The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The effect of using conjunction as cohesive device on the undergraduates’ quality of writing in argumentative essays of jordanian EFL learners.
Published version of a preprint
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The findings of their study revealed that using conjunctions as cohesive devices had a weak negative but insignificant correlation with writing quality.”
From Enhancing English as a foreign language university students’ writing through explicit instruction of conjunctions as cohesive devices: An experimental study (2022) · cites this paper as Al Shamalatm and Ghani, 2020
In the citing paper
“Several studies have found no difference between good and bad manuscripts in terms of the use of cohesive devices (Al Shamalatm and Ghani, 2020).”
From Enhancing English as a foreign language university students’ writing through explicit instruction of conjunctions as cohesive devices: An experimental study (2022) · cites this paper as Al Shamalatm and Ghani, 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- Al Khotaba, E. H. (2010). The Use of lexical repetition and patterning in written essays of Jordanian students majoring in English language and literature at Mu'tah University: a case study (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Sains Malaysia Unpublished Thesis).
- Al Khotaba, E. (2015). The Application of Writing Processes in ESP Argumentative Writing Tasks: Written Discourse Analysis. European Journal of Scientific Research, Volume 130 No 1: pages 46-56.
- Al Natsheh, M. (2007).Cohesion in 10th Grade Students Essay at Public and Private Schools in Al Karak Directorate. (Unpublished M.A Thesis). Mu'tah University: Jordan.
- Aljardaat,H.(2008).Rhetorical Transfer in the Expository and Argumentative Writings of Jordanian EFL Students. (Unpublished Master thesis). Mu'tah University; Jordan.
- Al-Khresheh, M. (2010). Interlingual interference in the English language word order structure of Jordanian EFL learners. European journal of social sciences, 16(1),106-113.
- Al-Sawalha, A. M. S., & Chow, T. V. F. (2012). The effects of writing apprehension in English on the writing process of Jordanian EFL students at Yarmouk University. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 1(1), 1-15.
- Al-Shatarat, Y. (1990). Errors in Cohesive Devices Made by Jordanian Intermediate Community College Students in the English Language Specialization (Doctoral dissertation). , Thesis: University of Jordan, Jordan.
- Al-zuoud, K. M., &Kabilan, M. K. (2013).Investigating Jordanian EFL Students' Spelling Errors at Tertiary Level. International Journal of Linguistics, 5(3), 164-176.
- Aryadoust, V., & Liu, S. (2015). Predicting EFL writing ability from levels of mental representation measured by Coh-Metrix: A structural equation modeling study. Assessing Writing, 24, 35-58. https://DOI.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.03.001 · DOI
- Asassfeh, S. M. (2015). Prospective EFL Teachers: What Language Learning Beliefs Do They Hold? The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(1), 13-26.
- Calkin, A. B. (2018). Writing on writing. International Journal of Educational Research, 87, 127-137. DOI: https://DOI.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.05.002. · DOI
- Coker, D. L., Jennings, A. S., Farley-Ripple, E., & MacArthur, C. A. (2018). When the type of practice matters: The relationship between typical writing instruction, student practice, and writing achievement in first grade. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54, 235-246. DOI: https://DOI.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.013. · DOI
- Gay, I. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational Research. Competencies for Analysis and Application (9th ed). Upper Saddle Ridge, NJ: Pearson Publishing.
- Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R. (1996). Theory & Practice of Writing. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
- Jalilifar, A. (2009). Discourse Markers in Essays Writings: The case of Iranian learners of English as a foreign language. English Language Teaching, 1(2), 114-122 .
- Kalajahi, S. A. R., & Abdullah, A. N. (2015). Discourse Connectors and Cohesion in Writing. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3 S2), 441-447.
- Kuo, H. (1995). Cohesion and Coherence in Academic Writing: from Lexical Choice to Organization. RELC JOURNAL, 26 (1), 47-62.
- Martínez, A. C. L. (2016). Conjunctions in the writing of students enrolled on bilingual and non-bilingual programs Uso de las conjunciones enlas composiciones de estudiantes de programas bilingües y nobilingües. Revista de educación nº 371. January-March 2016, 371, 100-125.
- Marshall, S., & Marr, J. W. (2018). Teaching multilingual learners in Canadian writing- intensive classrooms: Pedagogy, binaries, and conflicting identities. Journal of Second Language Writing, 40, 32-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2018.01.002 · DOI
- Meisuo, Z. (2000). Cohesive features in the expository writing of undergraduates in two Chinese universities. RELC Journal, 31(1), 61-95. DOI: 10.1177/003368820003100104 · DOI · Paper page
- Mirhosseini, S. (2009). For our Learn of English: Dialogue Journal Writing in EFL Education. Prospect: An Australian Journal of TESOL, 24 (1), 40-48.
- Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. TESL-EJ, 6(2), 1-20.
- Nuzzolese, A. G., Gangemi, A., & Presutti, V. (2011). Gathering lexical linked data and knowledge patterns from FrameNet. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Knowledge Capture, 41-48.
- Obeiah, S. F., & Bataineh, R. F. (2016). Does scaffolding-based instruction improve writing performance? The case of Jordanian EFL learners. Lublin Studies in Modern Languages and Literature, 39(2), 106-123.
- Obeidat, N. (2006). Cohesion in Simultaneous Interpretation of Press Conferences. (Unpublished M.A Thesis). Department of English Language, Yarmouk University, Jordan.
- Perkins, K. (1983). On the use of essays scoring techniques, objective measures, and objective tests to evaluate ESL writing ability. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 651-671.
- Rababah, L., & Melhem, N. B.(2015). Investigation into Strategies of Creativity in EFL Writing in Jordan. Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics, 5, 14-25. Arab World English Journal www.awej.org ISSN: 2229-9327 301
- Sanchez Sanchez, S. (2019). The Use of Discourse Markers in Argumentative Essays by Learners of Spanish as a Foreign Language. (Master thesis), University of Alberta, Canada.
- Sasaki, M., & Hirose, K. (1999). Development of an analytic rating scale for Japanese L1 writing. Language Testing, 16(4), 457-478.
- Yang, Y, (2007). Discourse analysis. Shanghai: Fudan University Press.
- Zhao, H. (2018). New insights into the process of peer review for EFL writing: A process- oriented socio-cultural perspective. Learning and Instruction, 58, 263-273.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Alawerdy, A. S., & Alalwi, F. S. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1053310 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Yousef Salman Al Shamalat, R., & Binti Abdul Ghani, C. A.
- Venue
- Arab World English Journal
- Publisher
- AWEJ Publishing
- Published
- 2020-07-15
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 290-301
- ISSN
- 2229-9327
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
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
