Improving Student Engagement, Referencing Skills, and Argument Quality via Panel Discussions in the Prewriting Phase: A Case Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1507.14Keywords:
prewriting phase, panel discussions, student engagement, referencing skills, collaborative learningAbstract
The prewriting phase is essential for academic writing since it sets a foundation for quality research and effective writing. This study aims to boost student engagement and improve academic writing skills through the panel discussion strategy. Traditional instructional methods and specific prewriting techniques appear insufficient for capturing students’ attention. Furthermore, lecturing frequently appears didactic, leading to limited constructive feedback because of large class sizes, with activities typically perceived as passive. This study explores students' focus and responses during discussions and writing research papers to improve their referencing skills and the quality of their arguments. It also assesses the participants' preferences and interactions in panel discussions during prewriting activities. The sample for this study consisted of 73 students enrolled in the ENG 102 course at General Education Department, the Modern College of Business and Science, utilizing the convenience sampling technique. The data collection tools included presentations, observation checklists, and surveys. The findings highlight the effectiveness of panel discussions as an innovative instructional strategy, fostering a more supportive environment among peers that encourages students to build confidence as researchers while adhering to academic standards. However, the variability in the sources consulted and the overall referencing quality indicate a need for further guidance. This research further confirms that panel discussions enhance students’ abilities, particularly in citing and producing more organized work, ensuring better feedback, exploring additional sources, assisting with citations, and conducting peer reviews.
References
Abo El-yazid, E. S., Elsayed, K. A., & Ebrahim, R. M. R. (2024). Enhancing fourth year nursing students’ self-confidence and engagement by using panel discussion strategy. Journal of Nursing Science Benha University, 5(1), 124-144. Retrieved October 9, 2024, from https://doi.org/10.21608/jnsbu.2024.333424
Alawad, E. A. (2025). AI-driven analysis: A case study on assessing argumentation proficiency and skill development through sequential submissions. Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations, 24(1), 108-117. Retrieved February 2, 2025, from https://philolinginvestigations.com/
Alawad, E. A., & Hamid, F. A. (2025). Comparative analysis of feedback practices and perspectives in online academic writing assessments at two regional tertiary institutions. World Journal of English Language, 15(4), 327 -340. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v15n4p327
Alawad, E. A. (2024). Synecdoche-related comprehension challenges for Modern College of Business and Science EFL students: A case study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 15(5), 1571-1580. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1505.18
Becze, S. (2024). Prewriting strategies. University Writing & Speaking Center. Retrieved June 13, 2024, from https://www.unr.edu/writing-speaking-center/writing-speaking-resources/prewriting-strategies.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (pp. 57–86). National Academy Press. Retrieved February 2, 2025, from https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/10067/chapter/7
Carr, R., Palmer, S., & Hagel, P. (2015). Active learning: The importance of developing a comprehensive measure. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), 173-186.https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787415589529
Ebralidze, P. (2023). Engagement theory: Fostering a meaningful learning experience. Anthropology, 11(1),100 - 297. https://doi.org/10.35248/2332-0915.23.11.297
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. https://doi.org/10.2307/356600
Golzar, J., Tajik, O., & Noor, S. (2022). Convenience sampling. International Journal of Educational and Learning Studies.1(2), 72-77. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijels.2022.162981
Green, A., & de Bodisco, C. (2020). Using team-based learning in discussion and writing classes. International Review of Economics Education, 35, 100195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2020.100195
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1986). Writing research and the writer. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1106–1113. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1106
Kallenbach, S. (1999). Emerging themes in adult multiple intelligences research. Focus on Basics, 3(A), 16-20. Retrieved February 18, 2025. https://www.ncsall.net/index.html@id=370.html
Kellogg, R. T. (1990). Effectiveness of prewriting strategies as a function of task demands. The American Journal of Psychology, 103(3), 327–342. University of Illinois Press.
Kempthorne, P., Mukhopadhyay, N., Sen, P. K., & Zacks, S. (1991). Research–How to do it: A panel discussion. Statistical Science, 6(2), 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177011820
Kennedy, G. E. (1983). The nature and quality of compensatory oral expression and its effects on writing in students of college composition. ERIC Document, 240, 597.
Lim, J. (2023). Exploring the relationships between interaction measures and learning outcomes through social network analysis: The mediating role of social presence. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00384-8
Linton, D. L., Pangle, W. M., Wyatt, K. H., Powell, K. N., & Sherwood, R. E. (2014). Identifying key features of effective active learning: The effects of writing and peer discussion. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 361–571. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0242
Marimuthu, P. D. (2024). Panel discussion as a teaching tool in the EFL classroom. International Education Studies, 15(1), 22-30.DOI: 10.24815/eej.v15i1.34769.
Mattanah, J., Holt, L., Feinn, R. et al. (2024). Faculty-student rapport, student engagement, and approaches to collegiate learning: exploring a mediational model. Current Psychology, 43, 23505–23516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06096-0
McConnell, D. A., Chapman, L., Czajka, C. D., Jones, J. P., Ryker, K. D., & Wiggen, J. (2017). Instructional utility and learning efficacy of common active learning strategies. Journal of Geoscience Education, 65(4), 604–625. https://doi.org/10.5408/17-249.1
Meyer, G. D. (1980). Speaking as a pre-writing activity: Its application to teaching community college freshman composition pupils. ERIC Document, No. ED185585. Retrieved February 9, 2025, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED185585
Nasiri, E., & Khojasteh, L. (2024). Evaluating panel discussions in ESP classes: An exploration of international medical students’ and ESP instructors’ perspectives through qualitative research. BMC Medical Education, 24(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05911-3
Neumann, H., & McDonough, K. (2014). Exploring student interaction during collaborative prewriting discussions and its relationship to L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, pp. 24, 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.009
Nguyen, T. D., Cannata, M., & Miller, J. (2016). Understanding student behavioral engagement: Importance of student interaction with peers and teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 109(2), 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2016.1220359
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. School Field, 7(2),133-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318
O'Mealia, S. (2011). How can prewriting strategies benefit students? Education Masters, Paper 14, 1–61. Retrieved February 9, 2025, from https://fisherpub.sjf.edu/education_ETD_masters/14
Paredes, F., Salcedo-Viteri, K., & Pinza-Tapia, E. (2023). Panel discussions to promote meaningful learning at distance education. Indonesian Journal of English Teaching, 12(2), 160-172. Retrieved February 12, 2025, from https://jurnalftk.uinsa.ac.id/index.php/IJET/article/view/2214
Piaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children. International Universities Press.
Ping, N. S., & Maniam, M. (2015). The effectiveness of Facebook group discussions on writing performance: A study in matriculation college. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 4(1), 30-37. DOI: http://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v4i1.4489
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830. 2004.tb00809.x
PurArjomandLangrudi, A., Chen, D., & Nguyen, A. (2016). Investigating the drivers of student interaction and engagement in online courses: A study of state-of-the-art. Informatics in Education, 15(2), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2016.14.
Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2021). Effects of an Engaging Process-Genre Approach on Student Engagement and Writing Achievements. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 38(5), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2021.1982431
Ranalli, J. (2021). L2 student engagement with automated feedback on writing: Potential for learning and issues of trust. Journal of Second Language Writing, p. 52, 100816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100816.
Reuell, P. (2019, September 4). Lessons in learning. Harvard Gazette. Retrieved February 3, 2025, from https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/09/study-shows-that-students-learn-more-when-taking-part-in-classrooms-that-employ-active-learning-strategies/
Schwerdt, G., & Wuppermann, A. C. (2009). Is traditional teaching really all that bad? A within-student between-subject approach. CESifo Working Paper Series No. 2634. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1396620 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1396620
Thow, M. K., & Murray, R. (2001). Facilitating student writing during project supervision: A practical approach. Physiotherapy, 87(3), 134–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9406(05)61080-2
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
Zhang, B. (2021). Engaging in dialogue during collaborative writing: The role of affective, cognitive, and social engagement. Language Teaching Research. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211054047
Zhang, F., Schunn, C., Chen, S., Li, W., & Li, R. (2023). EFL student engagement with giving peer feedback in academic writing: A longitudinal study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 64, 101255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101255
Zhang, Z., & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, pp. 36, 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.04.001
