CAN THO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

A SURVEY ON THE USE MODEL ESSAYS IN
LEARNING ESSAY WRITING OF ENGLISH
MAJOR STUDENTS AT CTU
B.A. Thesis

Supervisor: Đỗ Xuân Hải, M.A

Student: Nguyễn Thị Phương Thắm
Code: 7062924
Class: English Language Teaching 01
Course: 32

Can Tho, April 2010


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deep gratitude to my supervisor, Mr. Do Xuan Hai
for his support during the process of the research. Thanks to his helpful instructions,
my thesis was finished on time.
I wish to give my best regards to Ms. Ngo Thi Trang Thao for her valuable
source of materials and advice during the data collection and analysis process.
I am strongly grateful to Ms. Le Xuan Mai and Ms. Chung Thi Thanh Hang,
who gave me valuable comments to improve my thesis.
I am also indebted to Ms. Bui Minh Chau and Mr. Le Cong Tuan for their
precious advice in choosing the research.
I would like to extend my thanks to 70 students in English Language Teaching
classes for their completion of the research questionnaires.

Viết luận là một môn học quan trọng trong khung chương trình đào tạo Tiếng
Anh chuyên ngành của Trường Đại học Cần Thơ. Để có thể viết được những bài luận
tốt sinh viên chuyên ngành Tiếng Anh tại Đại học Cần Thơ đã áp dụng nhiều phương
pháp học khác nhau trong đó có việc tham khảo các bài luận mẫu. Mặc dù các bài luận
mẫu được sinh viên sử dụng khá phổ biến, cho đến nay vẫn chưa có một nghiên cứu
nào về hiệu quả của việc sử dụng các bài luận mẫu trong việc học viết luận ở Trường
Đại học Cần Thơ. Vì lí do trên, bài nghiên cứu này được thưc hiện nhằm tìm hiểu xem
những yếu tố ngôn ngữ nào được sinh viên chuyên ngành tại Đại học Cần Thơ chú ý
khi họ tham khảo một bài luận mẫu. Một bản câu hỏi đã được thiết kế bao gồm 30 yếu
tố ngôn ngữ có thể được chú ý trong bài luận mẫu nhằm thu thập số liệu từ 70 sinh
viên chuyên ngành Sư phạm Tiếng Anh, những người đã trải qua hai khóa học viết
luận tại trường Đại học Cần Thơ. Các yếu tố này liên quan tới 4 nhóm chính gồm từ
vựng, ngữ pháp, ngôn từ và nội dung. Phần mềm phân tích số liệu SPSS đã được sử
dụng trong quá trình xử lí số liệu. Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy tất cả các yếu tố ngôn
ngữ được đề cập đến trong bản câu hỏi đều được chú ý tuy nhiên mức độ chú ý của
sinh viên đối với từng yếu tố có sự khác biệt. Sinh viên chú ý nhiều hơn ở các yếu tố
ngữ pháp trong khi các yếu tố về từ vựng nhận được ít sự chú ý nhất.

3


TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
TÓM TẮT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Essay writing

7
10
10
10
10
11
12
12
12
14
15
17
17
17
18
18
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
24
25


CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
1. Summary
2. Discussion and implications

19
20
21
22
23
24
25


Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
Writing academic essays is a skill that English major students must acquire for
their studies at university. At Can Tho University (CTU), for example, English major
students are expected to finish five academic writing courses in the curriculum.
Among these courses, Writing 3 and Writing 4 are two courses relating directly to
essay writing. Specifically, in Writing 3, students are introduced to the structure of an
academic essay in general and how to write argumentative essays and
compare/contrast essays. Writing 4 is a step further, requiring students to write three
types of essays: classification, argumentative and cause/effect. During these courses,
students often consult various learning materials to help them write the required
essays. Among these materials are model essays.
Effects of model essays on learning writing have been a controversial issue. Qi
and Lapkin (as cited in Abe.M., 2008) stated that model essays can be a useful
reference tool for students to improve their essay writing in both meta-language
factors (lexicon, syntax, semantics, discourse) and language-related factors (structure,
organization). The argument was based on the findings about the effect of noticing in
L2 writing in Robinson (1995) and Swain (2005) as well as the findings about the
connection between reading and writing in Trosky and Wood (1982); Tierney, Soter,
O'Flahavan, and McGinley (1989) and Doyle (Eds.). However, many researchers
argue that the process of making meaning in L2 cannot be achieved by referring to
written texts (Murray, 1980) and model essays prevent L2 learners from having

factors and language-related factors in model essays and they tend to notice lexical
factors more often than the other factors.
The results are expected to give an insight into what students pay attention to in
the model essays and into the frequency of their noticing.
The current study consists of five chapters: introduction, literature review,
method, results and summary and conclusion.
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter presents an overview for this study that includes the reason for
choosing this study, the research questions, the data collection method, the analysis
method, and the summaries of each chapter.
Chapter 2: Literature review
In this chapter, previous studies in using model essay in learning writing, the
role of noticing in SLA and the connection between reading and writing will be
reviewed.
Chapter 3: Method
This chapter displays in general the periods in the process of the research
including the research design, description of participants, instruments and research
procedure.
Chapter 4: Results
This is the chapter in which the results and findings about students’ noticing
when consulting model essay are reported. The frequencies of noticing on many
aspects of language that students notice when consulting the model essay are also
analyzed in this chapter.
Chapter 5: Summary and discussion

8


This chapter summarizes the main findings as well as discusses the similarities
and differences in the findings between this study and previous studies. Some

down to the specifics of the problem that will be discussed in the paper. The
introduction often provides background information about the broad topic, identifies
the relevant problems or issues, and takes the reader step by step to an understanding
of why the specific focus of this paper is relevant to that subject. To create interest in
the readers so that they will want to read on, the introduction often begins with a
hook- an interesting statement that can engage readers' attention. The introduction also
includes a thesis, which contains the statement of the essay’s topic and the writer’s
assertion about that topic.
The supporting details of the essay are included in the body paragraphs. An
essay may have only one body paragraph (three-paragraph essay) or three body
paragraphs (five-paragraph essay). However, in terms of college writing, five-

10


paragraph essay is encouraged by professors. They provide information and
arguments that follow logically from the issue expressed in the introduction and
support it consistently throughout the paper. Each paragraph has a topic sentence that
clearly states the content of the paragraph. The concluding sentence may be a
restatement of the idea mentioned in the paragraph or a suggestion for the content of
the next paragraph.
The conclusion restates the thesis of the introduction in different words. The
conclusion can summarize main ideas mentioned in the body paragraphs. An essay
can have a close conclusion or an open conclusion. The close conclusion finishes all
the issues mentioned in the essay while the open conclusion tends to lead the readers
to another issue which will be presented in another essay. The issue must logically
follow the information provided to the reader in the paper.
1.3.

Requirements of a successful essay

Spelling
Punctuation
……….

AUDIENCE
The readers
PURPOSE
The reason for writing
WORD CHOICE
Vocabulary
Idiom
Tone

ORGANIZATION
Paragraphs
Topic & support
Cohesion & unity
11

THE WRITER’S PROCESS
Getting ideas
Getting started
Writing drafts
Revising


According to Rimes (1994), three basic requirements of an essay are clarity,
fluency and effective communication of ideas. In order to come up these
requirements, writers have to deal with eight main factors including content, syntax,
grammar, mechanic, organization, word choice, purpose, audience and the writing

Knudson (1991) conducted a study on using model essay to improve writing
skill. Teachers presented students with two excellent persuasive essays. One
convinced the readers that UFOs exist, the other claims that there was no such thing as
a UFO. Students were encouraged to analyze these models and discuss with the
teacher. Students were asked to emulate the critical elements, patterns, and forms
12


embodied in the models in their own writing. The following day, students received the
essay persuade that there was no existence of the UFO. Then they were required to
write an argumentative essay on a new topic. The effect of this writing instruction was
positive, though small (effect size=0.25). Not all techniques are effective with all
students, sometimes it requires a sufficient investment of time to reveal its potential
(Graham & Harris, 2005). If the students have enough content knowledge, model
essay is really a useful tool (Smagorinsky, 1992).
The question about what aspects of language L2 writers notice was posed by
Swain and Lapkin (1995). Their empirical study investigated the role of output in L2
writing context, examining whether the learners’ output could allow them to become
aware of language problems they encounter in composing. The participants, Frenchimmersion students in Canada, were asked to speak (think aloud) whatever was on
their mind in L2 composition. During analysis of think-aloud protocols, the units
called, language-related episodes (LREs) were identified and categorized into several
groups according to the type of language problems. The results revealed that the
participants noticed language problems, which promoted them to modify their output.
Based on the results, they concluded that “noticing may occur because of either
internal or external feedback which may prompt, for example, the generation of
alternatives and assessment of them through simple inspection through to complex
thinking” (p.386).
In exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task,
Qi and Lapkin (2001) conducted a research with two Mandarin background adult
English-as-a-second language (ESL) learners. By conducting a pretest and a posttest,

model essays was explored by Hanaoka (2007). Following Hanaoka’s (2007) research,
Abe’s (2008) study on using model essays as feedback tool in IELTS writing test
revealed that the noticing among language factors were less unequal than in Hanaoka
(2007). Abe (2008) also found that there was a difference in the quality and quantity
of learners’ noticing depending on their proficiency and the type of tasks undertaken.
3. Reading and Writing connection
Reading has long been considered as an effective and supportive skill for
writing. “The more our students read, the more they become familiar with the
vocabulary, idiom, sentence patterns, organizational flow, and cultural assumptions
of native speakers of the language” (Raimes,1994,p.34). Some L2 writing researchers
argue that L2 learners should be encouraged to use a model essay for improving their
writing skills in terms of the relationship between reading and writing. For many
years, reading and writing researchers (Trosky & Wood, 1982; Tierney, Soter,
O'Flahavan, & McGinley, 1989; McGinley, 1992) have acknowledged the importance
of the connection between the reading and writing processes. Reading and writing are
usually described as parallel processes (Trosky & Wood, 1982; Tierney & Pearson,
1983) where the activities of readers are congruent to or mirror images of the activities
of writers.
Ferris and Hedgcock (1998) argue that L2 writers have to be exposed to
various types of reading material since it is difficult to acquire L2 writing skills by
only writing. Eschholz (1980) points out that what L2 learners write depend on what
they read and they can improve their L2 writing skills by reading. He also argues that
given the opportunities to learn rhetorical modes, L2 learners can eventually apply
their knowledge about those modes to their writing. Based on Cumming’s (1995)
empirical study, which demonstrates the significance of rhetorical aspects of texts in
model essays, Smagorinsky (1992) discusses that model essays are the most helpful
tool if L2 writers have a sufficient amount of content knowledge. Thus, some
14



states that learners need to notice all aspects of language equally, such as lexicon,
grammatical form, sound, and pragmatic features. Some other researchers also claim
that awareness is necessary for language learning. For instance, Robinson (1995)
defines noticing as “detection plus rehearsal in short-term memory, prior to encoding
in long-term memory” (p.296).
Schmidt (2001) extends the discussions about the role of noticing. Based on the
assumption that noticing and understanding are different in the level of awareness and
on the psychological view that attention is of limited capacity, he states that “limited
15


attention resources are directed first at those elements that carry message meaning,
primarily lexicon, and only later, when the cost comes down, towards
communicatively redundant formal features of language” (p.13). Finally, Schmidt
emphasizes that what aspects of language an L2 learner notices in the input depends
on the individual differences.
Even though there is general agreement on the importance of awareness and
noticing, some disagreements also exist in the other SLA studies. Tomlin and Villa
(1994) disagree with Schmidt’s conclusion about the important role of noticing in
SLA and point out the necessity of finer discussion about the concept of attention.
Dividing the function of attention into alertness, orientation, and detection, they claim
that detection, “the cognitive registration of sensory stimuli” (p. 192), which does not
require conscious awareness, is vital for language learning. Robinson (1995) viewed
noticing as “what is both detected and then further activated following the allocation
of attentional resources” (p. 297), although he agrees with Schmidt in that awareness
is necessary for SLA.
Although there are a number of views on noticing, little is known about what
aspects of language are noticed in L2 essay writing. Supported by the studies of
Hanaoka (2007) and Abe (2008), the current study also tend to explore what aspects
of language students notice during the process of learning essay writing.

have just finished their essay writing classes last semester.
Table 1 will summarize characteristics of participants in my study.

17


Table 1 : Relevant participant characteristics
Year
Second year Third year
7
2
33
28
19.86
19 - 21

Characteristics
Gender
Age

Male
Female
Mean
Range

9
61

%
12.86


18


ensures the reliability of this questionnaire. The next 70 sheets of questionnaire
which were delivered to participants got Cronbach’s Alpha 0.885. Therefore, the
questionnaire is considered to be reliable. The reliability statistics are displayed in
Table 2 below.
Table 2:
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha
Pilot
Main

0.927
0.885

N

N of Items

15

30

70

30


model essays?
1. Result for research question 1:
The first research question aimed to investigate which aspects of language
the participants noticed. In order to explore what they were paying attention to, the
scales ticked in 30 factors included in the questionnaire are counted. Those factors
are adapted from Hanaoka’s (2007) and Abe’s (2008) studies. The 30 factors are
divided into four mains categories: lexicon (word choice, idiomatic expressions,
topical words and lexical diversity), form (tenses, subject and verb agreement,
sentence structures, structural diversity, article, preposition, punctuation and
spelling), discourse (structure, organization, coherence and unity) and content.
Factors that are ticked on the scale “never” is considered to be “not noticed” while
on the other scales: “always, usually, sometimes and rarely” it is considered to be
“noticed”. Table 2 below will display the proportion of ticked times on each scale
in the whole questionnaire.
Table 3: The proportion of ticked times in the whole questionnaire.
Scales
Times
%

Always
563
26.8

Usually
877
41.76

Sometimes
476
22.67

The second research question attempts to find out the degree of noticing
that participants give to language factors comprised in the questionnaire. Two
main findings are expected to find out in this part including: the degree of noticing
on four main categories of the model essays: lexicon, form, discourse and content
and the degree of noticing on factors in each category.
The degree of noticing on four main categories
Table 3 will provide the total mean score and SD of the whole the
questionnaire as well as of 4 main categories: lexicon, form, discourse and content.
Table 4: Mean score and SD of 4 main categories
Descriptive Statistics
N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Total

70

3.86

.426

Lexicon

70

3.72


21


The mean scores of four categories are above average (M > 3). That means
the degree of the noticing in these cases is “usually”. However, the mean scores
and SD of these 4 categories are slightly unequal. The mean score of form is the
highest (M=3.96, SD=0.551) which reveals that participants notice on the form
more frequently than in the other categories. Lexicon gets the lowest mean score
(M=3.72, SD=0.560). This can be inferred that participants pay less attention to
lexical factors in model essays. Therefore, my hypothesis that lexicon may receive
more attention than other categories is not correct in this case.
The degree of noticing on items of each category will be analyzed in the
next part.
The degree of noticing on factors in each category
After the noticing on 4 main categories are analyzed, this part is expected to
reveal the degree of noticing on items of each specific category.
2.2.1. The degree of noticing on items in terms of lexicon
This category contains items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 which tend to reveal factors related
to lexicon that participants give attention to.
 Item 1: I notice the way that the author selects words to put
appropriately in different situations.
 Item 2: I give attention to idiomatic expressions that were used in the
writing.
 Item 3: I notice topical words of the essay in order to let them be used in
my writing accurately.
 Item 4: I pick out topical words to enrich my vocabulary source.
 Item 5: I pay attention to the lexical diversity.
Table 4 below will display the mean score and SD of lexical items.
Table 5: Mean and SD of items in lexical category
Descriptive Statistics

item 4

70

3.79

.759

item 5

70

4.07

.804

From Table 4, it is obvious that lexical diversity receives more notice from
the participants than other factors (Item 5: M=4.07, SD= 0.804), followed by item 4,
22


1 and 3. Item 2 which presents the notice in idiomatic expressions has the lowest
mean score (M=3.36, SD=1.036). Those digits show that in terms of lexicon,
participants pay attention to lexical diversity more often than topical words and
word choice. Idiomatic expressions get least attention from these participants.
2.2.3. The degree of noticing on items in terms of form
What students notice in terms of form in model essays is mentioned from
item 6 to item 13 in the questionnaire.
 Item 6: I notice the tenses used in the essay
 Item 7: I pay attention to the subject and verb agreement.


item 8

70

4.26

.829

item 9

70

4.01

.825

item 10

70

3.57

.926

item 11

70

3.63

The degree of noticing on items in terms of discourse
Relevant factors in discourse category are included from item 14 to item 24
in the questionnaire that mostly mention the structure, organization, coherence and
unity of the model essays.
 Item 14: I notice if the essay structure is clear enough.(An essay has 3 parts:
introduction, body and conclusion.)
 Item 15: I notice if the paragraphs are organized in appropriate order.
 Item 16: I notice the order of the paragraphs to determine whether or not
that order can be changed.
 Item 17: I find connection words that the author uses to link ideas between
paragraphs.
 Item 18: I find sentence connectors that the author uses to link sentences in
each paragraph.
 Item 19: I notice transition words used to indicate the order of a sequence of
events.
 Item 20: I notice transition words used to connect one idea to a fact or
illustration.
 Item 21: I notice transition words used to indicate an effect or result.
 Item 22: I notice if all paragraphs support only one topic.
 Item 23: I notice how each body paragraph is related to the thesis.
 Item 24: I notice if there are any sentence in the paragraphs that are not
related to the main topic (off-topic).
The Table 6 below will display the mean score and SD of the items above.
Table 7: Mean and SD of items in discourse category
Descriptive Statistics
N

Mean

Std. Deviation


.788

item 18

70

4.26

.846

item 19

70

4.03

.742

item 20

70

3.89

.925

item 21

70