A Case Study Applying Building A Scholar In Writing Model In An EAP Course. Is Critical Writing Progression Linear

Electronic Research Journal of Behavioural Sciences, Volume 4 (2021)
http://erjbehaviouralsciences.com/
7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
147
A Case Study: Applying Building a Scholar in Writing Model in an
EAP Course. Is Critical Writing Progression Linear?
Maria Shobeiry
PhD Candidate, Department of Applied Linguistics, University of Tehran, Iran
Email: maria.shobeiry@gmail.com
Abstract:
Critical thinking is not admired in the Iranian educational system; therefore, most Iranian
students face difficulties in the Western universities where they are supposed to write essays
from a critical viewpoint. Focusing on critical writing in an EAP course, this case study
examined the linearity of the critical writing developmental steps of three Iranian female
agricultural students as was proposed by the BSW model of Baily et al. (2015). Participants were
instructed for critical reading and writing skills within the framework of Davies and Barnett’s
(2015), Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy of critical thinking and education, and the BSW model for 21
weeks. Sixty-three essays of the participants (data) were coded based on three coding schemes:
1) 6-steps of BSW coding, 2) Combo-coding, 3) stage theory coding. To increase the internal
validity of the research and check for the reliability of the coding system the whole data were
coded twice by two expert researchers. The results showed no linear tendency in the participants’
critical writing developmental stages in contrast to what the BSW model proposed. Critical
thinking skills developed parallel to the writing proficiency steps and in some cases, critical
thinking outgrew the writing proficiency of the participants. The results have notable
implications for EAP teachers to understand the cognitive procedures of critical writing
development in the students and support them accordingly to achieve the greatest results.
Keywords: Critical thinking; critical writing; BSW model; linear model of critical writing
development; parallel model of critical writing development.
Introduction:
In the twenty-first century, with the rapid development of technology, communicative
devices, and social media networks, human beings deal with various value systems in different
aspects of life from all over the world. This, accordingly, challenges people to decide how to
posit their own assumptions, beliefs, and thinking frameworks with regard to the mainstream
conventions in various communities.
For a member of society, adhering to a certain personal conceptual framework, grounded
in the contextual values of the community, is of high importance. It includes deciding to what
extent individuals would accept and adapt to new conditions, positions, and information with
regard to their own framework of thinking. This simply is an example of practicing critical
thinking in everyday life.
Critical thinking is defined in many ways in the literature which are mostly consistent
with each other. The focal point of most of these definitions is that critical thinking is the way of
thinking about thinking in order to make the thinking process improved (Paul, 2012). Therefore,
critical thinking is not just thinking; rather, it is a self-improvement way of thinking (Paul,
2012.p.3). It entails examining propositions of any kind offered for acceptance in order to find

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
148
out whether they correspond to reality or not (Sumner, 1940). Therefore, critical thinking is the
product of education and training which will become a permanent mental power in the trained
individuals (Paul, 2012).
Critical thinking and language learning are supportive of each other and go hand in hand(
Li,2016); consequently, it seems essential to improve the critical thinking skill of the language
learners especially the ones who take English courses for academic purposes (EAP hereafter) as
they need to master essay writing in English to pass through their courses (Wallac, 2003).
Among the main skills practiced in the regular EAP courses, reading and writing are of
remarkable importance (Murawska, 2017; Chanock et al., 2012; Vered, 2016) in that when we
read an academic text we open up a door to a new world to ourselves and when we write, we
translate our inner meanings into public words and put our ideas and experiences into written
forms (Vered, 2016). In order to achieve desirable results in an EAP program, instructors should
be provided with a clear and coherent teaching framework in which instructional procedures and
assessment systems are identified clearly in detail (Paul & Elder, 2013).
Among the many teaching and evaluation frameworks presented in the literature, this
study is predominantly focused on the BSW (Building a Scholar in Writing) model proposed by
Bailey, Zanchetta, Velasco, and Hassan (2015) because, apart from the traditional models of
teaching writing which mainly emphasize the role of teachers’ corrective feedback in improving
learners’ writing (e. g. Wardle and Roozen, 2012; Rojab et al., 2017; Shobeiry, 2020), the BSW
model provides a comprehensive instructional and assessment framework and presents a six-step
developmental procedure model of critical writing. Since this model is fairly new, the aim of this
study is to explore the extent to which the BSW model is applicable to the critical writing
progression steps of the Iranian agricultural students in an EAP course.
Review of the related literature:
In this section, first, various definitions and perspectives toward the notion of critical
thinking are briefly reviewed; then, the concepts of critical thinking in EAP and critical writing
in EAP are described concisely respectively.
Critical thinking:
Critical thinking is the core of tertiary education and should be the main focus of
university preparation programs in advanced pedagogic systems (Wilson, 2016).In order to
define the concept of critical thinking first, we need to elaborate on two main approaches toward
the construct of critical thinking including the philosophical approach, and the cognitive
psychological approach.
The philosophical approach, toward critical thinking, is the conceptual framework in
which the main focus is on the characteristics and qualities of hypothetical critical thinkers rather
than their actual behaviors or actions (Lewis & Smith, 1993; Thayer-Bacon, 2000). In this
approach, critical thinkers are considered to be the ideal thinkers who are capable of approaching
different aspects of life from a logical, flexible, and innovative point of view (Sternberg, 1986).
In other words, this approach is mainly about what critical thinkers are capable of thinking under
the best circumstance rather than what they actually think (Paul, 1992). In this sense, American
Philosophical Association’s consensus describes ideal critical thinkers as individuals who are
curious in nature, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded, eager to be well-informed, receptive to
diverse viewpoints, and willing to consider other perspectives (Facione, 1990). From this

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
149
perspective, critical thinking is defined as “the propensity and skill to engage in an activity with
reflective skepticism” (McPeck, 1981, p. 8), “reflective and reasonable thinking that is focused
on deciding what to believe or do” (Ennis, 1985, p. 45), and “disciplined, self-directed thinking
that exemplifies the perfections of thinking appropriate to a particular mode or domain of
thought” (Paul, 1992, p. 9).
The second approach toward the notion of critical thinking is the cognitive psychological
approach in which the main focus is on how people actually think versus how they could or
should think under ideal conditions (Sternberg, 1986). This approach provides a list of skills or
procedures performed by critical thinkers (Lewis & Smith, 1993). Since the actual process of
thinking is unobservable, in this approach, the main focus of cognitive psychologists is on the
thinking behaviors of individuals. Accordingly, critical thinking is defined by cognitive
psychologists as “the mental processes, strategies, and representations people use to solve
problems, make decisions, and learn new concepts” (Sternberg, 1986, p. 3), “the use of those
cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome” (Halpern, 1998,
p. 450), and “seeing both sides of an issue, being open to new evidence that disconfirms your
ideas, reasoning dispassionately, demanding that claims be backed by evidence, deducing and
inferring conclusions from available facts, solving problems, and so forth” (Willingham, 2007, p.
8).
Considering these two approaches toward the concept of critical thinking, Bloom (1956)
included critical thinking in education systematically, by providing an instructional framework
and assessment system for higher-order thinking skills. He published his taxonomy of critical
thinking and education in 1956, with the cooperation of a team of cognitive psychologists, in
which the cognitive processes of learning and developing critical thinking skills in learners were
conscientiously and thoroughly described.
The main purpose of this taxonomy was to encourage critical thinking in the learners by
building up lower-level cognitive skills in them. Bloom’s taxonomy is hierarchical, with
“comprehension” at the bottom and “evaluation” at the top. The three highest levels of analysis,
synthesis, and evaluation are associated with critical thinking in this hierarchy (Kennedy et al.,
1991).
Consequently, from this perspective, critical thinking is defined in the literature of
education as “analyzing arguments, claims, or evidence, synthesizing ideas, and evaluating
contents, making inferences through inductive or deductive reasoning” (Ennis, 1985; Facione,
1990; Paul, 1992; Willingham, 2007) and ”judging or evaluating the learning materials” (Case,
2005; Ennis, 1985; Facione, 1990; Lipman, 1988; Tindal & Nolet, 1995; Willingham, 2007).
Reviewing the main conceptual frameworks and perspectives toward the notion of
critical thinking in the literature, this study is grounded in the framework of Bloom’s (1956)
taxonomy of critical thinking and pedagogy and works of scholars who advocated Bloom’s
perspective.
Critical thinking in EAP:
In the literature of EAP, there are two main ways through which critical thinking is
realized. First, thinking about the language, meaning analyzing how the structure of English
language is used to express ideas, claims, arguments, contents and thinking through the
language, meaning actively using the language to explore and present ideas and arguments
(Wallace, 2003; Lea & Street, 2006, Moore, 2013). Students who are preparing for studying in

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
150
English-speaking contexts need to go beyond thinking about the language. They should develop
a good understanding of the concept of critical thinking and learn to think through the language
to express their ideas and thoughts in their field of study (Paul, 2012).
During the process of critical thinking, as Paul (2012) states, one goes through three steps
of analyzing (breaking the materials down), synthesizing (bring parts together in a coherent
way), and evaluation (making judgments based on sound evidence). These steps lead learners to
consider various viewpoints toward a subject and develop logical assumptions about it. Critical
thinkers not only develop an accurate understanding of an issue but also have the ability to
recognize trends and predict outcomes and consequences of a certain issue within a specific
context (Vardi, 2013). In better words, critical thinking is the reasonable and reflective method
of thinking which is focused on deciding what to believe or do (Ennis, 2015) in order to reach a
sound and justifiable decision, conclusion, or judgment(Vardi, 2013).
Critical thinking should be at the heart of the EAP courses all over the world in that
critical thinking training programs are found to be remarkably essential to the success of the EAP
programs in the advanced educational systems (Dooey, 2010; Nikoopour et al., 2011; Paul, 2012;
Bagheri, 2015; Wilson, 2016).
EAP classes in which the main purpose to improve the critical thinking skill of the
learners give notable importance to the teachers’ realization of the stages through which students
pass to develop advanced critical thinking skills.
The stage theory of Elder and Paul (1996) delineates 6 developmental stages of learners’
critical thinking skill which is briefly reviewed as follows:
i. Stage one: unreflective thinkers who are not aware of the prominent role of
thinking in their lives. They lack the ability to self-monitor their thoughts and
explicitly assess their thinking process and improve it thereby. They are unaware
of the appropriate standards for the assessment of an idea such as clarity,
accuracy, precision, relevance, and logicality.
ii. Stage two: challenged thinkers who are aware of the prominent role of thinking
in life; but, their thinking framework is mostly flawed even though they are not
aware of it. They start involving concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications
in various aspects of life. They, also begin to develop standards for the assessment
of thoughts such as clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, and logicalness. At this
level, thinkers require to gain the insight that whatever intellectual skills they
have are applicable across the domains of their lives.
iii. Stage three: beginning thinkers who have already entered the domain of
actively thinking about subjects and taking up challenges concerning them. They
realize that they might have problems with their thinking frameworks; so, they try
to improve them by gaining insights on a deeper level. Beginning thinkers, unlike
challenged thinkers, are aware not only of thinking as such but also of the crucial
role of thinking procedure in shaping their ideas, assumptions, inferences,
implications, points of view, etc. They are at the beginning stages of establishing
standards for their arguments, assumptions, and beliefs; while, they have enough
thinking skills to monitor their own thoughts.
iv. Stage four: practicing thinkers who not only recognize the problems in their
thinking procedure but also recognize the need to compensate for these flaws
systematically. They actively analyze their thoughts and try to improve their

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
151
thinking frameworks by reading and research. However, they still have problems
with gaining insights on a deep level even though they consistently monitor their
thoughts and try to obtain assumptions, inferences, and implications with regard
to any phenomenon they come across. They recognize the need for systematicity
of critical thinking and internalize critical thinking skills as a habit.
v. Stage five: advanced thinkers who have established the habit of thinking
critically in all aspects of life. They actively evaluate their thoughts and thinking
process and have achieved insights into life on a deeper level. They can easily
identify areas of significant ignorance and prejudice in a context and they
continually strive to be fair-minded in facing such situations.
They are also capable of developing new fundamental habits of thought,
based on deep values to which they are committed, and internalizing them. They
are aware of what it takes to regularly assess their thinking for clarity, accuracy,
precision, relevance, and logicality.
vi. Stage six: master thinkers who not only systematically and constantly monitor
their thinking process, but also continually revise their thinking strategies in order
to improve them. Critical thinking for them is an intuitive skill in that they have
deeply internalized the basic skills of thought. They continually develop new
insights into problems at deeper levels of thought through experience and practice
in the process of self-assessment. They are committed to fair-minded thinking
methods and they intuitively assess their thinking procedure for clarity, accuracy,
precision, relevance, and logicality. People of good sense in education and
business seek out master thinkers in that they recognize the value and ability them
in thinking through complex issues with logical judgment and insights. Master
thinkers have a high degree of intellectual integrity, perseverance, courage,
autonomy, responsibility, and fair-mindedness (Elder & Paul, 1996).
Critical writing in EAP:
Writing, in general, is the pathway for transforming knowledge and advancing
consciousness which should be instructed in a critical framework in education in general and in
EAP programs in particular (Çavdar & Doe, 2012; McCutchen, 2011; Rowley, 2012). Critical
writing is defined as a writing skill that includes evaluation of theoretical assumptions,
construction of arguments, supporting or opposing arguments, presentation of thoughts, and
integration of ideas(McMillan & Raines, 2011, Çavdar & Doe, 2012; Hyland, 2013). Critical
writing is of significant importance for university students who are expected to write essays on
various topics and make critical connections within subject areas during their educational
programs (Golding, 2011, Hyland, 2013). Students who are not good at critical writing might be
very knowledgeable in a certain subject but cannot achieve high marks in their essays since they
have difficulty applying their knowledge to the writing process (Kellogg, 2008; Hyland, 2013).
Due to the immense role of critical writing in EAP programs and considering the main
purpose of this paper, which is investigating the developmental procedure of critical writing skill
in learners, three models of critical writing improvement in the literature are reviewed as
follows:

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
152
i. First, the Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) model provides an
instructional pattern for facilitating writing development (Santangelo et al.,
2007). This model mostly concerns “content knowledge, strategic behaviors, self-
regulation skills, self-efficacy, and motivation” which is comprised of six
instructional stages through which instructors and learners collaborate with each
other in creating a writing strategy that best suits the learners’ needs. In this
model creativity, exploration, and evaluation in writing is of immense importance.
ii. Second is the Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy
model which helps instructors track the development of learners’ writing skills
(Biggs & Collis, 1989). This model is comprised of five stages of writing
development including pre-structural, uni-structural, multi-structural, relational,
and extended abstract. These stages are built one after another from basic to
complex writing skills which emphasize progression and hierarchy in writing at
each stage. In this model, there is no mention of the instructors’ level of
involvement or the instructional strategies employed in this method which is a
notable drawback of this model (Atherton, 2011).
iii. The third model is the Building a Scholar in Writing (BSW) model which
includes six steps of increasing intricacies in critical writing development (Bailey
et al. 2015). These steps embrace the transition from presenting simple ideas (just
bones) to connecting ideas (connecting bones) to formulating a thesis and
connecting key components (constructing a skeleton), to supporting ideas with
evidence (adding muscle), to building creativity and originality (adding essential
organs), and finally, developing strong, integrated, critical arguments (adding
brain). This figurative description of the BSW model accentuates the highest
position of critical thinking in writing skill by describing the transition from
presenting simple ideas in writing (just bones) to developing strong, integrated,
critical arguments (adding brain). This progression involves a transformation in
awareness and thinking, as well as development in students’ level of critical
thinking skills.
The BSW model is in line with the SOLO taxonomy in terms of structure
and progression; however, SOLO is less developed in pedagogical description and
instructional strategies for improving critical writing skills.
Significance of the study and research question:
BSW is a comprehensive framework for teaching and learning critical writing proficiency
which proposes a linear approach for critical writing development. According to this model, EAP
learners’ writings do not show any critical thinking improvement at the beginning steps of their
academic writing progression; thus, the last steps of their critical writing progress are supposed
to include development in critical thinking skills.
Since in advanced EAP courses most students are somehow experts in their own field of
study, they, to some extent, have critical perspectives toward the academic texts in their area of
expertise. Therefore, exploring the extent to which this linear approach is supported by the data
of this study is of significance in that, in my own experience as an EAP teacher, most EAP
students show a degree of familiarity with the concept of critical thinking in their first stages of
academic writing; therefore, this study is an attempt to answer to the research question “ To what

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
153
extent critical writing developmental procedure of a case of Iranian agricultural students supports
the linear approach of the BWS model?”
Method:
In this section, first, the teaching framework and the instructional procedures employed
during this EAP program is described in detail; then, the coding schemes and data analysis
procedure are explained respectively.
Participants:
Three female senior master students of agricultural engineering in plant pathology, pest
management, and plant breeding included the participants of this case study who were studying
at Azad University of Grammar and Azad University of Varamin. They all had sat an academic
IELTS mock test 3 months prior to this course and achieved the overall scores of 5.5, 5.5, and 5;
so, they were almost at the same level of English proficiency at the beginning of the course. The
three of them were planning on pursuing their Ph.D. studies in English speaking countries;
therefore, they took this EAP course in August 2019, with me as a private tutor, to improve their
academic reading and writing proficiency and learn how to use English effectively in the
Western English speaking academic contexts.
Teaching material:
Twenty-one private EAP tutoring sessions were held for the duration of 21 weeks (each
session for two hours) in August 2019 in Tehran. For each session, one cutting-edge academic
research paper, extracted from Google Scholar, was studied and explored as the teaching
material. These papers were basically on various aspects of agricultural engineering including
plant pathology, plant protection, plant breeding, seed science, and plant genetics. The abstract,
literature review and conclusion parts of the papers were the main focus of the teaching
procedure.
Teaching framework:
The teaching framework of this course comprised of two parts that were applied
simultaneously; First, the critical thinking training part, and second, the critical writing
instructions.
Critical thinking instructional framework:
The main part of the teaching procedure was the critical thinking training part in that
none of the students were adequately knowledgeable about the concept of critical thinking at the
outset of the course. The critical thinking approach of Davies and Barnett (2015) was the main
teaching framework of this study with an emphasis on reinforcing cognitive skills of observation,
analysis, interpretation, evaluation, inferences, problem-solving, and decision-making in reliance
on different background knowledge and circumstances. The critical thinking approach of Davis
and Barnett (2015) is comprised of three components:

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
154
i. Critical skills perspective focuses on the required skills for argumentative
analysis such as interpreting, analyzing cause and effect, synthesizing claims,
making inferences and predictions, evaluating and problem-solving.
ii. Criticality perspective suggests that a critical training program needs to develop
a “critical character” or “critical disposition” in students. Therefore, criticality
involves openness to new ideas, the will to be well-informed, and the ability to
take a position and defend it (Barnett, 2015).
iii. Critical pedagogy perspective refers to the capability of acting responsibly and
ethically in facing the world and new ideas. This perspective emphasizes active
engagement with civil society, political discourse, and the hidden structure of
power.
I also employed Blooms’ (1956) chart of the taxonomy of critical thinking and pedagogy
(Figure 1) as an instructional framework to empower the critical skills of the participants. The
chart was administered to the participants as a worksheet every single session. Students were
supposed to read the text based on the instructional hints and then complete the chart as a class
activity. The participants were also expected to write a short critical essay on each academic text
every session.
Critical writing instructional framework:
For critical writing instruction, I followed the instructional hints of the BSW model
proposed by Baily et al. (2015). In this model, the instructional hints are categorized based on the
steps of critical writing development of the learners. I summarized the main teaching strategies
proposed for each step in Table1.
Table 1: Teaching strategies for critical writing proficiency proposed by Baily et al. (2015)
Step 1 Increase students’ understanding of how to capitalize on ideas and expand them. Share examples of
written work with them and dialogue about strategies for connecting ideas
Step 2 Encourage students to establish consistent linkage of ideas throughout all components of the
assignment and to the overall purpose of the assignment
Step 3 Provide students feedback for strengthening critical support of ideas within and across components
of the essay to bolster the structure they have created. Engage students in reflective dialogue about
linking lived experiences and the literature to ideas in their essays.
Step 4 Assist students to establish a unique position on the subject and uniquely compare and contrast
themes across several literature sources to support their position/arguments. Encourage students to
think outside the box and be confident with their thoughts and ideas.
Step 5 Assist students to demonstrate higher-order thinking, which is the embodiment of critical thinking.
Encourage students to formulate clear and rich connections, debates, insights, analysis, and create
new understanding.
Step 6 Teaching strategies at this level should foster consistency in critical thinking and critical reflection.
When critical thinking is evoked in the writing process, students learn to reconsider learned ideas,
critically evaluate their own assumptions, and create new knowledge in their writing.

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
155
Figure 1: Bloom’s critical thinking skills used as worksheet (Bloom, 1956)

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
156
Data:
Sixty-three essays of the participants, written during the 21 weeks of the EAP course,
were collected, coded, and analyzed as the data of this study.
Coding scheme and rating system:
Three stages of coding were implemented in this study. First, the 63 essays of the
participants were all coded based on a six-step coding scheme designed based on the BSW
model of Baily et al. (2015). At this stage, the components and characteristics of the essays
determined which essay received what code which is explained in detail as follows:
i. Code step 1 is defined as the stage of writing quality that lacks the connection of
ideas between all components of the essay. Ideas are poorly presented in an
independent, disorganized, and unconnected way which obviously lacks critical
analysis and creativity.
ii. Code step 2, is related to the writings in which students have started to connect
ideas in some areas of their essays. But still, there is minimal construction and
linkage of ideas throughout the whole writing. At this stage, essays demonstrate
minimal analysis, minimal support of ideas, and lacks originality; even with the
development of simple arguments in some areas.
iii. Code step 3 in which essays are conceptualized as whole meaningful writing and
the ideas are clearly connected throughout the whole essay. Students, at this stage,
are able to generate linkages among the main points of the writing in a coherent
way. Students may begin synthesizing theoretical perspectives; but critical
analysis, creativity, argumentation and, integration of the literature and
information are inadequate.
iv. Code step 4 in which essays are well-organized in terms of integration of the
literature and overall connection of the writing around the main idea. The strong
analysis and argumentation that accompany the literature support are obvious here
and theoretical perspective is evidently present. However, the ability to evaluate
research evidence, develop a position, and integrate strong arguments for this
position is not strong. Creativity in writing is good at this stage and the
significance of the sources used in the essay is evident through strong arguments.
v. Code step 5 includes essays that display a high level of creativity and originality
in addition to coherency between ideas. Strong support of literature is obvious
accompanying critical analysis, argumentation, format, and grammar in essays at
this level. Most importantly, students’ position on subjects is portrayed in their
essays at this stage.
vi. Code step 6 includes the essays in which critical thinking, appraisal, and writing
skills are well-developed. The writings at this level illustrate the students’ deep
understanding of the subject matter with strong analysis and evaluation of ideas,
support of ideas, argumentation, grammar format and structure, and a high degree
of skills in creativity and originality. Students at this stage are capable of
developing inquiries or hypothesis-based strategies to formulate clear, rich,
organized ideas that generate a new understanding of the concept. This process

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
157
could lead the learners to reconsider the acquired ideas, critically evaluate their
own assumptions, and take better care in revising their writings.
Table 2 illustrates the first coding scheme of this study based on the BSW model of Baily
et al (2015) with some minuscule modifications.
Table 2: Coding scheme based on the BSW model
Essay example: students were asked to write a critical essay on fungicide resistance in cucurbit powdery
mildew: Experiences and Challenges
Step 1 Essays at this level present simple, independent, disorganized, unconnected, and undeveloped ideas
that are not supported and analyzed.
Essay example: Using the above example, essays at this level might present simple ideas of what
fungicide resistance is with no clear thesis or linkages throughout.
Step 2 Students have started to connect ideas in some areas of their essays, without connections to other
components.
Essay example: At this level, students are still theorizing fungicide resistance, and begin to show
simple linkages between using fungicides and other issues in the field
Step 3 The Connection between ideas is demonstrated throughout all components of the essay. The essay is
conceptualized as a whole. However, it lacks support for ideas, creativity, and critical analysis.
Essay example: Students are able to formulate a main personal idea about fungicide resistance in
cucurbit powdery mildew and briefly mention this idea throughout components of the essays.
Step 4 Connections are accompanied by synthesis and application of theoretical perspectives. Ideas are
organized around the perspective and supported with the literature. However, there is a lack of
creativity throughout.
Essay example: Ideas around the main concept of resistance of powdery mildew are integrated
throughout all components of the paper and supported by the literature. Significance empirical
evidence of how fungicides are used against this disease could be used to support the main points of
the essay.
Step 5 Essays demonstrate a high level of creativity and originality, in addition to coherency between ideas,
argumentation, and support of the literature. Strong arguments and creative understandings are clear
here.
Essay example: In the essay, students at this level may extend arguments to investigate the dominant
consequences of overusing fungicides on the nature, or diseases of this type in general.
Step 6 Essays at this level demonstrate critical thinking and critical appraisal skills. Essays demonstrate
analysis and support of ideas, argumentation, format and structure, and a high degree of creativity and
originality.
Essay example: When challenging the using fungicides in controlling cucurbit mildew, essays at this
level may analyze the impact of dominant consequences of using fungicides from different
perspectives and show how these can damage or benefit nature and the mass production system.
The second stage of the coding procedure was conducted due to some inconsistencies
found in the first labeling process between the data and the main coding scheme. This means
that, at the beginning steps of the learners’ critical writing development, some essays of the
participants were found to include a combination of the characteristics of the BSW beginning
steps with some signs of critical thinking development which clearly did not fit the BSW linear
model. Therefore, I designed the second coding system for this dataset, shown in Table3, in
accordance with these combined characteristics which I named “Combo coding scheme.”

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
158
Table 3: Combo coding scheme
Combo 2+6 Students connect ideas + they critical thinking and critical appraisal+ not good literature in
connecting the whole parts of the essay
Combo 3+5 The essay is well-conceptualized as a whole + signs of creativity
Combo 3+6 The essay is well-conceptualized as a whole + critical thinking ideas which are not well
established
Combo 4+6
Combo 5+6
There is theoretical perspective with good literature supporting it+ signs of critical appraisal
which is not well-established
Essays demonstrate a high level of creativity and originality with coherent expressions of critical
appraisal which are not well-developed.
Since the “Combo coding scheme” was too general and did not provide any specific idea
about the stage of the critical thinking development of the participants, the third coding system
was employed, based on the stage theory of Elder and Paul (1996), in which the data were coded
based on six main stages of critical thinking development of the participants as is shown in Table
4.
Table 4: Coding scheme based on the stage theory Elder and Paul (1996)
Stages of critical thinking development Characteristics
Stage 1 Unreflective thinker =U Unaware of the appropriate standards for the assessment of an idea
such as clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness.
Stage2 Challenged thinker =C Cannot make logical judgments. They start involving concepts,
assumptions, inferences, implications, and also they begin to
develop standards for the assessment of thinking such as clarity,
accuracy, precision, relevance, and logicalness
Stage3 Beginning thinker =B They are at the beginning stages of establishing standards for their
arguments and assumptions and have enough thinking skill to
monitor their own thoughts.
Stage4 Practicing thinker =P They still have problems with gaining insights on a deep level even
though they consistently monitor their thoughts and try to obtain
assumptions, inferences, and implications after facing any
phenomenon.
Stage 5 Advanced thinker =A They continually strive to be fair-minded as they can identify areas
of significant ignorance and prejudice in a context and also are able
of developing new fundamental habits of thought based on deep
values to which one has committed oneself. They are aware of what
it takes to regularly assess their thinking for clarity, accuracy,
precision, relevance, and logicalness.
Stage 6 master thinker A high degree of intellectual humility, intellectual integrity,
intellectual perseverance, intellectual courage, intellectual empathy,
intellectual autonomy, intellectual responsibility, and fair-
mindedness.
Data analysis and results:
Since the main purpose of this study was to examine the linearity of the developmental
stages of the participants’ critical writing skills, the coded data were qualitatively analyzed
considering the sequence of the sessions and the steps of the participants’ development.
In order to increase the internal validity of the research and check for the reliability of the
coding system, I asked a colleague of mine, as a research assistant, to code the data for the

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
159
second time to ensure the consistency of the coding procedure. Table 5 illustrates the coded data
performed by me and Table 5 displays the data coded by the research assistant. The items which
are coded with the word “NO” did not involve any indication of critical thinking development in
any part of them.
Table 5: Data coded by the main researcher
Session # Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3
1 Step 2 NO Step 3 NO Combo 2+6/C
2 Step2 NO Step 3 NO Step 3 NO
3 Combo 2+6/B Combo 3+5/B Step 3NO
4 Combo 3+6/B Combo 3+5/B Combo 3+6/B
5 Combo 4+6/B Combo 3+6/B Combo 3+6/B
6 Combo 4+6/P Combo 3+6/B Combo 4+6/B
7 Combo 5+6/P Combo 4+6/P Combo 4+6/B
8 Combo 5+6 /P Combo 4+6/P Combo 4+6/B
9 Step 6/P Combo 4+6/P Combo 4+6/B
10 Step 6 /P Combo 5+6/P Combo 4+6/B
11 Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/P
12 Step 6/A Combo 5+6A Combo 5+6/P
13 Step 6 /A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/P
14 Combo 5+6A Step 6/A Combo 5+6/P
15 Step 6 /A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/P
16 Step 6/A Combo 5+6/A Step 6/A
17 Step 6/A Step 6/A Step 6/A
18 Step 6/A Step 6/M Step 6/A
19 Step 6/M Step 6/M Step 6/A
Table 6 shows that most essays represented a combination of the learners’ specific level
of proficiency with some exhibition of critical thinking skill even with poor literature and overall
writing proficiency throughout the essays.

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
160
Table 6: Data coded by the research assistant
Session # Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3
1. Step 2NO Step 2NO Combo 2+6
2. Step2NO Step 3NO Step 3 NO
3. Combo 2+6/B Step 3NO Step 3NO
4. Combo 2+6/B Step 3NO Combo 3+6/B
5. Combo 3+6/B Combo 3+6/B Combo 3+6/B
6. Combo 4+6/P Combo 3+6/B Combo 3+6/B
7. Combo 4+6/P Combo 3+6/B Step 4/B
8. Combo 5+6/P Combo 4+6/P Combo 4+6/B
9. Combo 5+6/P Combo 4+6/P Combo 4+6/P
10. Combo 5+6/P Combo 5+6/P Combo 4+6/P
11. Combo 5+6 /P Combo 5+6/P Combo 5+6/P
12. Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/P
13. Step 6 /A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/P
14. Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/A
15. Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/A
16. Step 6/A Combo 5+6/A Combo 5+6/A
17. Step 6/A Step 6/A Combo 5+6/A
18. Step 6/A Step 6/A Step 6/A
19. Step 6/A Step 6/A Step 6/A
20. Step 6/M Step 6/M Step 6/A
21. Step 6/M Step 6/M Step 6/M
Table 6, illustrates the coded data by the research assistant. As clear, both Table 5 and
Table 6 show an acceptable level of consistency between the coding results of the two raters
which is also a sign of the reliability of the coding schemes in this study.
Data analysis showed that the majority of the essays (coded data) demonstrated a sign of
critical argument and critical thinking development from the beginning steps of the course even
before achieving the required level of writing proficiency to qualify for code 6 in contrast to the
BSW model expectation.
Even essays with poor grammar, consistency, and connected ideas involved some
features of critical thinking toward the main topic. According to the results of the third coding
phase (stage theory coding), at the beginning steps of the writing proficiency, participants were
found to be struggling to establish standards for their arguments and assumptions and had
enough thinking skills to monitor their own thoughts. As the students move forward to the more
proficient writing steps, the level of creativity and criticality in their writing increased
accordingly.
Participants were found to move from beginning critical thinkers to practicing critical
thinkers in the middle of the EAP course where they still had problems with gaining insights on a
deep level even though they tried to obtain assumptions, inferences, and implications after
reading the texts.
During the last ten sessions of the course students gradually achieved an advanced level
of critical thinking proficiency even though some of the essays were at step 5 of the BSW model
of critical writing proficiency. This means that their critical thinking skill outgrows their overall
critical writing skill. This is a clear indication of the fact that critical thinking skill develops
parallel to writing proficiency of the learners.

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
161
Conclusion:
This study revealed that, in contrast to the BSW model of Baily et al. (2015), critical
thinking skill of the participants improved in parallel with their overall writing proficiency. In
other words, the results of the study demonstrated that in order to achieve the advanced level of
critical thinking proficiency in writing, learners do not necessarily need to reach the highest level
of proficiency in writing skill as is claimed in the BSW model; rather, the majority of the data
displayed that the critical thinking skill of the participants started improving from the beginning
steps of the critical writing proficiency and in most essays the critical thinking skill of the
participants outgrow their overall writing proficiency.
This clearly confirms that critical writing could be considered as a combination of critical
thinking skill and writing proficiency skill which both improve hand in hand in a parallel way.
It is worth mentioning that this study was a case study performed only on 3 female
participants; consequently, more research on this issue is recommended to support the results.
References:
Ahmed, H. R. (2020). Analyzing Errors Made by Kurdish EFL Learners in Applying the Rules
of Syntactic Structure, Journal of Educational and Psychological Sciences, 4(34), 159-
168.
Ahmed, H. R. (2020). The Perceptions and Attitudes of EFL Learners in the Kurdistan Region of
Iraq towards Online English Courses, Research Journal of English Language and
Literature Research Journal of English Language and Literature, 7 (4), 288-300.
Amir, S., Kang, M. A., & Saeed, A. (2020). Listening Habits of Higher Secondary School
Students of English: An Analysis. Bahria Journal of Professional Psychology, 17(2),
106-112.
Amir, S., Saeed, A. (2019). English Language Teaching and Cultural Implications: An Analysis
of Higher Secondary School Subject Specialists’ Perceptions and Practices in Pakistan.
Praxis International Journal of Social Science and Literature, 2 (IX), 1-7.
Amir, S., Saeed, A. (2019). English Language Teaching and Cultural Implications: An Analysis
of Higher Secondary School Subject Specialists’ Perceptions and Practices in Pakistan.
Praxis International Journal of Social Science and Literature, 2 (IX), 1-7.
Anyim, W. O. (2020). Accessibility and Utilization of Web Resources by Students in FCT
College of Education Zuba, Abuja. Electronic Research Journal of Engineering,
Computer and Applied Sciences, 2, 78-91.
Atherton, J. S. (2011). Learning and Teaching: SOLO Taxonomy. Retrieved March 1, 2021 from
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/solo.htm
Bagheri, F. (2015). The relationship between critical thinking and language learning strategies of
EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 6(5), 969–975.

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
162
Bailey, A., Zanchetta, M., Velasco, D., Pon, G., & Hassan, A. (2015). Building a scholar in
writing (BSW): A model for developing students’ critical writing skills. Nurse Education
in Practice, 15(6), 524-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2015.07.008
Barnett, R. (2000). The -limits of -competence: Knowledge, higher education and society.
Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University.
Barnett, R. (1997). Higher education: A critical business. Milton Keynes: Open
University Press.
Barnett, R. (2015). A curriculum for critical being. In M. Davies, & R. Barnett (Eds.), The
Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education (63-76). Palgave Macmillan:
New York.
Biggs, J., & Collis, K. (1989). Towards a Model of School-based Curriculum Development and
Assessment Using the SOLO Taxonomy. Australian Journal of Education, 33(2), 151–
163. https://doi.org/10.1177/168781408903300205
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational
goals. New York, NY: David McKay.
Case, R. (2005). Moving critical thinking to the main stage. Education Canada, 45(2), 45–49.
Cavdar, G., & Doe, S. (2012). Learning through writing: teaching critical thinking skills in
writing assignments. PS: Political Science and Politics 45(2): 298-306.
Chanock, K., Horton, C., Reedman, M., & Stephenson, B. (2012). Collaborating to embed
academic literacies and personal support in first year discipline subjects. Journal of
University Teaching & Learning Practice, 9(3), 354-432.
Davies, M., & Barnett, R. (2015). Introduction. In M. Davies, & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave
handbook of critical thinking in higher education (pp. 1–26). NewYork: Palgave
Macmillan.
Dooey, P. (2010). Students’ perspectives of an EAP pathway program. Journal of English for
Academic Purposes, 9(3), 184-197.
Elder, L., & Paul, R. (1996). Critical thinking: A stage theory of critical thinking: Part I. Journal
of Developmental Education, 20(1), 34-35.
Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational
Leadership, 43(2), 44–48.
Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of
educational assessment and instruction. Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Golding, C. (2011). Educating for critical thinking: Thought-encouraging questions in a
community of inquiry. Higher Education Research and Development, 30(3), 357- 379.

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
163
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills,
structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53(4), 449-455.
Hyland, K. (2013). Writing in the university: Education, knowledge and reputation .Language
Teaching, 46 (2013), 53-57.
Kellogg, R. T. ( 2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmental perspective . Journal
of Writing Research, 1, 1-26.
Kennedy, M., Fisher, M. B., & Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: Literature review and
needed research. In L. Idol & B.F. Jones (Eds.), Educational values and cognitive
instruction: Implications for reform (pp. 11-40). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum & Associates.
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (2006). The ‘Academic Literacies’ model: Theory and applications.
Theory into Practice, 45(4), pp.368–377.
Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher order thinking. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 131-
137.
Li, L. (2016). Integrating thinking skills in foreign language learning: What can we learn from
teachers’ perspectives?Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22(4),pp. 273–288.
Lipman, M. (1988). Critical thinking—what can it be? Educational Leadership, 46(1), 38–43.
McCutchen, D. (2011). From novice to expert: Implications of language skills and writing-
relevant knowledge for memory during the development of writing skill. Journal of
Writing Research, 3, 51-68.
McMillan, L., & Raines, K. (2011). Using the “write” resources: Nursing student evaluation of
an interdisciplinary collaboration using a professional writing assignment. Journal of
Nursing Education, 50 (12), 697-702, doi:10.3928/01484834-20110930-01
McPeck, J. E. (1990). Critical thinking and subject specificity: A reply to Ennis. Educational
Researcher, 19(4), 10-12.
Moore, T. (2013). Critical thinking: Seven definitions in search of a concept. Studies in Higher
Education, 38(4), 506–522.
Murawwska, A. (2017). Can academic reading empower EAP students? Master Dissertation:
Newcastle University
Ndubuisi, A. G. (2018). British Educational Management Policies in Nigeria: A Historical
Overview. Electronic Research Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 1, 52-61.

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
164
Nikoopour, J., Farsani, A. M., & Nasiri, M. (2011). On the relationship between critical thinking
and language learning strategies among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Technology &
Education, 5(3), 253-278.
Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why, and how? New Directions for Community
Colleges, 1992(77), 3–24.
Paul, R. (2012). The critical connection: higher order thinking that unifies curriculum,
instruction, and learning, in Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Survive in a
Rapidly Changing World, Chapter 16, eds J. Willsen, A. J. A. Binker (Oxford:
Foundation for Critical Thinking Publisher), 293–296. Retrieved March 1, 2021 from
http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/richardpaul-anthology/1139
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2013). How to Write a Paragraph: The Art of Substantive Writing
(Thinker’s Guide Library) (1st ed.). The Foundation for Critical Thinking. Retrieved
March 1, 2021 from https://www.criticalthinking.org/store/products/how-to-write-a-
paragraph-the-art-of-substantive-writing/160
Rojab, R., Bambang, C., & Utami, W. (2017). The Effect of Meaning-focused Feedback as well
as Language-focused Feedback in the Journal Writing on Indonesian EFL Students’
writing Ability. International Journal of English and Education, 6(4), 2278-4012.
Rowley, M. (2012). The Power of Writing: Generating Profound Insights and Solving Everyday
Problems. Retrieved February 2, 2021 from http://www.metavoice.org/articles/article2/
Santangelo, T., Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2007). Self-regulated strategy development: A
validated model to support students who struggle with writing. Learning Disabilities: A
Contemporary Journal, 5(1), 1-20.
Shirly, F. B., Ann, V. V., & Christian, J. (2020). Effect of Critical Thinking Infusion on
Students’ Performance In English: Implications To Enhance Teaching-Learning
Instructions. Electronic Research Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 3, 14-22.
Shobeiry, M. (2020). The Effect Of Form-focused and Content-focused Feedbacks on Writing
Improvement of Online EFL Learners. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(17), 3548–3553.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Critical thinking: Its nature, measurement, and improvement. National
Institute of Education. Retrieved February 2, 2021 from
http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED272882.pdf
Thayer-Bacon, B. J. (2000). Transforming critical thinking: Thinking constructively. New York,
NY: Teachers College Press.
Tindal, G., & Nolet, V. (1995). Curriculum-based measurement in middle and high schools:
Critical thinking skills in content areas. Focus on Exceptional Children, 27(7), 1–22.

7782.
-
ISSN: 2652
165
Tus, J. (2019). Students’ Personality, Self-Efficacy, and Its Impact on the Academic
Performance of the Senior High School Students. Electronic Research Journal of Social
Sciences and Humanities, 1 (IV), 92-96.
Vardi, I. (2013). Developing students’ critical thinking. Workshop presentation at the place of
learning and teaching: Higher Education Research and Development Society of
Australasia Conference, Auckland NZ. Retrieved February 2, 2021 from
http://herdsa.nz123.co.nz/pre-conference-workshop-programme/
Vered, K. O. (2016). The critical nexus: Linked practices in reading, thinking and writing to
develop discourse competency. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 10 (1),
155-168.
Wallace, C. (2003). Critical reading in language education. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Wardle, E., & Roozen, K. (2013). Addressing the complexity of writing development: Toward
an ecological model of assessment. Assessing Writing, 17, 106-119.
Willingham, D. T. (2007). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? American Educator, 8-
19.
Wilson, K. (2016). Critical reading, critical thinking: delicate scaffolding in English for
Academic Purposes (EAP). Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22(11), 256–265.
Yadav, M. S., & Yadav, M. K. (2020). Role of the Transformational Generative Grammar and
other Language Learning Theories in English Language Teaching. Electronic Research
Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2 (I), 142-153.

A Case Study Applying Building A Scholar In Writing Model In An EAP Course. Is Critical Writing Progression Linear

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A Case Study Applying Building A Scholar In Writing Model In An EAP Course. Is Critical Writing Progression Linear

Similar to A Case Study Applying Building A Scholar In Writing Model In An EAP Course. Is Critical Writing Progression Linear (20)

More from Cheryl Brown

More from Cheryl Brown (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A Case Study Applying Building A Scholar In Writing Model In An EAP Course. Is Critical Writing Progression Linear