' use of writing strategies in light of their English writing achievements in Taiwan. This research used a cognitive approach to examine the process of writing. Forty student writers (including 20 low and 20 high achievers) in Taiwan participated in this study. Strategies used for writing by high and low achievers as revealed by a concurrent think-aloud protocol and immediate retrospective interviews with students were investigated, analysed, and compared. Results indicated that compared to low-achieving student writers, high-achieving student writers were more aware of and focused more on formulating their position statement in planning, generating text, and revising and editing their text, such as changing the meaning and fixing grammatical and spelling errors during their review. The findings are discussed in light of writing strategies and implications for writing pedagogy and teacher education.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Expert writers or high-achieving university students employed strategies for planning, setting goals, monitoring, textualizing, and revising more frequently and thoroughly than novices or low achievers.
“Several studies, based on classical models defining the different strategies used by expert and novice writers, suggest that expert writers or high-achieving university students employed strategies for planning, setting goals, monitoring, textualizing and revising more frequently and thoroughly than novices or low achievers (Chien, 2012;Rahmawati et al, 2019;Rijlaarsdam et al., 2012).”
From Collaborative writing of argumentative syntheses by low-performing undergraduate writers: explicit instruction and practice (2023) · cites this paper as Chien, 2012
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 104
- Authors
- Chien, S.-C.
- Affiliations
- Taipei Medical University (TW)
- Corresponding author
- Chien, Shih-Chieh
- Venue
- Asia Pacific Journal of Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 93-112
- ISSN
- 0129-4776 (ISSN-L)
- 0218-8791
- 1742-6855
- OpenAlex
- W2015396277
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 26.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Asia Pacific Journal of Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Keywords
- writing strategies, English writing achievement, student writers, think-aloud, writing process, revision and editing, text generation, writing instruction, teacher professional development, Taiwan
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
