1. education
2. english as a second language

In the Name of Allah the Most Gracious the Most Merciful
University of Khartoum
Faculty of Arts
Department of English
Investigating EFL learners’ Paragraph Writing Abilities: A Case
Study of Second and Forth Levels English language Students in the
Faculty of Arts, University of Khartoum
Submitted By
Mohammed Mohammed Zein Bushara Abd Al Gadir
Supervised By
Dr. Tawheeda Osman Hadra
A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of M.A. in English Language
2006
Dedications
To my Parents
Table of Contents
I. Page
Chapter one: Introduction
1
1.1
Overview.
1
1.2
The Research Problem
3
1.3
Scope of the Research
4
1.3.
The Research Questions
4
1.4
The Research Assumptions
4
1.5.
The Research Significance
5
1.6.
The Research Objectives
5
Chapter Two:
Literature Review
7
2.0.
Introduction
7
2.1.
The Writing Skill
7
2.1.1.
What is writing?
7
2.1.2.
The Nature of Writing
8
2.1.3.
The Purpose of Writing
11
2.1.4.
Approaches to teaching writing in EFL classes
12
2.1.5.
Approaches and Techniques
20
2.2.
2.2.1.
Paragraph Writing
What is a Paragraph?
21
21
2.2.2.
Paragraph Layout (length and indentation)
23
2.2.3.
What is a Topic Sentence?
25
2.2.4.
Unity in the paragraph
27
2.2.5.
Paragraph Patterns
29
2.2.6.
Methods of Developing a Paragraph
30
2.2.6.1.
Paragraph Development by Listing and Examples 30
2.2.6.2.
Development by Comparison and Contrast
32
2.2.6.3.
Development by definition
33
2.2.6.4.
Development by classification
33
2.2.6.5.
Development by process description
34
2.2.6.6.
Development by cause and effect
34
2.2.7.
Cohesion and Coherence
35
2.2.7.1.
Cohesion
35
2.2.7.2.
Coherence
40
2.3.
Summary
43
Chapter Three: Methodology of the research
44
3.1.
Introduction
44
3.2.
Subjects
44
3.3.
Materials
45
3.4.
Procedures
46
3.5.
Techniques of Data Scoring and Analysis
47
Chapter Four: Data Analysis and Interpretation
48
4.1.
Introduction
48
4.2.
Analysis and Discussion of the Students’ Performance
48
4.2.1 The Students’ Performance in Paragraph Length and Indentation48
4.2.2. The Students' Performance in the Topic Sentence
57
4.2.3. The Students’ Performance in paragraph Unity
67
4.2.4 The Students Performance in Cohesive Devices
76
4.3.
83
Conclusion
Chapter Five: Summary, Implications and Recommendations
85
5.0.
Introduction
85
5.1.
Summary of the Results
85
5.2. Recommendations
87
5.2.1. Pedagogical Implications
87
5.2.2. Suggestion for Further Research
89
Bibliography
91
Appendices
96
Appendix (1)
105
Appendix (2)
106
List of Tables
Table
page
Table (1): Group (A) Performance in Paragraph Length and Indentation
Table (2): Group (B) Performance in Paragraph Length and Indentation58
Table (3): Group (A) Performance in the Topic sentence
68
Table (4): Group (B) performance in the Topic Sentence
68
Table (5): Group (A) Performance in Paragraph Unity
76
Table (6): Group (B) Performance in Paragraph Unity
77
Table (7): Group (A) Performance in the Use of Cohesive Devices 84
Table (8): Group (B) Performance in the Use of Cohesive Devices 84
List of Abbreviations
C.U.P
Cambridge University Press
EFL
English Language for Foreign
Learners
L1
First Language
L2
Second Language
O.U.P.
Oxford University Press
WWW.
World Wide Web
Abstract
This research is an attempt to investigate paragraph writing abilities
among Sudanese EFL learners at university level, and to assess the
relationship between the learners’ paragraph writing abilities and their
academic levels. In order to set the scene, it is important at the beginning to
review some of the related literature concerning the writing skill in general
and paragraph writing in particular.
The research data were originally written answers to two tests given to
the second and fourth level students in the Department of English, Faculty of
Arts, University of Khartoum.
The results of the research have revealed that the students’
performance shows low grasp of paragraph writing abilities. They have also
revealed that the students’ academic levels have strong relation with their
performance in certain aspects of paragraph writing such as the topic
sentence development, and the unity of thought in a Paragraph. In addition,
the performances of both levels in other aspects such as the use of cohesive
devices, paragraph length and indentation are poor. Accordingly, the fourth
level students outperform their second level counterparts’ in terms of the
former aspects of paragraph writing. Furthermore, the results have shown
that the students’ lack of awareness of paragraph construction principles
seems to correlate with their overall poor performance in paragraph writing
where most of it is bellow the average.
Chapter One
Introduction
1.1 Overview
Whenever human beings live together, they develop a system of
communication. People share experience, exchange ideas, and transmit
knowledge from one generation to another in many different ways; however,
languages remain the most effective means of communication.
According to Harwer (1983:5) anyone who uses languages as well as
a number of different means, may write letters, speak on the telephone, listen
to the radio, read newspapers, etc. In general, four language skills can be
identified; listening and understanding, speaking, reading and understanding,
and writing. Speaking and writing are skills, which involve some kind of
production on the part of the language user. Listening and reading, on the
other hand, are receptive skills in that the language user is receiving the
written or spoken form of language.
Concerning the learning of these skills, Harwer (ibid) argues that it is
the teacher's responsibility to see that all the four main skills are practised.
The division made above between productive and receptive skills suggests
that in some way the skills are separated and should be treated as such: on
one day students should concentrate on reading and reading only, on the next
day, speaking and speaking only, etc. However, one skill cannot be
performed without the other. It is impossible to speak about conversation if
you only read what you have just written. Furthermore, people use different
skills when dealing with the same subject for all sorts of reasons. Someone
who listens to a lecture may take notes and then write a report about the
lecture. The same person might also describe the lecture to his colleagues,
and follow it up by reading an article about it. It can be concluded that focus
on one skill leads to practise in the other skills.
Arnedt and White (1990:1) state that speech is one of these few basic
abilities. People had been talking successfully for thousands of years before
writing was invented, and millions of people today get fine with their
languages, even though, they do not have written forms.
However, through writing we are able to share ideas, persuade and
convince people. We are able to discover and articulate ideas in a way that
only writing makes possible. Furthermore, McDonough and Shaw (2002:
175) argue that writing has many different functions (i.e. narrative,
persuasion, setting out an argument, and so on).
1.2 The Research Problem
This research is an attempt to investigate paragraph writing ability of
the second and fourth level students in the Department of English, Faculty of
Arts, University of Khartoum, and to assess the relation between the
learners’ performance in paragraph writing and their academic levels.
A paragraph in English is defined as coherent related sentences
dealing with a single topic. It should contain certain components: the topic
sentence, unity, coherence, and adequate development. In fact, all these
components overlap; using and adapting them to achieve the writer's
purposes will help him to construct an effective paragraph.
Johnstone (2002:101) argues that a written paragraph is described as
being unified in content. She states the following requirements for a written
paragraph. Firstly, every paragraph must have a topic sentence and the safe
place for it is at the beginning of the paragraph. Secondly, there are two
patterns, each is describable as a set of structural slots which can be filled
with one or more sentences. One pattern involves a Topic (T) slot followed
by a Restriction (R) slot, then an Illustration (I) slot; each is more specific
than the preceding one. The another pattern starts with a problem (P) slot
and followed by one or more solutions (S) slot (A.L. Becker (1965) quoted
in Johnstone 2002: 102). Thirdly, parts of the paragraph are often formally
marked where markers can be graphic (Indentation or line spacing signals
beginnings and ends of paragraphs).
1.3 Scope of the Research
This research covers the students' paragraph writing abilities with
regard to the paragraph length and indentation, the development of the topic
sentence, unity of thought in the paragraph, and the use of cohesive devices.
However, the analysis of formal errors is beyond the scope of this
dissertation.
1.4 The Research Questions
In investigating the research problem, the following questions will
be posed:
1. How competent are Sudanese EFL learners in constructing
paragraphs in English?
2. Has the paragraph writing ability anything to do with the learners’
academic level?
1.5
The Research Assumptions
In
answering
the
research
questions,
the
following
assumptions can be made:
1. Generally speaking, Sudanese EFL learners show low grasp of
paragraph structure in English due to their limited study of writing.
2. There is a strong relationship between the learners’ academic level
and their paragraph writing abilities. Accordingly, the forth level
students are assumed to outperform their second level counterparts.
1.6 The Research Significance
The significance of this study stems from the fact that EFL
Sudanese learners at university level face many difficulties in writing
in general and in paragraph construction in particular. The researcher
will focus on the requirements and techniques of paragraph writing
and attempts to attract attention of English language teachers to focus
on this important area in language skills, and English language
syllabus designers provide for more exercises and techniques of
paragraph writing.
1.7 The Research Objectives
The research aims at:
1. Investigating Sudanese EFL learners’ paragraph writing
abilities.
2. Increasing motivation of these learners towards writing a
unified coherent paragraph.
3.
Giving insight into the nature of paragraph writing, with
ultimate goals of improving the quality of Sudanese EFL learners
in paragraph writing abilities.
Chapter Two
The Literature Review
2.0 Introduction
This chapter discusses the writing skill; definitions of writing, the
nature of writing, the purpose of writing, approaches to teaching writing in
EFL classes, and approaches and techniques in teaching writing. Moreover,
the chapter is going to highlight the paragraph writing: definitions of
paragraph, paragraph layout, the topic sentence, unity of thought in a
paragraph, and paragraph patterns. Different methods of developing a
paragraph such as development by listing, by comparison and contrast, by
classification, by description, by definition, and by cause and effect will be
discussed. In addition, cohesion and coherence will also be dealt with.
2.1 The Writing Skill
2.1.1 What is writing?
In general, writing has been defined both formally and functionally. It
is defined formally to show its physical representation as the “recording of
human communication using signs or symbols to represent the spoken
words” (Macmillan Encyclopedia: 1986: 1317). This definition manifests
writing as only visible representation of the human language. The functional
definition of writing sets up writing as a communicative event. Peter
(1986:169) for example, views writing as “a curiously solitary form of
communication addressing an absent and often unknown reader”. Similarly,
Conor (1996:71) maintains that writing is an opportunity to explore one’s
inner feeling. Of course, spoken form can also be so described, but it is only
writing that can be used for communication across time and space.
Insights into writing can best be given when contrasted with speaking.
However, the relevant literature does not seem to give an equal weight to
speaking and writing. In that, many linguists tend to associate writing with
secondary status compared to that of speech. For example, the formal
definitions of writing, which have been given above, emphasize that writing
is a record of speech. Similarly, writing is viewed as “home-maid” of other
language skills, and should not, therefore, be approached as a major skill to
be developed. Moreover, a historical preference has been given in favor of
speaking vis-à-vis writing. In this connection, it is argued that “not only did
the spoken language precede the written language historically, but every one
of us learnt to speak first long time before we learnt to write (palmer
1991:27).
2.1.2 The Nature of Writing
Raimes (1983:4) believes that writing is not simply speech written
down as many linguists assume. Learning to write is not just a natural
extension of learning to speak a language. We learn to speak our first
language at home without systematic instruction, whereas, most of us had to
be taught in schools how to write the same language. She (ibid) arrives at the
conclusion that the two processes, speaking and writing, are not identical.
Brown and Yule (1983:95) maintain that there is analytic thinking follows
the acquisition of writing since it was setting down of speech that enables
man clearly to separate words, to manipulate their order and to develop
syllogistic forms of reasoning. They go on to make even large claims about
the ways in which the acquisition of writing, which permits the man to
reflect upon what he has thought, has permitted the development of
cognitive structures which are not available to the illiterate.
It is worth noting, that the study of language in the twentieth century
tended to concentrate on the spoken language. Many linguists from De
Sassure through to Chomsky neglected the written mode in favor of the
spoken one. This, however, contributed to the fact that writing was for a
long time a neglected area in language teaching. However, the assumption
that writing is putting the spoken language into a written form is only true
for activities like taking down dictation or transcribing a tape (Brookes and
Grundy 1998:1).
It can, also be argued that writing is more attended to than speaking, i.e.
we are more conscious of what we are doing and tend to attach more
importance of every kind, knowing that our readers can return to our writing
but we can not, and we can not easily rectify misunderstanding on the part of
the reader (ibid)). In addition, the autonomy of writing (particularly vis-à-vis
speaking) can be shown by its function as a differentiating factor between
the literate and the illiterate members of the relevant speech community,
while both members can have access to speaking, only literate ones can be
said to have access to writing.
Broughton et al (2003:116) state that when we write, unlike when we
talk, we are engaged in an activity, which is usually at the same time private
and public. It is private because the act of composition is by its nature
solitary, but it is public in that most writing is intended for the audiences
who are extremely difficult to define. The act of writing differs from the
talking one in that it is less spontaneous and more permanent, and the
resources available for communication are fewer because we can not - as we
do in conversation- interact with the listener and adopt as we go along. For
this reason, the writing conventions tend to be less flexible than those of
conversations, and the language used in writing tends to be more
standardized.
Historically, writing has many purposes; elaborating on this point will
be the subject matter of the coming heading.
2.1.3 The Purpose of Writing
If we ask ourselves why we write at all, the answer may well be to
pass information to some one we cannot presently talk to. Thus, writing
allows us to transcend time (when we leave a note for someone to pick up
later) or space (when we send a letter through post).
A second answer might be (especially when we think of the needs of
society as a whole) to solve the problem of volume, of having to store more
than the human mind can remember. In fact, from the beginning of history,
man has found it useful to store information, first using special trained
“memorizers” from within the community, and then moved on to develop
writing-systems. It has been found that written form is the most convenient
for the purpose of storing information (Brookes and Grundy (1998:3).
A third reason for writing might be to filter and shape our experience.
You cannot write without filtering information. As we write, we think about
what to write and how to present our experience. Indeed, we may well find
that writing helps us to come to term with our experience and understand it
better. When we edit what we have written, our writing itself goes through
further filtering. The result is that our writing provides our readers with a
condensed, economical, and carefully considered version of what we might
say to them which is very different from the spoken form. In a sense, we
have clarified what we think by forcing ourselves to write it down (ibid: p5).
The above mentioned is few among many purposes of writing. In fact,
recently most linguists, if not all, advocate the importance of teaching
writing skills. However, the question needs to be raised here is: how to teach
these skills? The following heading will try to find out an answer to this
question.
2.1.4 Approaches to teaching writing in EFL classes
Specialists in EFL have now become aware of the significance of
developing writing skills among non-native writers of English (Freedman et
al ,1983; Raimes, 1983; Zamel, 1985)
Raimes (1983: 5) tries to find out an answer to the question of how to
teach writing in EFL classes. She assumes that there are as many answers as
there are many teachers and teaching styles. In fact, there are a number of
things that writers deal with when they produce a piece of writing (i.e.
grammar, e.g. rules of verbs, agreements, sentence boundaries, content,
clarity, originality, logic, etc, the writing processes; getting ideas, getting
started, writing draft, revising, etc, audience and readers, word advice;
vocabulary, idioms, topics, etc, organization; the paragraph topic and
supported cohesion and unity, mechanics; hand writing, spelling,
punctuation, etc. All these elements are used to achieve clear, fluent, and
effective communication of ideas.
Teachers have developed a variety of approaches to the teaching of
writing. Raimes (ibid p 6) reports six approaches to teaching writing in EFL
classes. These are: Controlled-to-Free Approach, Free Writing Approach,
Paragraph Pattern Approach, Grammar-Syntax-Organization Approach, the
Process Approach, and the Communicative Approach. Elaboration on these
approaches will be the subject matter of the following subheadings.
(a)
Controlled-to-Free Approach
In the 1950s and early 1960s, the audio-lingual method of
language teaching dominated second language learning. Speech
attracted the primary concern, while writing served to reinforce
speech, in that it stressed mastery of grammatical and syntactical
forms. The controlled- to-Free approach in writing is essential:
students are first given sentences, then paragraph to copy or to
manipulate grammatically. With controlled composition, it is
relatively easy for students to write a great deal yet avoid errors and
limited opportunity to make mistakes. This approach stresses three
things: grammar, syntax, and mechanics. It emphasizes accuracy
rather than fluency or originality.
(b)
The Free Writing Approach
The emphasis in this approach is that intermediate level students
should put content and fluency first and not worry about the form. To
emphasize fluency even more, some EFL teachers begin their classes
by asking students to write freely on any topic without worrying about
grammar and spelling for five or ten minutes. They have to resort to
writing simple sentences. The teachers do not correct these short
pieces of free writing; they simply read them or comment on the ideas
the writers expressed. Alternatively, some students might volunteer to
read their own writings aloud to the class. Concern of audience and
content are seen as important in this approach, especially since the
free writings often revolve around subjects that the students are
interested in, and those subjects then become the basis for other more
focused writing task.
(c) The Paragraph-Pattern Approach
The paragraph-pattern approach stresses that students copy
paragraphs and imitate model passages. They put scramble sentences
into a paragraph order. This approach is based on the principle that in
different cultures people construct and organize their communication
with each other in different ways. So, the students need to see, analyze
and practice the particularly “English” features of a piece of writing.
Similar to this approach, is the Model-based Approach. The
emphasis here is on correctness and the adherence to and copying of
models. The teachers and the textbooks are the source of language,
and the good model is crucial. This Based-model approach was
transferred to the more recent interest in rhetorical rather than
language structure in written discourse. With such an interest,
materials with a focus on the organization of rhetorical acts and
manipulation of cohesive features are involved.
In both approaches the language based and rhetorical focused
approaches, the model text is taken as the starting point; the text is
analyzed and studied from features of form, content and organization;
linguistic items and rhetorical patterns are manipulated; then a new
input is provided as a basis for a parallel writing task.
Watson (1982:65) criticized the Model-based approach for
mother tongue language teaching and for EFL. He points out that
models tend to be too long and too remote from the students’ own
writing problems. In general, he views the imitation of models as
being “stultifying and inhibiting writers rather than empowering them
or liberating them”. This approach is also criticized in that, it exposed
students to the formal descriptive categories of rhetoric, offered good
examples (usually professional ones) and bad examples (usually the
students ones), encourages the students to absorb the features of a
socially approved style. This helps the students to analyze the product,
but it leaves the process of writing up to inspiration.
(d)The Grammar-Syntax-Organization Approach
In fact, writing cannot be seen as composed of separate skills,
which are learnt one by one. So, teachers advised writing tasks that
lead students to pay attention to organization while they work on the
necessary grammar and syntax. Students see the connection between
what they are trying to write and what they need in order to write.
This approach then, links the purpose of a piece of writing and the
forms that are needed to convey the message.
It can be argued that all of the four approaches, which have
been mentioned above, are based on the Product Approach to writing.
As its name suggests, this approach is concerned with the finished
text. Particularly, it concerns with the manipulation of the language
structure of the written text.
In 1980s the Product Approach became a subject of criticism
for a number of linguists in general and advocates of the Process
Approach in particular. Zamel (1983:165) argues that Product
Approach was prescriptive, formulaic, and overtly concerned with
correctness. Freedman et al (1983:181) considers this approach to be
pedagogically weak for the insufficient attention it paid to the writing
stages. Krashen (1984:25) also maintains that if the student-writer is
able to master, consciously, the entire rules of punctuation, spelling,
grammar and style that linguists have discovered and described his
reward would be a Ph. D in linguistics, but he would never be a
competent writer.
(e) The Process Approach
Recently, the teaching of writing began to move away from
concentration on the written product to an emphasis on the process of
writing (Raimes, 1983:10). She assumes that writers should ask
themselves not only questions about purpose and audience, but also
the crucial questions:
How do I write this?
How do I get started?
All writers must have decisions on how to begin and how to organize
the task. Student-writers in particular need to realize that what they
first put down on paper is not their finished product, but just a
beginning. Jordan (1997:167) states that the prime concern for
classroom activities will, therefore, be generating preliminary ideas,
prewriting activities, outlining, getting started, producing first draft,
revising, proofreading, and developing further drafts.
It is true that a student who is given the time for the process to
work, along with appropriate feedback from readers such as teachers
or other students will discover ideas, new sentences, and new words
as he plans. Many teachers in EFL classes now give their students an
opportunity to explore a topic fully in prewriting activities (Raimes
ibid). Teachers who use the Process Approach give their students two
crucial supports: time for the students to try out their ideas and
feedback on the content of what they write in their drafts.
Although there are many advantages of this approach, there
also, are many problems that can be pointed out in connection with
the Process Approach. Firstly, if the student is seriously required to
workout preliminary ideas (writing processes), he will devote a good
deal of time to non-writing tasks. Also this approach does not consider
the time limits in EFL classroom activities. Secondly, the Process
Approach could not avert from grammatical accuracy and rhetorical
formulae. Thirdly, this approach has been argued to centre upon the
student-writer as the sole generator of ideas irrespective of the
situation in which his writing takes place. Horowitz (1989:144) for
example, states that the Process Approach over-emphasizes the
individual psychological function and neglects socio-cultural context.
In fact, the Process Approach ignores the writers’ purpose and
audiences.
(f) The Communicative Approach
Unlike the Process Approach, the Communicative Approach
stresses the purpose of a piece of writing and the audiences. Studentwriters are encouraged to behave like writers in the real world and to
ask themselves the crucial questions about purpose and audience:
Why am I writing this?
Who will read it?
Traditionally, the teacher alone plays the role of audience. But some
feel that a writer does his best when writing is truly a communicative
act, when a writer writes for a real reader. Teachers using the
communicative approach, therefore, have extended readership. They
extended it to other students in the class, who not only read the piece
but actually do something with it, such as respond, rewrite in another
form, summarize, or make comment— but not correct (Raimes
1983:9).
2.1.5 Approaches and Techniques
All the approaches just mentioned do, of course, over-lap. It is seldom
to find a classroom where a teacher is devoted to one approach and excludes
all others. A teacher using a communicative approach or a process approach
is still using other approaches as the students need them; model paragraph,
controlled- composition, free writing, sentences exercises, and paragraph
analysis are useful in all approaches.
Raimes (1983:11) assumes that there are many ways to teach writing.
Although, the techniques are drawn from all approaches and address various
features that a writer needs to consider in producing a piece of writing, they
still have something in common. They stem from the basic assumption that
writing means writing a connected text.
It can be argued that all these techniques and approaches are set to
enable the students to organize well-structured text through specific
techniques in order to compose a good piece of writing such as the following
heading (paragraph writing).
2.2 Paragraph Writing
As mentioned in (2.1.3) that one purpose of writing is communication.
When people write, they pass their ideas and information to their readers. In
major fields of study, research, business, it is extremely important for a
person to be able to communicate well in writing. However, the problem of
the writer is basically a problem of control. In order to achieve this control,
writers must ask themselves two questions:
1. What do I wish to say?
2. How to say it?
Raimes (983:10) raises a similar question: “How do I write this?” McCarty
(1998:9) assumes that sometimes the writer has lots of ideas, but he may not
know which of them are relevant. How to say it, or how to write it covers all
writing skills, i.e. graphical or visual, grammatical, stylistic, as well as
rhetorical and organizational skills, particularly paragraphing.
2.2.1 What is a Paragraph?
There are many definitions for the term paragraph in relevant
literature. The followings are few among many: Davidson (1964: ) states
that the word paragraph comes from two Greek words, “Para” which means
by the side of, and “graphein” which means to write. He found that writers
formally put a mark by the side of a passage to draw attention to a division
of thought. He argues that a paragraph may be defined as the rounded
development of a single idea. In other words, paragraphs are devices for
showing minor divisions of thought within the whole written form such as a
text or composition.
Longacrer (1979:105) assumes that the paragraph is a unit of written
material that consists of a series of sentences for the sake of developing a
main or controlling idea. That is to say all sentences in the paragraph must
completely and accurately develop a central idea through logical order or
organization. McCarty (1998:57) also states that as the writer develops his
paragraph, he needs to keep his ideas under control and to organize these
ideas from the readers’ viewpoint, e.g. go from overview to details rather
than from details to overview.
Furthermore, Johnstone (2002:102) views the written paragraph as
being unified in content (I.e. having a “topic” expressed in a “topic
sentence” and, at least in some writing traditions, developed into sentences).
Langman (2003:11) maintains that a paragraph typically starts with a point,
and the rest of the paragraph provides specific details to support and develop
that point. An effective paragraph, then, must not only make a point, but
must be supported by specific evidences, reasons, and examples. Even if
readers do not agree with the writer, at least they have in front of them the
evidences on which the writer has based his\her opinion. Readers are like
juries; they want to see the evidences so that they can make their own
judgment (Langman ibid: p 12).
In sum, all the definitions above emphasize that a paragraph always
contains a single idea, one subject, one main idea, a controlling idea, or
central idea. In fact, the central idea and the supporting sentences of the
paragraph usually have a certain length and shape which traditionally called
“Paragraph Layout”.
2.2.2 Paragraph Layout (length & Indentation)
(A) Paragraph Length
It has been discussed in (2.2.1) that the paragraph is a group of
sentences. However, how many sentences does the paragraph contain?
Davidson (1964: ) made attempts to find an answer to this question. He
states that the length of an ordinary paragraph depends on the degree of
elaboration needed to bring out the topic clearly. He adds that some
paragraphs are quite short, while others are extremely long. Research has
shown that the average paragraph in English has five to ten sentences, with
seventy five to one hundred and fifty words. McMahan and Day (1984:87)
add that occasionally, though, for rhetorical reason a paragraph may be a
single sentence. Johnstone (2002: 102) maintains that a paragraph length
varies across written medium; paragraphs in newspaper columns are usually
shorter than paragraphs in books. Rooks (2003:6) also points out that the
Number of sentences in a paragraph depends on its subject. A paragraph
with a simple subject may have five sentences, but a paragraph about
difficult subject may have ten sentences.
(B) Indentation
When a writer writes, he always keeps his audience and readers in
mind. Certain readers expect him to use certain conventions, like manner
that helps in communicating with audiences. Often these conventions are
signals that help the readers to predict what will come next.
One important convention to follow is indenting the first line of each
paragraph. This indentation tells the readers that the writer is beginning a
new paragraph (Kathleen et al (1982:43)). According to Brown and Yule
(1996:95) it might seem that identifying the formal demarcation of chunk,
written or printed discourse is relatively simple task. After all, written
discourse is divided into paragraphs whose boundaries are marked by
indentation. Similarly, Brown and Yule (ibid) for example, appeal to
languages other than English for evidence that there are formal linguistic
markers of the beginning and ending of paragraphs. What is immediately
noticeable in the discussion of these markers is that they are genre-specific.
They also describe the marking of paragraph boundaries as one form of
partitioning in discourse.
Just as parts of sentences are formally marked, parts of paragraphs are
also marked. Markers can be graphic (indentation or line spacing signal
beginnings and endings of paragraphs), lexical (a head word in the
paragraph’s first slot can be referred to in subsequent slot), or it can be
grammatical (syntactic parallelism can signal that set of sentences belong to
the same part). A shift in a verb can signal a new slot such as transition
words (i.e. “but”, “for example”, etc) (Johnstone: 2002:105).
2.2.3 What is the Topic Sentence?
Just like the term “Paragraph”, the topic sentence has a number of
definitions in the concerned literature. It has been defined as the central idea
of the paragraph. Similarly, Smith and liedlich (1965:4) assume that the
sentence which expresses the controlling idea of a paragraph is called the
topic sentence upon which the unity of the paragraph is based.
Another definition is given by Rooks (1999: 10); he clarifies that the
first sentence of every paragraph you write should be the topic sentence. In
fact, it communicates the subject of the paragraph by giving the reader the
general subject, and the specific parts of the general subject that will be
developed in the paragraph. He adds that the topic sentence serves as a guide
in determining what details are needed to make the central idea clear for
readers, as well as what details are irrelevant.
A topic sentence usually appears at or near the beginning of the
paragraph. In this position, it announces in advance what the paragraph is
about. Occasionally, it occurs at the end to summarize what has been said, or
else where. It may appear in the middle as a kind of link between the two
parts. McMahan and Day (1984: 89) argue that writers sometimes put their
topic sentence in the middle or at the end as a matter of style. They,
furthermore, determine three positions of the topic sentence:
A. At the beginning: If you put each topic sentence at the beginning of
its paragraph, your readers can grasp the outline of your essay just by
glancing at the topic sentences, an arrangement that makes for clarity
and easy reading. In fact, most paragraphs start out with the topic
sentences following by examples, details, subordinates, etc.
B. At the end: Any time you develop a paragraph using inductive
reasoning (gathering specific evidences and examples from which
you draw conclusion), the topic sentence quite naturally comes at the
end. The topic sentence can also be put at the end as a mean of
achieving variety and emphasis.
C. In the middle: Putting the topic sentence in mid paragraph
occasionally is another way of achieving variety and thus making
your writing more interesting.
However, Johnstone (2002: 102) states that the writer of an English
paragraph may, in fact, be more free to decide what will go and where.
Langman (2003: 13) adds that it is often better to state your point in the first
sentence of your paragraph, and the paragraph will be unified if all details
support the point in the topic sentence.
2.2.4 Unity in the paragraph
As it has been mentioned in (2.2.1), the paragraph is a development of
a single idea, and this development depends on the topic sentence, and
succeeding several other sentences, which in some way contribute to or
support the idea of the topic sentence. In other words, all the sentences must
be related to the topic sentence and must, therefore, refer to it. If a paragraph
announces its main idea in the topic sentence and if all supporting sentences
contribute to the readers understanding of the main idea, it can be said that
the paragraph has unity of thought which is an inherent attribute of a good
paragraph.
It is true that an effective paragraph has unity. This unity can be
tested by checking the relationship between each sentence and the central
idea, the writer must be certain that each statement relates to the restriction
of the topic. In fact, some students do spoil what is potentially a good piece
of writing as they run into less obvious but similarly troublesome unity
problems (Allen and Park 1969:18).
Allen and Park (ibid: p19) state that, in order to achieve the unity, a
writer must stick to the point; he should say one thing about one topic in
each formal unit of his essay – the sentence, the paragraph, groups of
paragraphs in the organization of a paper, and the essay as a whole.
Although the principle of unity is easy to define as a definition, maintaining
that principle when you write is often difficult. If a paragraph is said to be
unified, only one thing must be said about the topic. Information and ideas
not closely related to the feature of the topic, no matter how interesting,
should be either omitted or clearly indicated as subordinate in importance
Imhoof and Hudson (1975: 120) add that the paragraph is a unit of
thought concerned with exposition of a single idea, and if it is to
communicate that idea clearly and concisely, it must possess oneness.
Paragraph is unified when it states only one central idea that is developed by
all other statements in the paragraph.
Understanding the principle of unity is not as difficult as it has been
mentioned above. In practice, however, students often violate it. Allen and
Park (1969:19) report that students violate the principle of unity for two
reasons: First, it is violated because the writer of the paragraph momentarily
forgets his central point and introduces a sentence or two not sufficiently
related to the topic. Second, because the writer is “Sentence oriented”; he
sees and uses the sentence as a unit for the expression of one idea, but not
the paragraph.
2.2.5 Paragraph Patterns
The relevant literature highlights two types of frameworks for the
paragraph. Becker (1965) quoted in Johnstone (2002:101) suggests that there
are two main patterns of the paragraph, each is describable as a set of
structural\semantic slots which can be filled with one or more sentences.
One pattern involves Topic (T), Restriction (R), and Illustration (I).
Winterowd and Murray (1985: 52) argue that the first two parts (i.e. T and
R) identify the central idea of the paragraph. Illustration, the third part of the
pattern, gives further development to the central idea with examples,
comparison, or further specific statements. Each one of the three elements is
more specific than the preceding.
The other pattern, on the other hand, starts with a problem (P) slot and
proceeds with one or more solutions (S). In this pattern, the paragraph
begins with an introductory sentence that explains the situation and raises
the problem, followed by an explanation that gives the solution to the
problem. Becker (ibid) assumes that in some paragraphs, the slot (S) is filled
with an embedded (TRI) structure.
2.2.6 Methods of Developing a Paragraph
As it has been mentioned in (2.2.2) the topic sentence starts the main
idea in each paragraph, but most paragraphs need more sentences. To
develop or to flesh out that main idea, you need to supply facts, figures,
reasons, examples, and illustrations - in short, concrete details- that pertain
to your topic sentence (McMahan and Day1984: 94).
It is true that a paragraph is not simply a loose collection of sentences or
even simply a sequence of sentences. It is an organic entity - a group of
related sentences that develop a single idea. Scholars
have
developed
several methods and patterns of logical organizations through which a
paragraph can be developed. The following are some of these methods.
2.2.6. 1 Paragraph Development by Listing and Examples
Before discussing this method, it is better to shed light on the sentence
function in a paragraph development. According to Imhoof and Hudson
(1975:110) sentences in most well-written paragraphs may be categorized
into four general functions: firstly, paragraph introducers which are
sentences that establish the topic focus of the paragraph as a whole,
secondly, paragraph developers which point examples and details of various
kinds that support the ideas set forth by the paragraph introducers, thirdly,
viewpoints or context modulators, these are sentences that provide smooth
transition between different sets of ideas, fourthly, paragraph terminators,
which logically conclude the ideas discussed in the Paragraph in a
psychologically satisfying manner. In fact, not all pieces of writing comply
with this analysis; however, most successful paragraphs usually contain
these four sentence types.
Concerning the paragraph development by listing and examples,
Imhoof and Hudson (ibid) assume that a listing paragraph has several parts.
First, a paragraph introducer –both a topic introducer and a topic sentence
are used to open the paragraph. Next, supporting examples are listed with
aids of connectors. Sometimes modulator sentences are used between
different sets of ideas. Finally, a terminator sentence brings the paragraph to
a logical conclusion.
It is helpful to learn two common ways of organizing support in a
listing paragraph –listing order and time order. Through listing order, a
writer can organize supporting evidences in a paper by providing a list of
two or more reasons, examples, or details. The most important or interesting
item is usually presented at the end of the paragraph because readers most
likely remember the last thing they read. Certain transition words are used to
indicate listing order (e.g. first, second, next, finally, etc.). Time order, on
the other hand, is also used by the writer to present details in the order in
which they occur. Many transition words are used to indicate the time order
in a paragraph (e.g. before, after, now, later, etc.). In fact, many paragraphs,
especially the paragraphs that tell a story or give series of directions, are
organized in time order.
2.2.6.2 Development by Comparison and Contrast
A comparison paragraph, as its name indicates, compares similar
aspects of qualities of two objects. On the other hand, contrast paragraph
compares dissimilar aspects of two subjects. In both the comparison and
contrast paragraphs there are two procedures that may be followed. The first
method alternates examples of subject “A” with examples of subject “B”;
the contrast or comparison may occur in the same sentence, or they may be
in consecutive sentences. The second method presents the whole subject “A”
examples together, then the whole subject “B” examples together. Moreover,
the support for comparison or contrast consists of examples, judgments,
factual details, etc.
2.2.6.3 Development by definition
In a sense, any paragraph that answers the question: “What is it?” uses
definition as a method of development. A definition paragraph describes,
explains, or defines an unfamiliar term by relating that which is unknown to
that which is already known. It makes use of the techniques of comparison,
contrast, and synthesis, often in combination. More specifically, a definition
paragraph may be developed by using comparison sentences that show an
unknown term as same as the known term. In any case, a given definition of
a paragraph, whether developed by comparison, contrast, or synthesis, or
combination, normally ends with a sentence that summarizes the distinctive
features of the term being defined (Imhoof and Hudson 1975:116).
2.2.6.4 Development by classification
Another common and useful method for developing a paragraph is
classification. In one sense, almost all writing involves classification. At
some points in a piece, the writer establishes some sets of categories which
he has discovered while analyzing his topic or synthesizing his ideas. In fact,
the writer of classification paragraph organizes items or ideas to be
discussed into relatively homogeneous groups, or splits his/her subject into
smaller parts in the topic sentence and then develops each part in turn, using
any suitable method of development.
2.2.6.5 Development by process description
Process description method is similar to the procedures followed in
conducting a scientific experiment. The descriptive paragraph requires
descriptive details which are usually intended to convey an impression –how
something looked, smelled, tasted, etc.
2.2.6.6 Development by cause and effect
The final method is the development of paragraph by exploring the
causes or effects of an idea, event, or situation. The writer sometimes
follows out a chain of reasoning from one idea to another or from one thing
to another, and he may go from causes to effects, or vice versa.
To sum up, all these methods discussed in this section, represent
different means of developing a paragraph used most frequently by writers.
It is often to combine two or more methods in a single paragraph. In fact,
these methods are not limited to paragraphs in their usefulness. A single
method might extend over several paragraphs, or even an entire essay.
Sometimes the use of several methods is a good way to explain a
complicated idea fully. Whether it could be one method or several, in one
paragraph or more, the development of one’s idea should always be full
enough for the situation and for the readers.
2.2.7 Cohesion and Coherence
As mentioned in (2.2.4), one of the most important principles of
writing is sticking to the point. However, the writer may sometimes find that
even though he carefully sticks to his central thesis in his paragraph, the
paragraph would still sound odd and disjointed. To overcome this problem,
the writer needs to know more about cohesion and coherence.
2.2.7.1 Cohesion:
W hen the writer is writing, it is worth bearing in mind that it helps his
readers if he can see clearly the relationship between his sentences. Quite
often, he can show this relation with particular joining words or phrases.
However, this relation between sentences is called cohesion. Cohesion is
defined by Conor (1996:25) as the use of explicit linguistic devices to signal
relations between sentences and parts of a text. Brown and Yule (1996:197)
take the view that the primary determinant of whether a set of sentences do
or not constitute a text, depends on cohesive relations between sentences
which create a great texture. A text has a texture and this distinguishes it
from something that is not a text - the texture is provided by cohesive
relations. Cohesive relations within a text are set up “where the
interpretation of some elements in the discourse is dependent on that of
another”, one presupposes the other in the sense that it can not be effectively
decoded except by recourse to it ( Halliday and Hassan ibid: P4).
Johnstone (2002:119) states that the best treatment of cohesion is
given by Halliday and Hassan. They describe five general and lexical
strategies that writers \speakers use (and readers\hearers expect) for showing
how the meanings of parts of different sentences are related to each other by
linking some elements in one sentence with some in another. These cohesive
devices create ties between sentences. For more illustration, the five
cohesive devices will be the subject matter of the following sub-titles.
1. Reference
According to Halliday (1985) referential ties are created when an item
in one sentence refers to an item in another sentence, so that in order to
interpret part of one sentence readers or hearers have to refer to some part of
the other sentences. Similarly, Brown and Yule (1996:95) assume that
referential ties direct the hearer\readers to look elsewhere for their
interpretation, whether their interpretation lies outside the text or lies within
the text.
Halliday (ibid:181) argues that there are three types of references:
A. A particular or circumstantial element introduced at one place in the text
can be taken as reference for something that follows (traditionally, this
relation is called cataphora). It is an exophoric relation that pointing outside
the text. It is possible to have anaphoric relation in which such items
pointing backward to earlier sentences. For more illustration consider
Halliday’s examples:
(1) Cataphora relation: She comes in blue, the queen.
(2) Exophoric relation: Look at it (the sun).
(3) Anaphoric relation: Look at the sun. It is going down.
B.
The
second
type
of
reference
is
demonstrative
like
these, those, this, that, etc. They may also be either exophoric or anaphoric.
C.
The third type is comparative reference which sets up a relation of
contrast. Any expression such as “the same”, “another”, similar, and related
adverbs such as likewise, equally, and many others presume some standard
of reference in the preceding text. However, comparative reference can also
be used cataphoricaly.
2. Conjunction
Halliday and Hassan (1976:320) state that human languages are
characterized by a set of logical relations that are embodied in the different
conjunction forms of coordination, opposition, modification, etc. Halliday
(1985) defines conjunction as a clause or clause complex, or a larger stretch
of text, may be related to what follows it by one or other specific set of
semantic relations. He further introduces English conjunction under three
broad headings, as shown bellow:
i) Elaboration such as opposition (e.g. in other words, similarly, etc).
ii) Extension: such as addition and variation (e.g. also, either, however,
otherwise, etc).
iii) Enhancement: spatio (e.g. there, throughout, etc) manner (e.g. thus,
likewise, etc), causal conditional (e.g. therefore, consequently, etc).
3&4 Substitution and Ellipsis
These two kinds of cohesive devices are presented together due to their
functional similarities. In fact, each can be defined in terms of the other.
Ellipsis is defined as substitution by zero. Whereas substitution is defined as
explicit ellipsis (Halliday and Hassan 1976: 317).
Halliday (1985: 297) adds that Ellipsis contributes to the semantic
structure of the discourse by setting up a lexcogrammatical relation. Such
relation is always between words rather than between meanings. Substitution,
on the other hand, serves as a place-holding device, showing where something
has been omitted and what its grammatical function would be. Moreover,
Halliday (ibid) focuses on three main contexts for ellipsis and substitution,
namely, the clause and verbal groups and the nominal group.
5. Lexical Cohesion
Halliday and Hassan (1976: 318) identify two processes as possible
source of textual cohesion. One process is that of reiteration; it means the
repetition of lexical items or the use of synonyms. The second process is
collocation; it is defined as the tendency of some words to occur in the
lexical environment of other words. To illustrate these two processes,
consider Halliday and Hassan’s example below:
Soon her eye fell on a little glass box lying under the table: she
opened it, and found in it a very small cake, on which the words
“EAT ME” were beautifully marked in currants. “well, I will eat
you”, said Alice, “ and if it makes me larger, I can reach the key;
and if it makes me smaller, I can creep under the door, so either
way, I’ll get into the garden, and I don’t care what happens”
She ate a little bit, and said anxiously, which way? Which way?
Holding her hands on the top of her head to feel which way it was
growing, and she was quite surprise to find that she remained the
same size (P. 320).
In this passage there are many occurrences of reiterated forms such as
eat, ate, eat. There are also occurrences of collocations: i.e. open, key, and
door. The occurrence of these lexical forms has been argued to achieve
cohesive effects by continuity of lexical meanings.
2.2.7.2 Coherence
Halliday and Hassan (1976:11) assume that discourse sentences
cohere as far as their meaning is concerned. Coherence may be established
by looking for how much the sentences in question do inter-relate in
meaning. Structural definition of coherence has been proposed by SCinto
(1977:9-12)); he points out that there are four ways to establish coherence.
Firstly, coherence can be created by logical cohesion. Secondly, it can be
conceived as the “degree to which meaning of an element of a text
contributes or distracts from the larger meaning of the text as a whole”.
Thirdly, a possible source of textual coherence is “syntactic connectivity”.
SCinto (ibid: p10) defines syntactic connectivity as a matter of possible
concatenation of sentences. The forth source of coherence is the lexical
cohesion.
However, explanation of textual coherence in a pure structural term
does not appeal to many linguists. For instances, Widdowson (1977: 31)
points out that it is not always necessary that relationship between
propositions within the same discourse to be signaled linguistically. He
argues that the meaning of the text does not always exist ready-made, i.e. it
has to be worked out by hearers or readers.
When a piece of writing has coherence (or it coheres), its ideas move
in smooth, straight uninterrupted line from the beginning to the end.
Accordingly, a coherent text must proceed logically and smoothly through
sensible ordering of items or ideas in the paragraph and linking the sentences
with transitional devices so that they follow smoothly from one idea to the
next, uniting the paragraph into coherent whole.
Concerning coherence in a paragraph (for the sake of the research), it
has been argued that a paragraph has coherence when its sentences are
woven together or follow into each other. If a paragraph is coherent, the
reader moves easily from one sentence to the next without feeling that there
are gaps in thought. If a paragraph lacks coherence, the reader will feel that
the sentences, not the paragraph, is the unit of writing, and he is reading a
collection of separate statements rather than integrated discussion. Smith
(1968: 85) states that clear readable paragraphs must be coherent as well as
unified and well developed. Their sentences must not only adequately
develop a controlling idea, they must link together smoothly. Each sentence
should lead into the next, so that the reader can easily follow the progression
of thought.
To achieve the orderly progression in a paragraph, you must arrange
your materials in some logical sequence and provide connecting links
between sentences. If your paragraph is to be coherent, then, you must first
arrange your materials in a logical order. The kind of order you use will
depend upon your purpose and the nature of your materials.
Winterowd and Murray (1985: 66-72) provide six model orders to
develop a coherent paragraph:
1- Chronological order: events here are organized according to time
order.
2- Spatial order: this model is based on the physical relationship
among items in order to give the readers a clear picture about the
topic.
3- Order of importance: if an expository paragraph is developed with
reasons or examples, the illustration sentences are often arranged
in order of importance.
4- Transition words.
5- Repetition for coherence.
6- Using several strategies for coherence (i.e. transition devices,
pronouns, paraphrase, repetition, etc.).
2.3 Summary
This chapter has discussed definitions of writing, nature of writing,
the purpose of writing, approaches to teaching writing, and approaches and
techniques in teaching writing. Relevant literature of paragraph writing has
been introduced; definitions of paragraph, paragraph layout, the topic
sentence development, paragraph patterns, and the unity of thought in a
paragraph. Various methods of developing a paragraph have been
highlighted; development by listing, by comparison and contrast, by
definition, by classification, and by cause and effect. Finally, Cohesion and
coherence have also been dealt with.
Chapter Three
Methodology
3.1 Introduction
This chapter outlines the methodology of the research: introduces the
subjects, describes the materials used in eliciting the research findings,
shows the procedures, and highlights the techniques of data scoring and
analysis.
3.2 Subjects
The subjects of the study consist of sixty students from the
Department of English, Faculty of Arts, University of Khartoum: thirty are
from the second level (Group A) and thirty are from the fourth level
(Group B). Both groups are asked to write paragraphs.
The students in group (A) range between 16 – 19 years old. They
have nine years of EFL study: four years at the basic school level, three
years at the higher secondary school level, and two years at the university
level. At the latter level, the subjects have studied two EFL courses in the
first year and two courses in the second year. Worth mentioning, the
students at the University of Khartoum, faculty of Arts usually take English
language as a compulsory subject in the first year and specialization usually
takes place after the second year.
The students in group (B) range between 19 – 23 years old. They all
have eleven years of EFL study: four years at the basic school level, three
years at the higher secondary school level, and four years at the university
level. In fact, in their university study, the subjects have studied one
advanced composition course.
Nine and more years of learning could be enough for EFL students to
become good writers, but general observation and research findings do not
seem to reinforce this expectation. However, their overall English
performance has often been reported to be bellow average. This can, no
doubt, be argued to have negative implications on their paragraph writing
abilities.
3.3 Materials
Materials of this study were originally written answers to two tests:
the first one was given to the students in group (A). They were given three
topics and requested to write only one paragraph in not less than (75) words.
The first paragraph was descriptive, the second and the third ones were
argumentative. The second test was given to the students in group (B), and
they were given the same topics as group one.
3.4 Procedures
As shown in (3.3.) the materials of this study were originally
answers to achievement tests. Three familiar topics were chosen for
paragraph writing. These were:
1- Describe your university (describe either buildings, labs, libraries or
lecture rooms).
2- “Smoking is bad for health”. Develop this sentence into a paragraph;
show how it is bad for health.
3- The conflict in Darfur is a political rather than an ethnic one. Develop
this sentence into a paragraph.
In one hour lecture, the students in group (A) were requested to
develop only one paragraph from the above topics without any instructions
on how to develop it. A few questions were raised about the length of the
paragraph, some students finished their writing at the first thirty minutes,
and few of them kept writing until the last minute of the prescribed time.
The students in group (B) as described in (3.2.) were also requested to
develop a paragraph. Because the researcher wanted to investigate the
relation between the students’ academic level and their paragraph writing
abilities, the same topics and the same time limit given to group (A) was
also given to group (B). Students in the forth level seemed to be more
confident while they were writing. Most of them finished in the first fifteen
minutes, and no one stayed till the last minute.
3.5 Techniques of Data Scoring and Analysis
The results of the study will be analyzed in terms of percentages,
and the performance of the subjects will be measured by scores. The total
scores of the test are eighty marks, divided equally into four elements, each
of which carries twenty marks:
1- The Length of paragraph and indentation;
2- The Topic sentence development;
3- The Unity of thought in a paragraph;
4- The Use of cohesive devices.
Chapter Four
Data Analysis and Interpretation
4.1 Introduction
This chapter focuses on the presentation and discussion of the results
arrived at through the tests of writing a paragraph given to the subjects in
question.
An overall investigation of the paragraph writing abilities among the
students of both groups will be dealt with in details. The discussion of the
students’ performance will move gradually from the layout of the paragraph
to the inner structure. In other words, paragraph length and indentation will
be dealt with first, and then comes the development of the topic sentence,
paragraph unity, and the use cohesive devices. Throughout the discussion of
these paragraph features, comparison between the performances of the
students in group (A) and their counterparts in group (B) will be
highlighted, and interpretations and explanations of the results will be
worked out.
4.2 Analysis and Discussion of the Students’ Performance
4.2.1 The Students' Performance in Paragraph Length and Indentation
The normal length of a paragraph in English as stated by MacMahan
and Day (1984:87) ranges between five to ten sentences, with seventy five to
one hundred and fifty words representing standard connected sentences.
Kathleen et al (982:43) points out that one important convention to follow,
when you are writing a paragraph, is to indent the first line of each
paragraph. This indentation tells the reader that the writer is beginning a new
paragraph.
So, judging by the criteria above, 66,6% of the students in group (A)
failed to indent their paragraphs and meet the required length of a standard
paragraph. They obtained grades ranging between (0 – 9), taking the pass
grade to be (10). Examples:
Ex (1)
University of Khartoum is very big, but
the lectures rooms
are very small that all the students cannot sit, because the
furniture are very bad and the chairs is broken.
Ex (2)
The smoking is bad for health, because effects on human and
causes diseases, lungs not able to protoct the body from
insect.
Away from the grammatical and spelling complications, the
paragraphs in the examples above do not comply with the conventional
layout of paragraph as the students started writing from the beginning of the
line paying no attention to the indentation, which is an inherent attribute of
the standard paragraph. The so called paragraphs in the examples above are
considered inadequately short ones (i.e. example (1) consists of (30) words
and another one contains (22) words); they apparently do not comply with
the average length that determines the flow of the topic to be written about.
In fact, most of the students in group (A) wrote very short pieces of writing
which are very hard to be called paragraphs when measuring them against
the criteria stated by MacMahan and Day above. See the examples below:
Ex (3)
I think smoking is bad for health because it cause many kind
of desese. one of main effect in smoking is cancer which is
very dangerous and its hard to recover. (31 words).
Ex (4)
university of Khartoum is very bigger and older building in
sudan and we found many lecture rooms labs and libraries.
we found many furniture, chair and bunch and table,
cafeteria and two field the west one and este field
found many faculty in center. (46 words)
and we
While (33,4%) of the students observed the indentation; however,
they produced inadequately short paragraphs. Consider the following
examples:
Ex (5)
The smoking isbad of health, because it effect on
human is causing disease’s lungs not able to protection the
body from jerth and insect . it’s not work with good health
perhaps cause suretan and other desease. (36 words)
Ex (6)
The conflict in Darfur I think is poltical rather
than ethnic. arab and nonarab live in Darfur together, and
their fathers and grandfathers live together without any
clash between them. I think the peole fighting now are not
from darfur, they are not belong arab or nonarab. (48
words)
Based on the linguistic analysis above which is supported by
examples from the subjects’ writing, we can say that the students in group
(A) confused the terms “paragraph length and indentation”. They either
produced a non-indented short piece of writing, which is - by no means qualified to be a paragraph, or a single sentence paragraph and sometime
separate sentences in separate lines. Thus we can draw a conclusion that the
students of this group do not have enough knowledge of the implication of
the terms paragraph length and indentation.
In group (B) the situation is not much better as 63, 4% of the students
failed to produce indented adequately long paragraphs. See the examples:
Ex (7)
My University is big and the buildings are very old and also the
lecture room but there some new lectures rooms, and the labs
are exclusive only to the scientific faculties, the libraries are
very interested and comfortable.
Ex (8)
In this crowded world there are many victims of smoking.
It destroys lungs of smokers and it is the main cause cancer
and the diseases of veins.
In addition to this it has indirect syptomaics such as that, the
smokers usually have high depression.
It has also great influence on the sexual ability of the
smokers.
Just like the students in group (A), the students in examples (7) and
(8) above started their paragraphs from the beginning of the line leaving no
space to mark the indentation. The paragraph in example (7), for instance, is
inadequately short: it consists of a long single sentence, which includes (38)
words. As readers, we expect writer of this paragraph to extend his
description of the buildings to include: e.g. the number of the buildings,
spacing and the materials of which they were built, i.e. he should write an
overview of his university; however, he came up with very limited
fragmented ideas, thus violating the required length that determines the flow
of the paragraph. Similarly, the paragraph in example (8) is also a short one
as it contains (56) words comprising four sentences, each of which is written
on a separate line.
Indeed, if we consider the paragraph as a unit of writing which has a
certain layout and average length, the students' paragraphs above, no doubt,
would fall short of such qualifications. This result indicates that these
students are totally unaware of the implication of the terms of paragraph
length and indentation.
30% of the students in group (B) observed indentation; however, they
came up with short paragraphs which do not comply with the length of a
standard paragraph as stated by MacMahan and Day (1984:87). Consider the
examples below:
Ex (9)
My university has good building because it has build by
British system But the lecture room they are very old and the lab
also very bad The library you can find ancint books you have find
very good bunches. (30 words)
Ex (10)
I think the conflict in darfur is ethnical more than
political because that is my point of view. People live in darfur
for many years and we do not hear about conflict like this in their
grandfathers or fare grandfathers. For this reasons I think the
political reasons are responsible for this war. (53 words)
6,7% of the students in group (B) used indentation and came up with
the right length of a paragraph. See the example bellow:
Ex (11)
As far as Darfur is considered to be a multi cultural, religious
and linguistic region, conflict among of it's people should of course be
a logical one. In my view point, the current conflict is a political one,
but unfortunately it has been gravitated by politicians in order to be
an ethnic conflict. I think the sheer responsibility of this conflict lies
on the shoulder of the central government, because it has armed the
Janjweed troops to stand against the non-Arab tribes in order to
achieve some sort of power balance in the region. Consequently, the
government should be accused by the Security Council as being
responsible in way or another of the humanitarian crisis.
The paragraph in example (11) is one of a few examples among
the students’ writings where the student observed the indentation and
successfully managed to write enough sentences and words (115 words in
particular). In other words, the student opened his paragraph with a long
sentence, which contains (25) words, introducing the cultural, religious, and
linguistic nature of the Darfur region. Then he moved to the body of the
paragraph, in which he introduced his viewpoints and gave supporting
evidences. In conclusion, we can say that this paragraph contains enough
sentences and words which determines the flow of its topic.
Depending on the analysis above, which is supported by examples
from the subjects’ writing, we can say that the students in Group (B) also do
not have enough knowledge of the implication of the terms of paragraph
length and indentation. Although the students in this group have relatively
long experience with EFL writing, they still face problems in paragraph
writing technicalities.
With reference to the students’ performance in paragraph length and
indentation, it appears clearly that the poor performance of the students in
both groups is noticeable. A similar result is arrived at by Younis (1999:30):
who conducted a research investigating paragraph writing competence
among university students. His subjects were chosen from the students at the
preliminary year in the Faculty of Medicine, University of Khartoum.
Younis found that most of his subjects wrote the intended paragraphs paying
no attention to the idea of the average length that determines the
development of the topic sentence, i.e. they did not govern the length of the
paragraph by the amount of information needed to develop the topic
sentence.
The result above reveals the poor performance of the students in
paragraph length and indentation. This can also be supported statistically
from the data analysis where 13,3% of the students in group (A) obtained
grades ranging between (0-4), and 53,3% of them obtained grades ranging
between (5-9) - taking the pass grade to be (10). Similarly, 16,7% of the
students in group (B) obtained grades ranging between (0-4), and 46,7% of
them obtained grades ranging between (5-9). In fact, more than 60% of the
students in each of the groups scored grades less than the pass grade. The
tables bellow show the statistical figures in details:
Table (1): Group (A)'s performance in paragraph Length and Indentation
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
4
13,3%
5-9
16
53,3%
10-14
6
20%
15-20
4
13,3%
Total
30
99,9%
Table (2): Group (B)'s performance in Paragraph Length and Indentation
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
5
16,7%
5-9
14
46,7%
10-14
9
30%
15-20
2
6,7%
Total
30
100%
The question needed to be raised here is: What are the reasons
underlying the students' poor performance in paragraph length and
indentation? These reasons can be attributed to the weak background of the
students in English in general, and to the total absence of writing practice in
particular in the EFL courses taught at the faculty.
4.2.2 The Students' Performance in the Topic Sentence
Rooks (1999:11) maintain that what a reader expects when he\she
enters a new paragraph is to hear one declares a point in the topic sentence
and then offer support for the point. If you violate this expectation– if a
paragraph wanders aimlessly among half dozens of points, or if it declares
points without offering any evidence to support – then the reader becomes
confused or irritated by your argument. He won’t want read any further.
Concerning the performance of the students in group (A) with regard
to the topic sentence development, most of them are found to be unaware of
the implication of the term “topic sentence development”. 69,9% of them
totally deviated from the topic sentence. See the examples:
Ex (12) Smoking is bad for health because it causes many
diseases like cough. smoking is a big cause to lost
more of our money to buy something is not
necessary in our life…
Ex (13) the smoking is bad for health and grave habit in the society. in my
view is grave habit. It become unmistakable and familiar habit for
young people than the old.
The women also become to practice this hardful things in the
society.
Although mankind and women know the smoking is useless for
healthy but it become as routine part from their dialy life. But from
the bitty, even the teenager practice this grave habit.
Indeed, if we consider the paragraph as a unit of thought related to
the main point presented in the topic sentence, these examples above, no
doubt, would fall short of such a qualification. Each of which seems to
consist of a list of disconnected sentences. Apart from the indentations that
should mark each one, there is no one sign to qualify them as paragraphs.
Lansford and Connors (1989) state that a successful paragraph should have
three attributes: Unity (focusing on one idea), Coherence (its parts are
clearly related) and development (its main idea is supported with its
specifics). So judging by these criteria, the paragraphs cited in examples
(12&13) seem to lack even partial development; they are all a jumble of
single-sentences with no supporting specifics, each of which could be a topic
sentence in its own right.
In example (12), for instance, the student put down a sentence at the
beginning of the paragraph, part of which could be considered a topic
sentence. As readers, we expect the student to develop this sentence and
follow it up by a series of sentences to reinforce his statement, to show how
smoking is bad for health and to come up with a number of examples of
diseases caused by smoking. Contrary, the student came up with a new
sentence which carries a new idea. Without supporting the first sentence, the
student jumped to write about the economic effects of smoking although the
prescribed paragraph is: “Smoking is bad for health” (See 3.4.). From the
beginning of the paragraph, readers feel astray and notice how the student is
moving from sentence to sentence without developing one topic sentence,
exactly as described by Kathleen et al (1982:44) who says: “if you do not
focus your paragraph on a central idea, your reader may become confused or
even annoyed, since your paragraph may indicate that you yourself are not
sure of what you want to say.”
In example (13), the student completely deviated from the topic
sentence. In that he stated his topic at the beginning of the paragraph:
“smoking is bad for health and grave habit in the society”. In this opening
sentence the student raised two points: "health and social aspects of
smoking"; however, he devoted the rest of the paragraph to develop the
second point (social consequence of smoking). The readers would be
interested to know how smoking is bad for health. In fact, readers are like
juries, they want to see evidences, reasons, and examples. Even if they do
not agree with the writer, at least they should have in front of them
evidences on which the writer based his\her opinion (Landman 2003:11). In
return, the writer of this paragraph did not convince the reader. He\she
introduced no specifics to support the first part of his statement which is laid
down in the first sentence. He devoted the rest of the paragraph to the second
part of the idea, leaving the earlier one undeveloped.
While the rest of the students in group (A) either rewrote the
sentences, which were given in the test, considering them as topic sentences
and partially developed them, or wrote paragraphs, in most cases, consisting
of a series of separate sentences, each of which has an idea capable of being
developed in a separate paragraph: e.g.
Ex (14)
The conflict in darfur is political and it is ethnic. I think the
people in that place live in peace although they are different
trips. But the government go there and make the problem. Also
I think the conflict is between the arab and nonarab because the
arab people killed the non arab and after that they fighted each
other.
Ex (15)
my university have many beautiful buildings such as big library
and big halles for studing different subjects. The lecture room
contain many chair which are very confortable. In the middle of
university we find long street round this street many bunches. We
find too offices which have modern furnitures like chairs and
tables.
With reference to group (A)’s paragraphs, we can see that there are
two features characterizing the students' paragraphs: they either deviated
from the topic sentence or accumulated a number of undeveloped topic
sentences into a single paragraph. A similar result is arrived at by Abdullah
(2000:187): who conducted a research to evaluate Sudanese EFL writing
discourse competence. His subjects were chosen from the students in some
national Sudanese universities. Abdullah found that there were two patterns
that characterized the students' paragraphs: first, some students handled a
whole essay in a single paragraph; second, a single paragraph may itself
embody a number of paragraphs.
Concerning the students in group (B), their performance in
developing the topic sentence reveals that 53,3% of them failed to develop
their topic sentences: 33,3% of them totally deviated from the topic
sentence, while 20% were able to partially develop it. Those who completely
failed to develop their topic sentences –just like the students in group (A) –
came up with a series of sentences each of which could be considered a topic
sentence in its own right. To illustrate this point, consider the following
examples:
Ex(16)
I think the conflict in Darfur rather political than an ethnic
one. This my opinion and the reality on the ground so. Darfur
is consists of more than one tribes, these tribes naturally
mixed up with each other and made social textile that make
the people live together in spite of differences in language or
color as one tribe. The conflict of resources raises
occasionally.
Ex (17)
My university has got ahigh building it has divided in more
tha six department, Any department have one or two
lecture's room or partically laps. Also has got libraries. One
it is called Main library and art library. More ever have
other department libraries. In addition to have all
equipments like comfortable chairs and bunches and so on.
So I am going to say my university it is most famous
university in Sudan.
In example (16), the student opened his paragraph by a statement,
which supposed to be a topic sentence, claiming that “the conflict in Darfur
is political rather than an ethnic one”. No specifics are presented to support
this comparison statement; however, the student thrust a new topic sentence,
which can be developed into a paragraph in its own right. Instead of
strengthening his argument and showing how the conflict in Darfur is a
political rather than an ethnic one, the student moved to write about the
social textile in Darfur and he tried to develop this topic by introducing
specifics, but he left his topic sentence at the beginning of the paragraph
undeveloped.
Away from the spelling, inflection, and cohesion complications, in
example (17) the student devoted a big part of the paragraph to report the
parts of his university: buildings, departments, lecture rooms, libraries, labs,
equipment, chairs, benches, etc; however, he gave description to no one of
them. The student inconveniently introduced a new idea in the last sentence
(i.e. my university is most famous university in Sudan), which seems to be
illogical since he did not present any premises to justify this concluding
statement. Imhoof and Hudson (1975:120) state that "the conclusion is
usually a single sentence at the end of the paragraph and is often a
restatement, in different words, of the controlling idea". They add that "a
successful paragraph usually contains a paragraph terminator, which
logically concludes the idea discussed in the paragraph in a psychological
satisfying manner". So judging by these criteria, the student neither restated
his main idea in the concluding sentence nor does the concluding sentence
logically bring the paragraph to the end in a satisfying manner.
However, only 13,3% of the students in Group (B) managed to
develop their topic sentences and end up with good paragraphs. See the
example bellow:
Ex (18)
Smoking is bad for health. This is true fact because smoking is
very dangerous for our health and it is the main cause for many
diseases like cancer, and lungs diseases, and heart attack, and a
lot of other diseases. Smoking is also bad for our health because
it make healthy people do not eat their Normal meals. Smoking is
not bad only for smokers but it is also bad for the people who sit
with the smokers. The negative smokers may face the same health
problem. At the end I can say that smoking is really dangerous
for health.
The paragraph in example (18) is considered as one of the well
developed paragraphs written by a student in group (B). The student here
put down the topic sentence "smoking is bad for health" at the beginning of
the paragraph, which gives the reader a clue about the idea that will be
discussed in the paragraph (i.e. health hazards of smoking), and then he went
on to develop this controlling idea, introducing specifics such as kinds of
diseases caused by smoking (i.e. cancer, lung disease, and heart attack).
Subordinates were introduced to strength the statement in the topic sentence:
the negative impact of smoking on the smokers' appetite and the
consequence of passive smoking. The student also introduced a concluding
sentence at the end of the paragraph in which he restated his controlling
idea.
Eventually, we can say that the development of this paragraph
supports its controlling idea and logically relates to it.
In conclusion, we can see that the performance of both groups of the
students varies with regard to the topic sentence development. A little
progress can be seen on the performance of the students in group (B), which
seems to support the second assumption of the research which says: There is
strong relation between the learners' academic levels and their paragraph
writing abilities. Accordingly, the forth level students outperform their
second level counterparts.
Furthermore, the above result can be supported statistically from the
data analysis where 46,7% of the students in group (A) scored grades
ranging between (0-4), and 23,3% scored grades ranging between (5-9).
While 33,3% of the students in group (B) scored grades ranging between (0-
4), 20% of them scored grades ranging between (5-9), and 46,6% of the
students in group (B) scored grades over the pass grade - taking the pass to
be (10). See the tables bellow:
Table (3): group (A)'s performance in the topic Sentence
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
14
46,7%
5-9
7
23,3%
10-14
9
30%
15-20
0
0%
Total
30
100%
Table (4): group (B)'s performance in the topic Sentence
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
10
33,3%
5-9
6
20 %
10-14
10
33,3%
15-20
4
13,3%
Total
30
99,9%
4.2.3 The Students' Performance in Paragraph Unity
Imhoof and Hudson (1975:109) state that unity in a paragraph is
secured by establishing a controlling idea, or a topic sentence, and then by
selecting material which is closely enough related to the topic sentence that
truly develops and supports it. If you were writing a paragraph to develop
the topic sentence "Economic inflation directly affects the ordinary persons'
standard of living", the comment "directly affects the ordinary persons'
standard of living" would justify and suggest supporting statements about
food costs, clothing prices, mortgage interest rates, and rent level, but
probably not statements about endangered species of animals or changing
weather patterns in North America.
Accordingly, the researcher tries to evaluate the students' performance
in paragraph unity: 66, 7% of the students in group (A) failed to maintain
unity of thought in their paragraphs. They spoiled the unity either by adding
unrelated material or sentences the contents of which are not adequately
interrelated to form a unit of thought. See the examples bellow:
Ex(19)
In the world there is bad things in our lives. e.g
pollution, deforestation, fat, smoking. all these bad
things I think are bad for our health. smoking gives our
health a lot of ills that means human do not work
because the health become very bad. The smoking
pollutes the air and the place .
Ex (20)
Darfur is alarge state in Eastern Sudan and many tribes with many
races live in it. They live in peace but there is alittle trouble some
times happen. The conflict in Darfur firstly is an ethnic and after
the government divided in 1998 this ethnic conflict move to the top
because the state of Darfur is the central element of
the
government party. At the end I think the conflict is ethnic one.
The students in the examples above spoiled the unity of their
paragraphs by adding ideas which are not closely related to their central
ideas. In example (19) for instance, the paragraph lacks unity because the
student introduced materials that do not relate to his\her restricted topic:
"smoking is bad for health". The student devoted a big part of his\her
paragraph to report a number of bad things for human beings' lives such as
pollution, deforestation, fat, and at the end he revealed the subject matter of
the paragraph.
Similarly, the paragraph in example (20) lacks unity of thought
because the student introduced a sentence at the beginning of the paragraph
which carries a geographical idea about Darfur: "Darfur is a large a state",
then he thrust another idea about the peaceful co-existence in Darfur, and at
end he also introduced a new idea about the nature of conflict in the area:
"the conflict in Darfur is an ethnic one". The unity of thought in this
paragraph is violated as the student skipped around from one idea to another,
exactly as described by Allen and Park (1979:18) who state that "students
violate the principle of unity for two reasons: first, it is violated because the
writer of the paragraph momentarily forgets his\her central idea and
introduces a sentence or two not sufficiently related to the topic. Second,
because the writer is "a sentence-oriented"; he sees and uses the sentence as
a unit for the expression of one idea, but not the paragraph".
With regard to the students in group (B), their performance in
paragraph unity reveals that (53, 3%) of them violated the unity of thought
in their paragraphs – just like the students in group (A). They did not stick
to the central ideas of their paragraphs, and some of them introduced
sentences which do not contribute to the readers' understanding of the main
idea of the paragraph. See the examples bellow:
Ex(21)
When dealing with international problem, I think it is necessary to
distinguish between clashes that grow up for political, economical,
and ethnical reasons. And who is responsible about escalating of
the problem.
I will consider Darfur issue as one of the African Horn issue.
Regarding to historical disorder in the region. But I think the
government is responsible for greation of the problems between
the ethnical groups in the region. Especially in ethnical cleansing,
massacre. Genocide.
In my opinion Darfur conflict is ethno-poltical problem that
characterized after the political conflict between the governce
groubs, after joined for popular defence.
Ex (22)
Smoking is one of the beggest health problem because it can be
considered as a threat in contemporary world. The common
disease that caused by smoking are cancer, lung diseases, also
smoking make blood poison and other diseases. So there are many
society and organizations broking out to act on fighting the
smoking and in all aspects. And also there are medical
organizations supported by UN to work hard to prevent smoking
because it going to be a great problem in the world.
The paragraphs in the examples above lack the unity of thought
because each of which contains more than one idea. In example (21), for
instance, the paragraph contains multi ideas: the writer raised the idea of
distinguishing different types of clashes at the beginning of the paragraph,
then he moved to the idea of government's responsibility towards creation of
the conflict. At the end he expressed his opinion about the conflict. Similar
situation is described by Allen and Park (1979: 19) who state that "the writer
sometimes violates his paragraph unity because he puts down one sentence,
and then thinks up another; working from his second sentence, he creates a
third, and from the third, a forth, and so on. The consequence of such a
method of composing is often a gradual shifting of the subject ground,
sometimes so imperceptible as one reads from sentence to sentence that one
must compare the beginning of the paragraph to the end to realize how far
the writer has gone astray from what he started out to say. Similarly, the
paragraph writer in example (22) introduced the health consequence of
smoking in the first two sentences; however, he dedicated the rest of the
paragraph to the organizations which fight against smoking.
On the other hand, only 10% of the students in Group (B) came up
with unified paragraphs obtaining grades ranging between (15-20). They
succeeded to stick to the central idea of their paragraphs – giving them unity
as defined by Allan and Park (1969:20) who point out that "in order to have
unity a writer must stick to one point. He should say one thing about one
topic in each formal unit". See the examples bellow:
EX (23)
The conflict in Darfur is political rather than ethnic. The
political nature of the conflict came as the result to
accumulation of marginalization in the area many decades ,
especially on the level of development. This political nature has
been crystallized in armed rebellion which has been trying, for
political reasons, to depict what is running in Darfur as an
ethnic conflict between Arabs and Africans or non-Arabs. In
fact the tribes of Darfur live together for thousands of years in
peace without such kind of clashes, therefore the conflict in
Darfur is just temporary political ones.
EX (24)
My university is the very green university. From the door of the
university you find hundreds of green trees, these tree are in
lines which gives the university very beautiful shape. Some of
theses trees are very old and some of them are young. You can
find mango trees, mahoganee trees, palm leaves trees and many
anothers. Between trees you can find grasses. And water always
is runing in small chanels. In my university some time you can
see animals like monkeys which are very interesting animals.
My university is just like forest.
Away from the grammatical, spelling, and cohesion complications,
the paragraphs in examples (23&24) are unified in thought. For instance in
example (23) the student presented information about one central idea: "the
conflict in Darfur is political rather than ethnic one". All the other sentences
relate to the central idea, and justifications are presented to support the
comparison statement laid down on the topic sentence. Similarly, in example
(24) for instance, although the student deviated from the prescribed paragraph,
he came up with a unified paragraph. He discussed a single idea: "the green
cover in the university". In that he described trees, grass between trees, and
gave examples of the types of trees.
He also introduced a subordinate idea
such as the kind of animals usually live in green areas like monkeys. In the
concluding sentence the student restated his main idea in different words (i.e.
my university is just like a forest), which brings the paragraph to the end in a
psychological satisfying manner.
In conclusion we can see that the performance of both groups varies
with regard to the paragraph unity. A little progress can be observed in the
performance of group (B), which could be attributed to the fact that these
students have been studying English language for more years (i.e. eleven
years in particular), while the students in group (A) have been studying
English for eight years. Furthermore, this result seems to support the second
assumption of the research (see 1.5).
The above result, which shows that the students in group (B)
outperform their group (A) counterparts in maintaining the paragraph unity,
can be supported statistically: 10% of the students in group (A) scored
grades ranging between (0-4), and 56,7% of them scored grades ranging
between (5-9), taking the pass grade to be (10). On the other hand, 13,3% of
the students in group (B) scored grades ranging between (0-4), and 40 %
ranging between (5-9), while 36,7% of the students in group (B) scored
grades ranging (10-14) – over the pass grade. The tables below summarize
the results:
Table (5): group (A)'s performance in paragraph unity
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
3
10%
5-9
17
56,7%
10-14
10
33,3%
15-20
0
0%
Total
30
100%
Table (6): group (B)'s performance in paragraph unity
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
4
13,3%
5-9
12
40 %
10-14
11
36,7%
15-20
3
10%
Total
30
100%
4.2.4. The Students' Performance in Cohesive Devices:
Readers are confused when a text lacks cohesion: they cannot easily
follow from one part to another, cannot tell which ideas are more important,
and cannot determine how ideas are related. To connect the pieces of a text
and to signal their relationships, skilled writers usually make use of cohesive
devices. Zamel (1983:22) states that cohesive devices are crucial in writing,
for they turn separate clauses, sentences, and paragraphs into connected
prose, signaling the relationships between ideas, and making obvious thread
of meaning the writer is trying to communicate.
With reference to the performance of group (A) in the use of cohesive
devices, it has been shown that 76,7 % of the students failed to select correct
cohesive devices in their paragraphs, and only 23,3% handle the matter of
using cohesive devices – they obtained grades ranging between (10-14),
taking the pass grade to be (10). The poor performance of the students in the
use of cohesive devices is manifested in inappropriateness, redundancy, and
insufficient use of links. The examples below are the cases in points:
Ex (25):
The university of Khartoum it is the biggest university in
Sudan. In the university there are many beautiful lecture
rooms. In these lecture rooms we can understand the
lectures easy from him. However every where you can
find bunches. Last, the University of Khartoum it is the
mother of universities and it is very nice.
Ex (26):
The conflict
in Darfur it is political rather than ethnic. The
government is responsible for everything in Darfur. Therefore I
think the people in that place live together for many years without
any problem. All tribes live without fighting in the past, only three
years ago started fighting
In example (25) the use of the pronoun "it" (in lines 1&5) can be
classified as redundant, because the pronoun "it" in both cases is a repeated
subject in the sentences which makes them redundant. Another use of
cohesive device is that the student inappropriately used the pronoun "him"
(in line 4); he used the pronoun without any a prior reference, thus
disturbing the readers who might wonder to whom the pronoun "him"
refers? The student also inappropriately used the linking word "however" (in
line 4) which indicates adversative addition; however, the addition in the
example is a positive one. In example (26), for instance the word "therefore"
is an incorrect conjunctive adverb connector, since the context and logic do
not warrant a true cause-effect relationship between the two adjacent
sentences.
As for insufficient use of linking devices, it is a noticeable
phenomenon among group (A)'s writing. For example, in these paragraphs:
Ex (27)
Smoking is bad for health. It is very bad it make many diseases. Like
cancer and heart disease and many other. The smoking it is bad
social behavior. Negative smoking is the third bad thing. Smoking is
very negative for our health.
Ex (28)
I think the conflict in Darfur is political proplem not ethnic
conflict. the political partys are responsible for that conflict. The
two tribe fight each other for political reason not ethnic. This is my
opinion about this conflict.
Away from the unity of thought and the topic sentence development,
the paragraphs in the examples above lack cohesive devices. In example
(27), for instance, there is complete absence of links as the paragraph-writer
wrote separate sentences and he did not use a single linking word between
them. For instance, it would have been correct if the student used additional
conjunctions such as "also" at the beginning of the forth sentence in order to
introduce another bad aspect of smoking. In addition, it would have been
more rhetorical if the student used linking word to show that he is
concluding his idea (I.e. finally, at the end, etc). Similarly, in example (28)
the paragraph-writer wrote his paragraph in separate sentences and did not
use linking works to signal the relationships between the ideas in these
sentences; for instance there is a cause and effect relationship between the
ideas in the first and the second sentences which can be signaled by devices
such as “therefore”, “consequently”, etc.
With regard to Group (B)'s performance in the use of cohesive
devices, the situation is not much better as 66,7% of the students failed to
select correct cohesive devices in their paragraphs. Inappropriateness,
redundancy, and insufficient use of links feature the students' paragraphs.
See the examples bellow:
Ex (29)
Smoking is bad for health. It is as far many reasons that smoking
is bad for health it has strong relation with cancer and heart
attacks and lung diseases and blood diseases and heart diseases
and many other. Secondly smoking is bad for health is that
smokers, through negative smoking, cause health damage for
others.
Ex (30)
Darfur is milti-cultural region where people lived in peace. Moreover
there is small clashs between the people there. It also merely a
political crisis which enclude avariety of personal benefits, and also
the reason of this conflict is the international organizations and UN
and USA, and also the Sudanese opposition.
In example (29) the student inappropriately used “as far” ( in line 1)
getting the reader confused by semantic and syntactic inappropriate use. He
also introduced the word “secondly” (in line 4) which indicates listing;
however, he missed the linking word “firstly”, thereby confusing the reader
who has certain expectation about what can and can not follow the particular
linking word.
Similarly, in example (30) the student inappropriately used the device
"moreover", since the sentence, which follows the device, does not form a
positive additional idea to the preceding one. It would have been correct if
the student used negative additional device such as "however". It also
appears that there is excessive use of certain devices such as "also", and
"and". The student used these connectives to establish cordinated sentences
that convey ideas of addition. A similar situation is described by Khamra
(1986:21) that such a student suffers not only from ignorance of rhetorical
principles that underlie English discourse, but from deficiency in the
following two areas: (1) the ability to write long sentence that requires
various coordinating and subordinating tools, and (2) knowledge of the
meaning and proper use of linking devises, especially those needed to
establish intersentential relationships.
Generally speaking, the overall performance of both groups of the
students in the use of cohesive devices, in comparison with other paragraph
features, is poor. The analysis reveals that this feature represents a real
problematic area for the students. A similar result is arrived at by Gubair
(1985): he conducted a research based on Halliday and Hassan’s theory of
Coherence and Cohesion. His subjects were chosen from second and forth
year students at university level. He investigated the students’ performance
in the use of cohesive devices in English language and the strategies they use
when lacking the knowledge of cohesive devices. Gubair concluded that the
students had problems with cohesion and coherence, and that a couple of
compensatory communicative strategies, such as overgeneralization and
avoidance of using specific ties, were used. Moreover, he observed that the
students always rely on L1.
Furthermore, the statistical analysis reveals that the students'
performance in the use of cohesive devices is poor: 56,7% of the students in
group (A) scored grades ranging between (0-4), and 20% of them scored
grades ranging between (5-9). Similarly, 16,7% of the students in group (B)
scored grades ranging between (0-4), and 50% of them scored grades
ranging between (5-9). See the table below:
Table
(7): Group (A)'s performance in Cohesive Devices
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
17
56,7%
5-9
6
20%
10-14
7
23,3%
15-20
0
0%
Total
30
100%
Table (8): Group (B)'s performance in Cohesive Devices
Grade
Frequency
Percentage
0-4
5
16,7
5-9
15
50%
10-14
9
30%
15-20
1
3,3%
Total
30
100%
The reason behind the students' poor performance in the use of
cohesive devices can be attributed to the insufficient instruction on cohesive
devices at both levels (pre-tertiary and tertiary level). This justifies the fact
that the performance of the students of both groups is poor although they are
at different academic levels.
4.3 Conclusion
Analysis of the students’ performance shows that the overall
performance of the students in paragraph building is poor. Although the
students in group (B) outperform their group (A) counterparts, still the
general Mean remains below the average (i.e. 39,86). It has also been shown
that the students in both groups show low grasp of paragraph length and
indentation and the use of cohesive devices; while in the other paragraph
features, such as the topic sentence development and the unity of thought,
the group (A)'s performance is worse than their group (B) counterparts’.
The overall poor performance in paragraph writing among the
students can be attributed to the weakness of general standard in English
language, which resulted from insufficient instruction of practice the writing
skills at both levels (school and university). Regarding the school level, the
subjects were taught (SPINE SEIRES) in the English language syllabuses. In
(SPINE) a little concern is paid to the components of writing a good text.
The total percentage of writing activities of the last book of the series (i.e.
SPINE 6) is about 25% of the whole textbook. In each of the ten chapters
comprising the book, there are four sections, one of which is devoted to
writing activities, usually entitled: notes, summary and composition. There
is total absence of models and exercises on paragraph writing. At the
university level; however, the situation is worse as there is only one course
on writing among eighteen EFL courses given to the students at the
Department of English, Faculty of Arts, University of Khartoum throughout
their university study.
Chapter Five
Summary, Implications and Recommendations
5.0 Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to summarize the results of the study,
evaluate the study, show its pedagogical implications in the light of its
results and suggest areas for further research.
5.1 Summary of the Results
The research has been an attempt to investigate the paragraph writing
ability of Sudanese EFL learners at university level, and to evaluate the
relation between the learners’ paragraph writing abilities and their academic
levels, taking the case of the second and forth level students at the
University of Khartoum, Faculty of Arts, Department of English.
In investigating the research problem the following questions have
been posed:
1.
How
competent
are
Sudanese
EFL
learners
in
constructing a paragraph in English?
2.
Have the paragraph writing abilities anything to do with the
learners’ academic level?
In
searching
for
these
questions,
the
following
assumptions have been made:
1. Generally speaking, Sudanese EFL learners show low grasp of
paragraph structure in English due to their limited study of
writing.
2. There is a strong relationship between learners’ academic level
and
their paragraph writing abilities. Accordingly, the fourth
level students outperform their second level counterparts.
These assumptions have been realized in terms of the following
results:
1. 80, 3% of the second level students' performance in paragraph writing
is below the average.
2. 60 % of the forth level students' performance in paragraph writing is
below the average.
3. The study has shown that the students in both levels show inadequate
grasp of the paragraph length and indentation and the use of cohesive
devices.
4. The performance of the forth level students is better than their second
level counterparts in terms of the topic sentence development, and the
unity of thought in the paragraph.
5.2 Recommendations
5.2. 1 Pedagogical Implications
Although this research is basically concerned with the paragraph
writing abilities of Sudanese EFL learners at the tertiary level, its results
can be useful and of great value for learners, as well as teachers and course
designers.
As shown in (1.7.) one objective of the research is to improve
Sudanese EFL learners’ paragraph writing abilities. Students, in fact, have
to concentrate on both theoretical and practical principles of paragraph
writing.
The results of the study reveal some major problems in paragraph
writing among Sudanese EFL learners such as inadequate development of
the topic sentence, lack of unity, and wrong use of cohesive devices.
Therefore, the students have to pay more attention to the requirements of
paragraph writing and should practise reading good paragraph models to
view how professional writers construct their paragraphs.
The results of this research can also, be useful for teachers. It has
shown that there is insufficient instruction and training in writing a
paragraph. In lectures, teachers should give their students more practise on
paragraph writing. Teachers should follow the following techniques:
a.
Give the students scramble sentences and ask them to
rearrange them into a proper paragraph.
b.
Ask the students to write a short paragraph about
themselves titled, for instance “Write a paragraph about
yourself.” The paragraph should include personal data
such as name, address, age and place of birth. Assure your
students that they cannot fail this assignment. Everyone
who completes it will receive the pass grade. Read the
papers and record personal comments in order to give
feedback.
c.
Before the students can develop main ideas and give
supporting details, they need to have an idea about
understanding how things are related and practice the
subordination of one idea to another. Provide plenty of
practice by having students think of as many subtopics to
an idea as possible.
d.
Provide the students with different techniques of
developing a paragraph such as development by listing,
comparison, description, etc, to enable them to recognize
the structure of paragraph discourse and functions of
language.
Finally, the results of the research can also, be useful for course
designers. The research findings show that there are shortcomings in terms
of paragraph writing exercises in Sudanese EFL syllabus at university level.
Therefore, the concerned EFL course designers should design sort of
remedial work on the basics of paragraph writing in English, and this work
should take a form of intensive paragraph writing practice. The course
designers also should design a training course for the Sudanese EFL teachers
at all levels –pre-tertiary and tertiary – in paragraph writing in order to
qualify these teachers to do the job properly.
5.2.2 Suggestion for Further Research
As shown in (1.5.), this study is evaluative in nature. It sets out to assess
the extent to which Sudanese EFL learners in the University of Khartoum,
Faculty of Arts, Department of English have good knowledge in terms of
paragraph writing as a result of their long experience (average of ten years)
with EFL courses. The research also aims at assessing the relation between
paragraph writing ability and the students’ academic level. However, this
study has merely scratched the surface of paragraph writing. More research
is required to complement the findings of the present study. The following
are a few possible directions for further research:
1.
This study has been carried out on students who belong to a
single university (i.e. University of Khartoum). In fact, the students who
join this university relatively score higher grades in the Sudanese
School Certificate Exams in comparison to the students who join other
universities. So, these independent variables may lead to the argument
that, depending on what kind of university the students belong to, they
can have different writing behaviors. Further research, therefore should
be directed to investigate the paragraph writing abilities of students
across Sudanese universities.
2.
The present study sheds light on the nature of paragraph writing
and investigates paragraph writing abilities among the researched
subjects. However, the paragraph is a unit of writing that comes before
the essay. Further research, therefore should deal with the essay writing
ability.
Bibliography
Allen, D. and J. Parks (1969): Essential Rhetoric. Boston: Mifflin Co.
Allright, R. (1979): “Language Learning Through Communicative
Practice”. In C.J. Brumfit, and K. Johnson (ed): The
Communicative Approach to Language Teaching. , pp. 167-181.
Oxford: O.U.P.
Arnedt, V. and R. White (1999): Writing Process. London: Longman.
Attia, S. (1990): Error Analysis in the EFL performance of
Khartoum University Freshmen.
Unpublished Thesis, University of Khartoum.
Becker, A.L. (1975): “A Linguistic Image of Nature: The Burmese
Numerative Classifier System”. International Society of
Language, Vol.9. pp.109-112.
Brookes, A., and P. Grundy (1998): The Beginning of Writing. Cambridge:
C.U.P.
Brown, J. and G. Yule (1983): Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: C.U.P.
Broughton, G., Brumfit and Flavell (ed) (2003): Teaching English as a
Foreign Language. Sussex: Taylor and Francis Group.
Connor, U. (1987): “Resaech Frontiers in Writing Analysis”.
TESOL Quarterly, Vol.21.pp677-696.
__________ (1996): Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross Cultural Aspects of Second
Language Writing. Cambridge: C.U.P.
Davidson, D. (1964): Concise Composition and Rhetoric. New York:
Charles Scribner’s Son.
Escholz, P.A. (1980): “The Pose Model approach: Using Product in
Process”. McClelland (ed). In T.R. Donoan and B.W.
Freedman, A.,I. Pringle and J. Yalden(ed) (1983): Learning to Write: First
Language\Second Language. New York: Longman.
Gubair, D. (1985): Foreign Learners’ Cohesive Devices: An Analysis and
Evaluation of Foreign Learners’ Knowledge of Cohesive
Devices. Unpublished Thesis, University Of Khartoum.
Goody,J. (1977): The Domestication of Savage Mind. Cambridge: C.U.P.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1979): “Towards a Sociological Semantics”. In C.J.
Brumfit, and K. Johnson (ed): The Communicative Approach
to Language Teaching. Oxford: O.U.P.
_____________ (1985): An Introduction to Functional Grammar.
London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. and R, Hassan (1976): Cohesion in English. London:
Longman.
Horowitz, D. (1986): “Process not Product Less Than Meet the Eye”.
TESOL Quarterly,. Vol.20.pp.141-144.
Imhoof, M. and H.Hudson (1975): From Paragraph to Essay. Oxford: O.U.P.
Johnstone, B. (2002): Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Jordan, R.R. (1997): English for Academic Purposes. Cambridge: C.U.P.
Kathleen, A., Hart, C. Alice, and Heim (1982): Sentences, Paragraphs and
Essays An Integrated Approach. Canada: Little and Brown
Company limited.
Kharma, N. (1997): Error in English Among Arabic Speakers: Analysis and
Remedy. Beirut: Lebanon Publishers.
Krashen, S.D. (1984): Writing Research: Theory and Application. Oxford:
Pergamon Institute of Education.
Lansford, A. and R. Connors (1989): The Saint Martin’s Handbook. New
York: Saint Martin Press.
Macmillan Encyclopedia (1986): London: Macmillan London Limited.
Mathews, P. and Tura (1973): Practice, Plan and Write. New York:
American Book Company.
Mathews, A. et al (1990): At the Chalk Face, Practical Techniques in
Language Teaching. London: Edward Arnold.
McCarter, S. (1998): A Book on Writing. London: Intelli Gene.
McMahan, E., and S. Day (1984): Rhetoric Writing. New York: McGrawHill Book Company.
McDonough, J. and C. Shaw (1993): Materials and Methods in ELT: A
Teacher Guide. U.S.A: Blackwell.
Mohammed, Y. (1999): Paragraph Writing Awareness Among Sudanese
Preliminary Students: The Case of the Preliminary
Medical Students. Unpublished Thesis, University of
Khartoum.
Morris, I. (1980): English Teaching Perspectives. London: Longman.
Palmer, F. (1971):Grammar Discourse. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Peters, P. (1986): “Getting the Theme Across: A study of Dominant Function
in the Academic Writing of University Students”. In B. Couture (ed):
Functional Approaches to Writing: Research Perspectives: Pp. 169.
London :Frances.
Raimes, A. (1983): Techniques in Teaching Writing. New York: O.U.P.
Rivers, W. (1981): Teaching Foreign Language Skills. University Of
Chicago: Chicago Press.
Rooks, G, M. (1999): Paragraph Power. New York: Marry Jane Peluso.
Scinto, L.F.(1977): “Textual Competence: A preliminaryAnalysis of Orally
Generated Texts”. In Linguistics: An International Review, Vol. 194. pp.5.
Smith, W.F. and R.D. Liedich(1965): From Thought to Theme. New York:
Harcourt Brace and World Inc.
Van Dijk, T.A. (1980): Text and Context: Exploration in the Semantics and
Pragmatics of Discourse. , London: Longman.
Widdowson, H.G. (1977): Teaching Language as Communication.Oxford:
O.U.P.
Zamel, V. (1985): “Responding to Students Writing”.TESOL Quarterly. Vol.
19. pp79-101