Academic Writing For English Foreign Learners

! #
$
%
#

#
! '
! #
( )* + #
, $ +
# -+
.+ + # +
# +
#/ +
( '
#
- 0
! 1 #/ 2(
3

. 4$ 5#/
-
6! 2 2! #

!
#
$ !% ! $
' ' ($
' # % %) %* %
' $ '
+ %
' !# $,
( $
- .

!
- (
%
. %
% % % $
$ $ -
-
- -
// $$$
0
11#23.

4 )*5/ +)
* !6 ! 7!8%779:9 % ) -
2 ; !
*

- %. = - !=+%4 %:9:
/- ?:9@4 )*5/ +)
3 :9@

i
Abstract
The current research investigates the problems experienced by Kurdish students when
developing their academic writing at the English Language Teaching Centre (ELTC) at the
University of Sheffield. The aim of the study is to find out the major and minor problems
faced by Kurdish students when undertaking academic writing. Moreover, it also aims to
identify the relevant factors underlying their problems. Such an understanding of their
problems and the proposed solutions will be beneficial for both Kurdish teachers and
students. For this purpose, four research questions were proposed and the answers to these
questions were provided and discussed. The scope of the study is to collect data from both
teachers and Kurdish students from the ELTC. The data for the study were gathered through
different mixed-methods: questionnaires, interviews and the collection of essays from the
Kurdish students at the ELTC.
The questionnaire and interview findings revealed that the students’ major problems are
grammar, vocabulary and content knowledge. Moreover, their secondary problems are
organisation, structuring, and sometimes spelling, as can be seen in the essays. Their minor
problems are style and referencing. Additionally, the teachers in the interviews claimed that
the Kurdish students are more descriptive than critical. Furthermore, according to the
interview, the Kurdish students are similar to Eastern students in terms of their writing
problems and they are not different from them. Moreover, the students’ writing ability
developed dramatically during their stay in the UK and their period of study at the ELTC.
Finally, according to the interview data, the best solution and a good suggestion for
improving the non-native speakers’ (NNS’) writing could be through reading and practising
the language independently.

ii
Acknowledgements
My Lord God, I have no idea where I am going, I do
not see the road ahead of me, I cannot know for
certain where it will end.
Thomas Merton
The road to a Masters degree is indeed long and arduous. There were many times when I
could not see the road ahead of me; Allah took my hand and dragged me. Now as my journey
comes to an end, with Allah’s wish, I would like to acknowledge all those who helped me
along the way.
x I would first like to thank Allah for blessing me with so many gifts. Thank you for
giving me the intelligence to accomplish this feat. You have blessed me with a loving
family, good instructors and lovely friends. Allah, You are my endless guidance and
inspiration.
x My supervisor, Dr. Gibson Ferguson, I wish to express my gratitude for your faith in
me, and your support over these three months. Your high standards have encouraged
me to pursue excellence in the research domain.
x I want to express my sincere gratitude to my parents and each and every one of my
siblings, who educated me and enlightened my dark days. Father and Mother, you are
my first teachers. I am grateful for your faith in me. Thank you for your prayerful

iii
support. You have taught me lessons of life and patience. Thanks for giving me the
freedom to study and to learn.
x To all teachers who taught me from primary school to university, and all instructors at
university, especially those who taught me at Koya University during my four
academic years of study. I want you to know how much you all have taught me over
the past years.
x I am grateful, too, for having such amazing, brilliant and friendly instructors at the
department of English Language and Linguistics, Applied Linguistics with TESOL at
the University of Sheffield, who allowed me to devote myself full-time to the
completion of this Masters degree. You all have been supportive instructors.
x And last, but certainly not least, I wish to thank Human Capacity Development
Programme (HCDP) and all my friends who helped me in Kurdistan, in the UK, and
anywhere else. In addition, I wish to thank all who have encouraged me in my
lifetime.

iv
Table of contents
Abstract..................................................................................................................i
Acknowledgements..............................................................................................ii
Abbreviation Keys...............................................................................................ix
List of Tables........................................................................................................x
List of Figures......................................................................................................xi
Chapter 1. Introduction and Brief Background of Academic Writing.................1
1.1. Introduction and Background.....................................................................1
1.2. Aims of the Study.......................................................................................2
1.3. Setting and Scope of the Study...................................................................2
1.4. Organisation of the Research......................................................................2
Chapter 2. Literature Review................................................................................4
2.1. Review of the Literature................................................................................4
2.1.1. A Brief Explanation of English writing............................................4

v
2.1.2. The Approaches of English Academic Writing................................7
2.1.3. The Effect of L1 on SLA in English Academic Writing..................8
2.1.4. The Problems of NNS in Developing Their
English Academic Writing.............................................................10
2.1.5. Teaching English Academic Writing
Instructions in Non-Native Classes................................................21
2.1.6. Conclusion......................................................................................25
2.2. Educational Background of Kurdish Students.............................................26
2.2.1. Exposure to English Language and its
Importance in Kurdistan.................................................................26
2.2.2. The Education System and English Language Teaching in
Secondary schools and at University Level in Kurdistan...............27
2.2.3. English Language Writing at University Level..............................29
2.2.4. Conclusion......................................................................................30

vi
Chapter 3. Research Design and Methodology..................................................32
3.1. Research Design..........................................................................................32
3.2. Context and Research Questions.................................................................32
3.2.1. Ethical Issues..................................................................................33
3.2.2. Reliability and Validity..................................................................34
3.3. Methodology................................................................................................35
3.3.1. General Overview...........................................................................35
3.3.2. Data Collection...............................................................................35
3.3.2.1. Participants........................................................................35
3.3.2.2. Methods.............................................................................36
3.4. Data Analysis...............................................................................................37
Chapter 4. Findings: Presentation, Analysis and Discussion............................39
4. Presentation and Discussion of the data.........................................................39
4.1. Results and Findings....................................................................................39
4.1.1. Questionnaire Results and Discussion.................................................39
4.1.2. Interview Results and Discussion........................................................53

vii
4.1.3. Essay Analysis Results and Discussion...............................................58
4.2. Discussion of the Main Findings.................................................................60
4.2.1. The Major, Secondary and Minor Problems of Kurdish
Students in Developing English Academic Writing.......................60
4.2.2. The Differences and/or Similarities of the Problems Faced by
Kurdish Students Compared to Students of other Nationalities...62
4.2.3. The Improvements of Kurdish Students
during their Study at the ELTC.......................................................63
4.2.4 Suggestions and Recommendations for Improving
Students’ Writing to Study at English-Medium Universities..........64
4.3. Conclusion...................................................................................................65
Chapter 5. Conclusions.......................................................................................66
5. Conclusion and Main Findings.......................................................................66
5.1. Some Suggestions for the Solutions............................................................67
5.2. Limitations of the Study..............................................................................67
5.3. Implications of the Study and Future Research...........................................69

viii
References...........................................................................................................70
Appendices..........................................................................................................85
Appendix (A): Questionnaires Questions...........................................................85
Appendix (B): Interview Questions....................................................................91
Appendix (C): Transcript of one of the Interview with the Kurdish Student...94
Appendix (D): Essays.......................................................................................100
Appendix (E): Factors that Affected Kurdish Students in
Developing English Academic Writing......................................111
Appendix (F): Different Choices Made by the Kurdish Students about the
Problems of English Academic Writing....................................112
Appendix (G): The Most to the Least Problematic
Issue for the Students` English Academic Writing....................113

ix
Abbreviation Keys
L1 First Language
L2 Second Language
NS Native Speakers
NNS Non-Native Speakers
TL Target Language
EFL English as a Foreign Language
ESL English as a Second Language
SLA Second Language Acquisition

x
List of Tables
Table (1). The range of writing problems from the most to the least problematic.
Table (2). The students’ abilities in different aspects of academic writing, graded in
percentage form.
Table (3) Problematic components for the students in achieving English academic writing.

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1. Percentage scores of the major, secondary and minor problems of Kurdish students
in developing their English academic writing.
Figure 2. Different choices of English academic writing problems made by the Kurdish
students in the ELTC.
Figure 3. The factors underlying the writing problems of Kurdish students.
Figure 4. The improvements of the Kurdish students in different components of English
academic writing in the ELTC.
Figure 5. The Kurdish students’ opinions on English academic writing.
Figure 6. Percentage scores showing the Kurdish ELTC students` perception of causes of
their writing problems.
Figure 7. Diagram of the students` choices about their problems in English Academic writing.

1
Chapter 1. Introduction and Brief Background of Academic Writing
1.1. Introduction and Background
The field of L2 writing was founded in the early 1950s. Afterwards, in the 1960s, different
data were collected after the UK, USA, and Australia received an increased number of
overseas students and began to enrol them in colleges and universities (Hinkel, 2004; Storch,
2009). At the same time, the English language developed rapidly within other countries
(Crystal, 1997). Moreover, the idea of writing is the creative act of discovery. Conveying the
meaning is one of the important issues in writing; the absence of this will mislead the reader.
Research on L2 writing has experienced a dramatic increase in the last few decades.
However, many problems have remained unsolved. Consequently, investigations and
research studies continue in this field in order to discover new problems and to solve them.
Academic writing has attracted an increased interest within the field of English for academic
purposes. Writing is considered as the source of information that the writer has and it reveals
how knowledge is constructed and how ideas are structured; it helps to access the hidden
knowledge of humans. Some researchers believe that writing involves the wrestling of ideas
and that good linguistic experience is needed to convey the meaning (Hyland, 2004). When
students are asked to write an English piece of work, many respond that ‘I do not know how
to start’ or ‘What shall I write about?’ Many students face difficulty in starting writing and
become stuck on a track. It is the writing skill that appears to present the greatest problems to
English NNS (Crerand, 1992; Silva, 1992; Cheng, 1993; Gerardi, 2001; Hyland, 2002a;
Hinkel, 2004).

2
1.2. Aims of the Study
The main purpose of the study is to investigate and examine the common errors made by the
Kurdish students in the development of their academic writing. Moreover, the paper’s major
aims are to provide adequate information about the Kurdish students’ problems and to
explore the factors behind the problems associated with developing their English academic
writing. Furthermore, the significance of this paper is to gather some suggestions from the
ELTC teachers and to explore capable solutions that will aid students to develop their
academic writing.
1.3. Setting and Scope of the Study
The paper is based on data that were collected at the ELTC (English Language Teaching
Centre), University of Sheffield, and the participants were all Kurdish students. The data
analyses were in the form of mixed methods; both qualitative and quantitative analyses were
carried out. The students were asked to answer a questionnaire and to participate in an
interview. Latterly, some essays were collected in order to analyse students’ improvements in
the time since they had been studying at the centre.
1.4. Organisation of the Research
The paper consists of five chapters. Chapter 1 presents an overview of the study, including its
aims and scope. Chapter 2 introduces the review of the literature and relevant studies in the
field of writing. Later in the chapter, there is a brief explanation that illustrates the Kurdish
students’ backgrounds. Chapter 3 illustrates the research design and the methods used in the
study. In Chapter 4, the results of the research are discussed and the research questions will

3
be answered. Finally, in Chapter 5, a brief conclusion will sum up the research paper by
defining the main findings and providing some suggestions for further research.

4
Chapter 2. Literature Review
2.1. Review of the Literature
2.1.1. A Brief Explanation of English writing
Among the four skills, writing is considered as the most problematic and complex issue for
EFL/ESL students (Crerand, 1992; Silva, 1992). However, it is a very crucial skill to learn for
both academic life and for finding an appropriate job. Furthermore, writing in EFL/ESL
mainly involves linguistic knowledge, vocabulary choice, and the use of cohesive devices
(Hyland, 2003). Moreover, the writing skill is the knowledge trace of the language (Hyland,
2004). However, according to Umair (2011), the skill is not only the mirror of one’s ideas,
but it needs innovation to convey this idea. Any problems in this skill will cause the learner to
struggle with his/her writing. Many NNS experience a great deal of difficulty in English
writing (Crerand, 1992; Silva, 1992; Gerardi, 2001). It can be identified as a frustrating and
alienating skill (Cheng, 1993; Hyland, 2002a; Hinkel, 2004) because it is believed to be a
tiring activity, and students need to concentrate on grammar, vocabulary and tense usage in
order to produce logical writing (Coxhead and Byrd, 2007; Swick, 2009). On the other hand,
it is a source of personal empowerment and it can result in access to social and economic
benefits (Hyland, 2002b).
In their book, Bradley-Johnson and Lesiak (1989) described writing as one of humanity’s
highest achievements because it requires many skills. In order to produce successful writing,
the writer should concentrate on each of (1) grammar, (2) mechanics, (3) production, (4)
convention, (5) linguistic and (6) cognition components; these are each explained briefly
below:

5
1. Grammar: The correct use of tenses and aspects.
2. Mechanics: The legible formation of words and sentences. Students’ handwriting
should be neat and readers should be able to read it easily.
3. Production: The generation of sentences and their importance in conveying ideas and
feelings.
4. Convention: These are the rules of capitalization, punctuation and spelling.
5. Linguistics: The use of a wide range of vocabulary with the correct syntax.
6. Cognition: The organisation of the text is an important issue and the events should be
arranged and sequenced logically, and in a coherent manner.
The lack of any of these components would make the work difficult to follow and incoherent.
Similarly, if the students face problems with one of these components, they cannot follow
their writing and they will face the other components, since they are all interrelated like a
chain of rosary beads. For instance, if the student has a problem with spelling, s/he will
definitely have difficulty with vocabulary while writing. Each component has its importance
in maintaining the quality of the writing. The loss of one component will result in the student
losing one component after another.
As was aforementioned, L2 writing is not strictly related to ideas; each of the components of
grammar, vocabulary, content knowledge, punctuation, and referencing play their role in the
activity (Hyland, 2004). Crème and Lea (1997) referred to the notion of structure and
argument in writing. These concepts were indicated as being the root of well-written work.
The concept of constructing a piece of writing is like building a house with bricks. Each has a
different role in structuring the shape of the house, through different arrangements of the
bricks. Similarly, each writer may design the writing in a way that s/he likes. They also

6
declare that one person may hesitate while writing, while another may find it easy. Shaping
writing depends on grammatical rules, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, organisation,
structuring, academic style, referencing, and content knowledge (Swick, 2009). These can be
explained using the analogy of the beads of a rosary chain; with the detaching of all the beads
together, a good piece of writing will be produced. However, the lack of any of them will
lead to incompletion of the work.
Furthermore, writing is the process of many years of training. It will not come naturally and
automatically to anyone in the blink of eye. In addition, differences in their acquisition might
be the source of their problems (Gerardi, 2001). However, Biber (1988) argued that both the
speech and the written language are interrelated. In this view, ideas that can be performed in
speech can also be decoded into written text easily and vice versa. By contrast, performing a
speech without a written text or writing a piece of work without performing it will be less
beneficial. Lately, Hyland (2003) illustrated that students should be aware of the language
structure, text function, creativity of expression, composition, and processing while they are
writing. Hence, he recommended that each concept should be treated separately.
Consequently, organised and well-structured writing will direct the attention of the readers
and encourage them in the continuation of reading. In his book, Hyland (2003) stated that the
exclusive focus of the writer on the form and function of their writing means that the writer is
firmly detached from the personal experience of writing. According to him, writing is the
way of sharing personal attitudes; writing is the innate power that expresses the writer
through originality and spontaneity.

7
2.1.2. The Approaches of English Academic Writing
It is possible to categorize academic writing into three different approaches. Each writer
classified these approaches differently. Both Flowerdew (1993) and Hyland (2008) illustrated
that the genre approach, which involves explicit knowledge of writing, is restricted in
academic writing. It has been described as a teaching tool rather than a research tool, and
deals with specific situations. Additionally, Jordan (1997) sorted the approaches into product
and process approaches. The product approach deals with the copying of the original text
with slight changes in vocabulary. By contrast, the process approach, which is known as the
creative approach, helps the learners to write new ideas rather than imitating the previous
version using different vocabulary. The use of this approach will help learners to have more
responsibility. Accordingly, Hariston (1982) identified the process approach as a new
paradigm.
For Dudley-Evans and St. John (1988), the approaches can be classified into the product,
process and social construction approaches. Firstly, the product approach is described as
involving a simple copy of texts. Secondly, the process approach is concerned with the
thinking process. Moreover, the process approach deals with revision and editing. Larsen-
Freeman (1983), cited in Flowerdew (1993), described the process approach as being
individually-oriented. However, the product approach is more situation-oriented. Thirdly, the
constructionist approach is based on the improvement of genre analysis. However, over the
past years, both the process and the product approaches have dominated EFL/ESL classes
(Badger and White, 2000).

8
In addition, Kay and Dudley-Evans (1998) argued that the genre-based approach would
improve rhetorical structures and the linguistic features of writing. However, Hyon (1996)
identified the genre-based approach as a tool to test written text. Conversely, Byram (2004)
states that the genre-based approach is less helpful for the learners, because students are more
passive in the class and are limited to specific ideas related to the contexts. Additionally, the
writing production will be meaningless because what they have learned is more specific in
terms of some social and linguistic issues. According to Henry and Roseberry (1998), the
genre-based approach helps the rhetorical organization of the text and improves students’
awareness of the linguistic features.
2.1.3. The Effect of L1 on SLA in English Academic Writing
According to Kroll (1990), Silva (1992), and Silva and Matsuda (2001), L2 writing is firmly
connected to the understanding of SLA, because SLA competence will lead to L2 writing
performance. Furthermore, Hinkel (2002) stated that writing could be organized and well-
structured when the writer brings both L1 and L2 into harmony and avoids vague ideas. In a
follow-up book, Hinkel (2011) investigated the fact that L1 plays its role in the phenomenon
and that L2 writers take the idea of structuring from their own language. Additionally, both
Carson and Kuehn (1992) and Hyland (2002b) explained that proficient writers are good in
both their L1 and L2 writing because they are able to transfer those strategies and approaches
across the language easily and display those skills in L2 writing, similar to how they do so in
their L1. In contrast, inexperienced L1 writers suffer the same problems while writing in
English. These weak writers often face difficulty with mechanical, organisational and idea
problems. For Carson and Kuehn (1992), language literacy is related to language proficiency.
Anyone could preserve the balance between both languages; s/he could be able to write in

9
both languages fluently. As Carson and Kuehn stated, “…Discourse competence in L1
writing does transfer to the L2, and that lack of aptitude in L1 writing will also handicap the
writer in L2” (1992:177).
Additionally, both cognitive and socio-cultural factors have an efficient role in the area of L2
writing development (Jourdan and Tuite, 2006). L2 writing may involve both L2 language
proficiency and L1 writing expertise and ability (Kobayashi and Rinnert, 2008). Writing
problems are not only due to content problems, however, other relevant factors include the
culture, society, or previous academic background, which may lead the students towards
ambiguity. The writers identified the cause of the problems as a lack of travelling experience
and the non-native environment of the students.
Teachers should pay much attention to the L1-L2 transfer problem, and L2 learners should be
separated from native speakers for the sake of motivation. The idea of L2 writing influenced
many writers in the field of language. Many studies have been carried out on the role of L1
on L2 writing. Many writers have argued that L2 writers transfer their linguistic features from
their L1 in order to write in English. Usually students depend on their L1 linguistic
knowledge to create L2 ideas. Many linguists identify this as the influence of one’s L1
knowledge on the use of the L2. For example, a study was conducted on 16 Chinese students
in order to find out the effect of their L1 on their L2 writing (Wang and Wen, 2002). The
study wanted to show the problems faced by the Chinese students when developing their
English writing. The results showed that they rely on their L1 when composing in the L2. The
students used both the L1 and L2 content knowledge at their disposals. However, they used

10
their L1 linguistic competence more than their L2 linguistic competence. Consequently, their
writing was hard to follow due to the lack of logical connectors.
Additionally, Wang and Wen (2002) believed that L2 writers have more than one language at
their disposal and more attention needs to be paid to how they are using these languages.
More evidence can be found in Darus and Ching (2009); they conducted different studies that
showed that Chinese students have faults in their usage of mechanics, tense, prepositions and
subject-verb agreement. The study concluded that those problems were due to direct
translation and L1 interference during L2 writing. The aforementioned writers explained the
role of L1 in L2 writing; both Crerand (1992) and Carson and Kuehn (1992) declared that
NNS switch between L1 and L2 due to topic independence, since L1 to L2 transfer conquered
the field of L2 academic writing.
2.1.4. The Problems of NNS in Developing Their English Academic
Writing
Writing may involve organising, translating ideas from L1, grammar, punctuation, and
spelling (Cheng, 1993; Swick, 2009). In his two books, Hinkel (2004, 2011) identified that
organization and structuring are becoming the focal point of native writing classes. He
illustrates that they both refer to the connectivity of the ideas in the text; hence, the
connections should be logical. On the other hand, both Hirose (2003) and Wallace and Wray
(2011) explained that the early part of the writing should be linked to the conclusion, and that
the arguments should be organized logically. However, structuring is absent in university

11
writing for many NNS, as Hirose (2003) found in a study on Japanese students’
argumentative writing.
Many Kurdish students flourish their writing with bombastic words, while it is not well-
structured. Their writing is biased and uninformed; this causes the reader to give their work a
negative evaluation. Flourishing and decorating writing with bombastic words and
expressions will distance the work from being clear and neat. Furthermore, Bailey (2011)
explained that paragraphs are considered as the building structure of writing, and they should
be well-organized with logical connectors being used to help the reader. Due to the lack of
logical connectors, the writing will be vague. Moreover, sometimes the writing would be
understandable with the existence of some grammatical errors, but it would be so difficult to
follow.
A study was conducted by Keow (2001) on six Singaporean primary school students. The
medium of their instruction was English and their mother tongue was Chinese. The data
showed firstly that the students were very worried about the organisation of their writing,
rather than being worried about mechanical problems. Secondly, the students tried their best
to write effective and purposeful paragraphs, although at the same time they left grammatical
and vocabulary errors. They believed that paragraphing would help the text to flow
effectively. Additionally, another study was conducted by Kubota (1998) on 46 Japanese
undergraduate students at some Japanese universities. The data revealed that the students
were influenced by their academic background and this negatively affected the quality of
their English writing. The students suffered from a lack of experience in following
instructions. The students had problems with structuring their essays, since organizing and

12
structuring were ignored in their education, and more emphasis was put on grammar and
linguistics.
Furthermore, foreign/second language writing is the habit of reinforcing the language patterns
or the extension of the grammar (Coxhead and Byrd, 2007; Hinkel, 2011). In addition,
Hyland (2006) discovered that grammatical problems are one of the issues that should be
considered. He identified the fact that L2 writers usually have problems with the correct use
of modals, since it is absent in their native language. If we use Kurdish students as an
example, this problem will be clarified and identified easily. The use of modal verbs are
absent in the Kurdish language, meaning that the students face difficulty in finding alternative
words for the modals. Moreover, many NNS’ writing problems involve grammatical or
lexical rules (Hinkel, 2002, 2004). For students with a limited linguistic range, due to a lack
of language skills, this will be considered as a serious handicap in their academic skills
(Karahan, 2007).
In the science departments of many Eastern countries, writing is not considered as a major
issue and it is not very important (Hinkel, 2004). Therefore, many non-native students are
taught to be dry and impersonal in their writing, which might be the cause of their grammar
problems (Hyland, 2002a). Additionally, Hyland (2002a) explained that many Eastern
students are taught to use ideas from books rather than using their own ideas. However, this
could be problematic, since the students take ideas from books/journals without referencing
them, which constitutes plagiarism. Hence, it is not surprising at all when L2 students have
difficulty in conveying their ideas or their meaning, since they depend on limited syntactic
rules and language skills. Moreover, often when the students are instructed to write an

13
English essay with the correct grammar, they are not likely to do well in it. Furthermore,
another study was conducted by Crossley and McNamara (2011) on inter-group homogeneity
among students from different European backgrounds, in order to find out whether or not
they all share linguistic and syntactic problems. The results showed that the students from the
related backgrounds share the same problems; they use less sophisticated vocabulary with
highly complex grammar to show the power of their writing.
Additionally, Belcher and Braine (1995) identified that some problems of NNS’ writing are
due to a lack of motivation, inadequate preparation, poor discipline and/or the negative
attitudes of the teachers. However, sometimes students with high motivation and good
discipline still face difficulty in writing. In these cases, the problem is due to the proficiency
test. Mastering any language is not easy and requires a lot of work. Belcher and Braine
(1995) conducted a study on Zhang, a Chinese native speaker who wanted to complete his
study in the USA. They found that Zhang’s problems were due to three reasons besides the
lack of motivation and inadequate preparation. Firstly, he could not express himself and he
found it difficult to convey the message in English. Secondly, he had a low interest in the
English culture and did not like to socialize with English native speakers. Thirdly, Zhang had
not been taught different writing instructions and did not know about writing strategies.
In addition, Rabab’ah (2002) identified that Arab students, especially Jordanian students, face
difficulty with lexical, syntactical and phonological faults. Many students cannot continue
with their writing due to the lack of sufficient vocabulary and content knowledge on the
given subject. Arab students have problems with both grammar and vocabulary; hence, these
factors lead them to stop whilst in the middle of writing. The major problem is related to the

14
students’ deficiencies in self-expression; another factor is that they use English as a tool to
pass their exams rather than learning it in order to communicate with others. Arab students
share almost the same problems as Kurdish students, due to the similarities in their
backgrounds. Rabab’ah identified some factors underlying this problem, which are as
follows:
x The lack of TL environment and sufficient motivation.
x Inadequate teaching methods and instructions.
x Out-of-date curriculum and sources.
x In many departments, except the English department, the lecturers teach in Arabic.
x Lack of sufficient knowledge about the English culture and language for both teachers
and students.
x There is no opportunity to practise natural English, and students do not bother
themselves with doing writing practise. They use the language only when they are
obliged to do so.
Further evidence can be found in the work of Jordan (1997). The writer searched for those
writing difficulties that many overseas students, students who study at UK and USA
universities, suffer from. The list below shows the students’ problems, ranging from the most
to the least problematic.

15
(Jordan, 1997:46)
Table (1). The range of writing problems from the most to the least problematic.
The data shows that the students had more problems with the principles of producing writing,
rather than the process.
In addition, Table (2) shows the students’ abilities in different aspects of academic writing;
the students were from six engineering faculties in one of the American universities which
has a large number of NNS. The survey was conducted on the NNS in those faculties.
Vocabulary 62%
Style 53%
Spelling 41%
Grammar 38%
Punctuation 18%
Handwriting 12%

16
(Jordan, 1997:49)
Table (2). The students’ abilities in different aspects of academic writing, graded in
percentage form.
Jordan explained that the non-native students’ major problem is the lack of logical arguments
in paragraphs. In writing, more attention should be paid to writing instructions to achieve
stylistic writing.
Students’ abilities in Academic writing Grade
Grammar/Sentence structure 25%
Appropriate vocabulary 24%
Punctuation and spelling 22%
Overall writing ability 21%
Logical connection 13%
Ability to self-correct own work 13%
Importance of writing for department 11%
Presenting ideas in organized way 7%
Avoiding plagiarism 7%
Stating problems clearly 7%
Quality of content 5%

17
By contrast, another study investigated the common errors made by Iranian students. Their
problems were with content and form. Their difficulties started with punctuation (67%),
grammar (55%), referencing (54%), organizing (52.3%), expressing ideas (51%), spelling
(46%), and ended with content problems (39%). The students claimed that they cannot
express their ideas due to a lack of experience of the English language. Their weak
foundation and shortage of motivation will not allow them to improve (Mousavi and
Kashefian-Naeeini, 2011).
Additionally, in his study, Doushaq (1986) illustrated the role of grammar in academic
writing; students should master grammatical structure in order to be a good writer. The study
was made on 96 Jordanian students in order to identify organisation, sequencing the ideas,
subject unity, coherence, grammar, spelling, punctuation, and vocabulary problems. The
students did not perform well; their major problem was grammatical mistakes and the minor
problems were mechanical errors, stylistic errors, and rhetorical errors. Furthermore, thirty
Iranian postgraduate students were participants in a study by Namvar et al (2012). The results
indicated that they have problems with both grammar and vocabulary. The writers identified
the reason underlying these problems as the lack of using the vocabulary they learned in the
classes. The learners are unable to use grammar rules correctly, and through just memorizing
words they cannot convey their intended message. Iranian students learn words separately
and then they translate it into their mother tongue, which means they store words individually
and not as a chunk. Hence, they fail to bind the words grammatically. The reason for this was
due to the lack of native teachers and a lack of sufficient authentic guidance books.

18
Mojica (2010) identified a lack of linguistic abilities in terms of students having deficiencies
in organisation, structuring, coherence and the correct use of grammar; these are problems for
many EFL/ESL students. The case is the same for Kurdish students; they struggle to fulfil
their requirements for academic writing. Moreover, Umair (2011) examined 90 Arab
students, and found that they have multi-ability writing problems. By contrast, Fadda (2012)
collected some samples of writing from 50 postgraduate Arab students in King Saud
university, Saudi Arabia. The data showed that the students’ major problem is associated with
style and referencing rather than the other problems.
In the modern society, one cannot write about a subject unless s/he has enough knowledge
about the subject. One of the problems that should be identified in the field of academic
writing is the content problem, which is when the students do not have sufficient familiarity
with the subject. This requires both cognitive knowledge and L1 experience in order to write
in English; if the students cannot fulfil these criteria, they cannot write well. In her case
study, Crerand (1992) identified that the more knowledge students have about the subject, the
better their writing will be. Her studies concerned the problems of grammar, syntax,
vocabulary and orthography, which were due to the content problem.
Writing requires students to look beyond the level of words, which means the students should
pay sufficient attention to the content, grammar and structural rules. The content problem for
Arab students is another problematic issue, which is due to the lack of availability of
authentic texts; developing and preserving their knowledge requires a lot of effort (Al-
Khasawneh, 2010). Ten Arab postgraduate students, who were doing a Masters course at
Utara university, Malaysia, participated in a study by Al-Khasawneh. Their major problems

19
were the lack of sufficient information about the content, a smaller range of vocabulary, a
weak foundation, the environment, and teaching methods. Another study by Bacha (2002)
showed the same problems for Arab students as were identified by Al-Khasawneh.
Silva and Matsuda (2001) and Baba (2009) explained that students could create different
imaginations and develop the content knowledge through reading different sources. It has
been proved that many low-level proficient students translate the ideas directly from their L1
due to the lack of content knowledge (Baba, 2009). Baba conducted a survey on 68 Japanese
students, examining their summary writing. He found that due to the lack of reading, the
students are unable to express their knowledge. He stated that reading would increase the
background knowledge and reduce content problems. In addition, Wang and Wen (2002)
believed that the task environment, composing process and long-term memory play their
roles in the students’ writing problems. However, only a few researchers studied the
complexity of context and the text, but Belcher et al (2011) argue that the text and its context
should be interrelated firmly; otherwise, critical ethnography should be used as an
appropriate methodology.
Validity and relevance are the principles of writing. The writer should design their writing to
be valid and the content should be logical. In addition, the content should be relevant to the
subject. Otherwise, the readers will get lost while they are reading the text (Wallace and
Wray, 2011). Both Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998) explained that validity is the main
point in writing, in order to attract different readers, and the arguments should be persuasive.
They categorized writing approaches into both the product and the process approaches. The
product approach could deal with mechanical, style and linguistic problems. In comparison,

20
the process approach could deal with planning, brainstorming and revision of the written text.
Writing cannot be finished by only using class knowledge; students should brainstorm their
ideas about the content and express it logically with the use of correct grammar to convey the
meaning (Dudley-Evans and St. John, 1998; Belcher et al, 2011; Cheng, 1993).
A study was conducted by Holden (1995) on 39 Singaporean A-level students who were in
the second year of college. The aim of the study was to ascertain the effect of topic difficulty
on the NNS. The results showed that if the students were provided with some vocabulary
about the topic, they found it easier to write the paragraphs of text. By comparison, if the
students were not provided with the relevant vocabulary then they found it more difficult to
write the paragraphs.
More evidence can be found in the work of Msanjila (2005), who illustrates that many
students from African universities have problems with expressing themselves logically and
systematically. Additionally, they mix both English and Kiswahili language expressions.
Hence, comprehending ideas is complex and difficult. The writer conducted a case study on
60 students from two different secondary schools in Tanzania. The English language was the
language of work for many, and the students were not interested in the language. The study
revealed seven major problems in the students’ writing: capitalization, punctuation problems,
fuzziness, poor organisation and illogical sequence, spelling problems and grammatical
errors. Writers should use a number of principles to aid the reader in understanding the
meaning; failure to do so causes complexity, vagueness and ambiguity. The writers revealed
the main causes of the problems. Firstly, they could not differentiate between written and
spoken language. Secondly, there was a lack of sufficient authentic sources for the students

21
and teachers. Thirdly, there was a shortage of qualified teachers and poor teaching methods.
Finally, they transferred their ideas from their L1 to English and this made some expressions
sound strange. These problems will affect the content and understanding will be difficult.
2.1.5. Teaching English Academic Writing Instructions in Non-Native
Classes
Another relevant point to be considered could involve the lack of sufficient instructions for
teaching academic writing. Silva and Brice (2004) demonstrated that L2 writing is a
phenomenon where L2 writers should pay much more attention to the writing instructions
rather than linguistic errors. Additionally, Crerand (1992) claimed that direct translations by
the students is due to the lack of sufficient writing instructions in their academic curriculum
and the fact that there is less motivation by the non-native teachers to teach academic writing
lessons. Since the 1990s, the instructions for teaching academic writing in EFL/ESL classes
have been developed, at least theoretically. Hedge (2000) maintained that the first step of
writing could be accounted for as the hardest step. Hence, the choice of information and
deciding to start writing needs to be fulfilled in the early stage of writing. Later, the students
should mind-map all the knowledge they have on the content. Grammar and language
mistakes should be corrected after binding the ideas together. Organization and structuring
are other techniques which will make the writing coherent and logical. Students should be
informed about these strategies because if the student just combines one pattern with another,
the reader will be unable to understand it.

22
Usually NNS depend on a narrow range of linguistic rules. This limited range will produce
uncertainty in their minds to write in English. The problem is due to the lack of familiarity
with different procedures and rules of how to write rhetorically and linguistically. Due to the
lack of appropriate instructions on academic writing for many NNS, they face difficulty in
their writing (Storch, 2009). A study by Yamada (2004) proved the issue that teaching
writing instructions will improve students’ experiences in L2 writing. Teaching writing
instructions could be the good base of learning for NNS of English, as in many UK and USA
universities and schools these problems are overcome through various teaching methods
(Bacha, 2002). However, unfortunately, in many Eastern countries, especially in Kurdistan,
L1 instructions are used in L2 writing classes, and L1 methods influence L2 writing (James,
2010; Kibler, 2010).
For Hyland (2006), writing involves both bodily experience and time. Writers should create a
specific kind of world in which they do their writing. However, external factors, such as
political, religious and economic issues may alternate writer’s way of thinking and isolate
him/her from the main idea of the work. In modern societies, political issues have controlled
the educational system (Sillars, 1999). For example, Abu-Ghazaleh and Hijazi (2011),
through their studies on Jordanian students, explained that in many Eastern countries the
students rejected learning the English language due to cultural and political matters. They
believe that if they learn the language they will lose their own identity. Consequently, when
they come abroad to finish their studies and they are asked to write in English, they cannot.

23
In another way, political issues will reduce their language experience and content knowledge.
Hence, students should be provided with a good social environment and adequate instructions
while they are writing. Providing these will drive the student towards producing an organized
and structured piece of work. Moreover, discourse should be taught in NNS writing classes in
order for students to achieve a better ability to convey their intended message. Discourse can
be identified as a clear form of innovation in the field of writing. It is the way of writing for
NNS that mirrors their culture and tradition (Hyland, 2009). Although Manuchehri’s (1974)
study is old, some of these problems have still been dragged into the new era of writing. For
example, the lack of native teachers and adequate instructions has disappointed many
students.
Hinkel (2002) claimed that L2 writing is often over-hedged and this makes the writing
different from native writing. He explained the issue using the example of Arab students who
over-generalize their ideas and write many ideas in English that are not fully developed. The
lack of sufficient instructions for their writing is the source of this problem. After examining
some students’ essays, Hinkel concluded that most of the NNS cannot organize the structure
of their writing and develop their ideas. Additionally, he indicates that non-native students
use the same techniques and strategies as used by the native students.
Due to the absence of writing instructions in the early classes of primary or secondary
schools, many students face difficulties in writing a coherent text with the correct grammar
and vocabulary (Keow, 2001). Additionally, Cheng (1993) believed that many Asian students
lack the basic principles of writing. Therefore, they are not able to express themselves
adequately. As a result, the students make more errors, whether grammatically or

24
mechanically. Bradley-Johnson and Lesiak (1989) discussed the importance of class
interaction. They stated that students should be familiarized with components such as:
a. The importance of handwriting, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling: This was the
basic component in the late 1980s. However, with the coming of technology and
computers these issues cannot play an effective role, since computers will correct
spelling mistakes and the incorrect use of capitalization.
b. Vocabulary and word usage: This will show the writers’ skills and make the material
more interesting to read.
c. Sentence and paragraph structure: Sentence structure deals with the correct syntax and
grammar. A lack of agreement in the terms may mislead the reader. Additionally,
paragraph structure deals with headings and sub-headings, and the paragraphs should
be organised logically.
d. Production and quality: The written material should be sufficient, and sufficient
information should be given on the content, in order to transmit the message clearly.
Hinkel (2004) put forward four key concepts that each play a role in the writing process:
i. The English proficiency level of NNS is different from NS and they need to work
for many years to be native-like.
ii. Applying the instructions of NS to NNS does not lead to improvement because
their language acquirement is still not sufficient.
iii. Experience and access to writing for NS is different to that of NNS. In other
words, NNS’ linguistic and syntactic levels are not high enough to rely on to
transform knowledge from their L1.

25
iv. Their vocabulary and discourse are not developed enough because they come
from a different system of education.
2.1.6. Conclusion
Students have suffered from different problems of writing for a very long time. However,
recently many scholars and linguists have emphasized that the problems could be related to
the language and the linguistic proficiency of students (Pennington and So, 1993). In
comparison, other linguists have asserted that the problems might not be due to language-
related factors but rather result from insufficient and inadequate writing instructions (Arndt,
1987; Silva and Brice, 2004). Arndt (1987) supported the idea that NNS could improve their
written ideas through writing instructions and L1 stimulation. Pennington and So (1993)
conducted a study on six Singaporean university students to prove this idea; the results
showed that the instructions that are given in EFL/ESL classes improved the quality of NNS’
writing. In addition, linguistic proficiency tests and good writing instructions might have an
indirect role in the writing process. Otherwise, students will blindly rely on their L1 to finish
their writing. Mirhamadi (2011) conducted an experiment on 25 junior Iranian students who
studied abroad. Their grammar and vocabulary problems were due to the lack of sufficient
instructions in Iran. A study by Manuchehri (1974) revealed the same problem for Persian
students. A good way of overcoming these problems is to ensure that students are well
instructed and that they can assess their own work (Mojica, 2010).

26
2.2. Educational Background of Kurdish Students
2.2.1. Exposure to English Language and its Importance in Kurdistan
Kurdistan is a province which is surrounded by Arab, Turkish and Persian people. Each
speaks in a different language to the Kurdish language. Many years ago, the English language
was not considered as an important language and many people rejected learning it.
Nowadays, due to the development of the media and foreign companies in the region, many
people wish to learn the language for the sake of communication and applying for a better
job. The environment in which the Kurdish students are learning the English language is a
non-native environment and almost all the teachers are English non-native speakers.
Additionally, Kurdish students do not like to read a lot because they were not taught to do so.
However, as has been explained in many studies, the writing skill cannot be acquired
successfully by writing alone, but it also requires reading. Reading may provide students with
different and new knowledge about different topics. In his dissertation, Bonair (2004)
discussed the importance of the media besides reading for NNS. He stated that access to the
media and reading stories would influence the development of English academic writing.
Additionally, traditional methods of teaching writing had failed to meet many students’
needs. Furthermore, the absence of this activity in Kurdistan has meant that many students do
not prefer to read books. As a result, the lack of rhetorical and structural knowledge will
affect their writing. Both Silva and Matsuda (2001) and Hyland (2002b) explained that
writing and reading are two attached skills, whereby the development of one depends on the
other.

27
High-order operations in the writing process, such as planning, evaluating the text,
brainstorming and mind mapping have an important role in developing ideas. During L2
writing, students will depend on these operations but unfortunately these are all absent for the
Kurdish students. They cannot mind-map their ideas and plan his/her work because the
educational system did not give them the opportunity to learn these skills. Usually Kurdish
students prefer to translate those expressions, idioms or sayings that give a powerful
meaning. In fact, when they translate these expressions, it does not mean that the meaning
should remain the same. Many times my university instructors in Kurdistan told my friends
and me ‘Where did you find this expression?’, since s/he did not get our point and had never
heard of such an expression before.
2.2.2. The Education System and English Language Teaching in
Secondary schools and at University Level in Kurdistan
The education system in Kurdistan is divided into three different levels. Primary and
Secondary schools take 6 years each, and University takes 4 years except for architectural
engineering, which takes 5 years, and Medicine, which takes 6 years. The weakness and
negative points of the education system is the lack of availability of sufficient authentic
English sources and English native teachers. Another issue that should be considered is the
use of the Kurdish language inside the class. All teachers and students, except for those in
some engineering departments and the English department, are communicating in the Kurdish
language and use the language to give lectures. Furthermore, students from the 5th
grade of
primary school until the 1st
year of university have only one hour of general English per
week. Additionally, apart from the medicine, engineering and English departments, all other
departments do not have any English lessons after the 1st
year. This problem has resulted in

28
many Kurdish students facing difficulty with the English language generally and with English
academic writing specifically.
Moreover, many Kurdish adult students may find English writing difficult or even may not
achieve it, owing to the fossilization of the knowledge in their mind or because they have
reached the level of competence which means they cannot change easily. As an English non-
native student, I believe that the English writing of Kurdish students is shorter in length, less
cohesive, less fluent, and contains more grammatical, vocabulary and punctuation errors
because they cannot express every idea that they have in their L1 or they may translate the
ideas in a wrong way. Rhetorical and linguistic forms cannot transfer between the languages
easily. Hence, they do not have the ability to write a well-organized academic piece of
writing. The problems that Kurdish students have in Kurdistan are due to the non-native
environment and the lack of English native teachers. Kurdish students hardly meet English
native speakers, and their classmates and teachers are all Kurdish. With the exception of the
English department, subjects taught by most of the other departments are taught in either
Arabic or Kurdish. Additionally, there is no English proficiency test for entrance to the
university. Besides, the academic curriculum is completely different. Furthermore, students
do not have the tendency to learn the language for any other reason except to pass their
exams. These problems will lead the students to face difficulty with their writing.
In the case of Kurdish students, the methods of English writing for academic purposes have
been traditional and strictly related to the educational curriculum. As Manchon and Haan
(2008) explained, the academic system and previous academic instruction will shape
EFL/ESL writing. Their investigation showed that socio-culture plays a crucial role in the

29
composing process. The majority of the students preferred to use L1 instructions, while they
write in the L2.
2.2.3. English Language Writing at University Level
One of the problematic issues that should be identified for Kurdish students is in writing and
developing academic writing. The background of English academic writing in Kurdistan is so
weak because of the fact that the students are not used to writing or communicating in
English. During four academic years, only a few students write a dissertation. By contrast, the
majority did not write even an assignment. In addition, due to the absence of writing reports
and assignments, the students find difficulty in writing a piece of well-organized work. Many
Kurdish students, even some teachers, see only the surface form of writing. Having control of
the surface features is crucial, but different components, such as cohesive devices, lexicon
and linguistic forms should also be considered. Sometimes students can write in English with
the correct grammar, but they cannot apply the knowledge that they learned to the content. In
other words, most of the Kurdish students’ problems are with the content, due to the lack of
sufficient information on the topic.
Moreover, in Kurdistan many faculties and departments ask their students to write an English
work, whilst the teachers do not give sufficient and adequate instructions on what the writing
should be like and how to structure the writing. In addition, it would be strange if teachers
ask for every detail to be written because the teachers are NNS and they do not have adequate
information about different pedagogies. The reason for this is quite simple; it is due to the
lack of sufficient sources and authentic books. Hence, usually students do not have enough

30
knowledge on the ways of writing. In addition, it has been discussed that L2 writing
instructions have remained the same and that teachers use the same pedagogy that previous
teachers used almost 20-30 years ago. Hence, students cannot find anything interesting about
English writing; however, sometimes it is the most hated part for them.
Furthermore, Kurdish students lack knowledge about structuring and ideas sequencing. They
cannot organize their paragraphs logically because teachers in most departments do not focus
on invention and creation; they just need a piece of writing that covers the subject that they
already taught to the students. As a result, students struggle with the creation of logical
paragraphs because they cannot use cohesive devices correctly and this will mislead the
readers. Consequently, students should practise more to improve their writing, and usually
they should sequence ideas logically to convey the meaning (Robinson, 1991). Another
problem could be the lack of experience and the inability to convey their ideas through
sentences. When I was an undergraduate student, my teachers always told us ‘You are
moving around the bush, why you do not hit the core?’ Sometimes, the students claimed that
they wrote two pages for one question, yet they still got a low mark. They thought that
getting a high mark should depend on quantity, rather than quality. However, a brief but
meaningful idea is better than long and inadequate paragraphs.
2.2.4. Conclusion
To sum up, Kurdish students encounter many difficulties in writing and this fact has been
clearly identified. The non-native environment and academic system have great roles in these
difficulties, since even if you like to speak only a few will understand you. Therefore, there

31
are almost no or very few opportunities to practise natural English and to interact with NS.
Some other factors, such as the lack of teachers’ interest in teaching the lessons, a lack of
proficient teachers, and the use of the mother tongue, the Kurdish language, even inside the
class, resulted in the students paying less attention to their English proficiency level. Another
factor could be the lack of practise, meaning that the students are unable to apply the
instructions they have already learned. Moreover, the topic difficulty could be another
relevant reason because the topic choice is not in the students’ control (Belcher et al, 2011).
Holden (1995) conducted a study on a group of Singaporean students, and found that the
priority is given to the teachers inside classes. Hence, content problems and a lack of
sufficient knowledge on the topic might be other obstacles to writing.

32
Chapter 3. Research Design and Methodology
3.1. Research Design
The main aim of the current chapter is to explore the problems faced by Kurdish students in
developing their academic writing, and to discuss the design of the research questions. The
focal point is on Kurdish students’ major/minor problems, and the reasons behind the causes
of these problems. The first section of the chapter will discuss the context and the research
questions. The second section will illustrate the participants and the mixed-methods that are
used in the research. The third section will discuss the method of data analysis.
3.2. Context and Research Questions
The study is conducted in the English Language Teaching Centre (ELTC) at the University of
Sheffield. The students are studying in the centre to develop their academic English
proficiency and the main aim is to achieve the required score for entrance to the university.
The teachers are both English native and non-native speakers. However, the data were only
collected from the English native speaker teachers. The teaching methods are up-to-date and
new technologies are used for teaching, such as smart boards and computers. Moreover, it is
prohibited to speak in any language inside the class except English. Furthermore, the students
are taught different lessons, such as writing, speaking, IELTS and USEPT exam preparation.
Additionally, different students of different nationalities can be found in one class based on
the outcome of their English proficiency test, which they took to identify their proficiency
level. Besides, students attend 5 days/week, which amounts to 21 hours/week. The standard
range of students per class is 14-16. In addition, they are provided with books.

33
The teachers ask the students if they have any academic problems, and in the following
lessons they will discuss them. Moreover, they have afternoon classes, which provide
students with information about IELTS and USEPT tests. Furthermore, every Wednesday the
students have seminar lectures to improve students’ listening and note-taking skills, in order
to prepare them for the university lectures. Lastly, they have a mobile library so that they can
receive short stories and they can discuss the stories after the class to practise their reading
and speaking.
Based on the literature review, the following research questions have been formulated, in
order to achieve the purpose of the study:
1. What major, secondary and minor problems do Kurdish students at the ‘ELTC’ face
in developing their academic writing skills in English?
2. Are their problems different or similar to those of other international students?
3. What progress have students made during study at the ‘ELTC’?
4. What recommendations, if any, do you have for the preparation of the students’
writing to study at an English-medium University in the UK and USA?
3.2.1. Ethical Issues
The participants were told to take part in the research voluntarily. Additionally, they were all
informed that the given information will be kept strictly confidential and that their
participation in the questionnaire and interview session will be anonymous (see cover letter
of questionnaire in Appendix A, and interview sheet in Appendix B).

34
Before collecting the data, a standard ethics form was completed by the researcher and signed
by the allocated supervisor; a copy of the form was then sent to the department of English
Language and Linguistics for the purpose of reviewing.
3.2.2. Reliability and Validity
The research tools used in this study are regarded as valid tools for achieving the overall aims
and objectives of the study. The reliability and validity can be observed on the basis of the
following:
1. The key number for validity is 30 participants for the questionnaire. However, the
interview participants are different from the questionnaire students. Moreover, essays were
collected from different students in order to achieve the collection of further data from
different Kurdish students so that the research questions could be answered.
2. The three research methods (questionnaire, interview with both the teachers and the
students, and essay collection) were conducted at the ELTC, University of Sheffield, UK.
3. The questionnaire and interview items were formulated by the researcher and some
teachers from the ELTC were asked to revise the items in the questionnaire to avoid obscurity
in the wording and content of the final version.
4. Finally, all methods were approved by the supervisor.

35
3.3. Methodology
In this section, a general overview will firstly be discussed. Following this, the methods of
data collection will be explained. In the data collection section, the participants’ backgrounds
and the research methods used will be indicated.
3.3.1. General Overview
The present research used a ‘mixture of both the qualitative and the quantitative data’ (Ellis
and Barkhuizen, 2005; Dornyei, 2007; Bitchener, 2010). All the participants in this study
took part voluntarily. Moreover, some English native teachers at the ELTC also voluntarily
took part in the study.
3.3.2. Data Collection
3.3.2.1. Participants
In order to achieve the purpose of the study, a number of ELTC teachers and Kurdish
students were required to participate in the survey. The participants who participated in the
questionnaire were Kurdish students (n=30) and ELTC English native teachers who taught
writing (n=5). Five students were asked to participate in the interview to also hear their
problems face-to-face; some of the students participated in the questionnaire while some
others did not. Finally, different essays (n=5) from different students were collected to
evaluate the Kurdish students’ competence and to identify their problems through their
writing and the given feedback by the ELTC teachers. Moreover, all of the students are from
the same culture and English is their foreign language.

36
3.3.2.2. Methods
The purpose of this research could be achieved by collecting data through a survey study. The
survey study contained ‘mixed-method approaches’ (Dornyei, 2007; Bitchener, 2010), with
three types of methods being used: a questionnaire, an interview, and the collection of
students’ essays.
a. Questionnaires: Questionnaires were given to Kurdish students (n=30) who study
at the ELTC. The students agreed to participate in the study voluntarily.
Moreover, all the questions were designed by the researcher and were approved
by his supervisor. The questionnaires consist of two parts. The first part aims to
collect some background information about the students’ previous
academic/educational background and the environment that they came from. The
second part aims to identify the students’ major and minor problems in writing. In
addition, it identifies the factors underlying their problems and the improvements
they have seen since they began studying at the ELTC. The questionnaires are
both close and open-ended, and were designed to collect students’ ideas on their
improvements since studying at the ELTC and the activities they have done in the
centre. See Appendix (A) for the questionnaires used in the study.
b. Interviews: Interviews with both the ELTC English native teachers (n=3), who all
taught writing lessons, and Kurdish students (n=5) were conducted. The
interviews were open-ended to give them freedom when answering and the
opportunity to mention any problems they have. Moreover, all the questions were
approved by the supervisor. The interview took 20-30 minutes for the students and
10-20 minutes for the teachers. Furthermore, some students participated in the

37
questionnaire and some did not, in order to collect different ideas. Some questions
were posed to both the teachers and the students to obtain different answers. The
interviews were conducted for two reasons. Firstly, the aim was to find out the
students’ major and minor problems in writing and how these problems are
different from those experienced by other nationalities. Additionally, the
interviews explore some suggestions and appropriate solutions for their problems.
Secondly, the interviews provide opportunities for some students to indicate their
problems more clearly and to give their opinions on the background of their
previous academic system. See Appendix (B) for the questions prepared for both
the teachers and the students.
c. Essays: The purpose of collecting essays is to find out some problems faced by
students when writing essays. The essays were collected from Kurdish students
(n=5); some participated in the questionnaires and interviews and some did not.
The essays were corrected by different teachers from the ELTC and corrective
feedbacks were given on each essay. The goal behind the collection of the essays
is to collect different data. See Appendix (C) for the students’ essays.
3.4. Data Analysis
As previously mentioned, a mixture of qualitative and quantitative data was collected. The
statistical analysis of the questionnaire will be conducted using the software program
‘Microsoft Excel’ in order to obtain some figures and tables. Both the interview and essay
findings will be reported and discussed later. The interview data will be collected through

38
analysing both the teachers’ and the students’ speech. Finally, the essays can be analysed
through the corrective-feedback and corrections that the ELTC teachers wrote on the papers.

39
Chapter 4. Findings: Presentation, Analysis, and Discussion
4. Presentation and Discussion of the data
The objective of this chapter is to present and discuss the collected information about the
Kurdish students in the ELTC. The chapter is divided into two sections. Firstly, it presents
and reports the results and findings of the questionnaires, interviews and essays. Secondly, it
will discuss and illustrate the data in detail, with comparisons being made with previous
studies’ findings; the findings will be discussed in relation with each research question.
4.1. Results and Findings
This section contains an analysis of the research data collected from the questionnaire, the
interview and the essay analysis. Quantitative data were collected from the questionnaire
survey. Moreover, qualitative data were gathered through the face-to-face interview and the
essay analysis.
4.1.1. Questionnaire Results and Discussion
As previously indicated, the questionnaires have two sections. The first section is designed to
indicate the students’ educational background in Kurdistan and to reveal the frequency of use
of English academic writing in their classes at university. The second section will illustrate
the students’ major and minor problems in their academic writing. Additionally, it will
explain the factors behind these problems. Moreover, it will show the improvements in
writing that the Kurdish students have seen since they have been studying at the ELTC.

40
Finally, it will determine those activities that they have carried out in writing classes at the
ELTC.
For the background questions, the students were asked many questions (see Appendix A), but
the most important questions will be illustrated here. Firstly, they were asked whether they
attended a private or state university, and all the students (n=30) answered that they had
attended a state university. Secondly, they were asked whether their lessons were taught in
Kurdish or in the English language, but the findings revealed that only half of the students
(n=15) were taught in the English language. However, only 2 out of the 15 students were
taught by English native teachers. This means that 93.3% of the participants had English non-
native teachers and learnt in a non-native environment. Consequently, the students’
environment might be a factor which affects Kurdish students’ academic writing, since they
did not practise the language adequately; this is similar to the findings of Rabab’ah (2002)
arising from an investigation of Jordanian students.
Moreover, the students were asked to indicate how many hours/week they did English
academic writing at university in Kurdistan. Most of the students (n=24) gave the response of
‘none’; this response accounted for 80% of the students. Additionally, 90% of the students
did not have any kind of English academic writing at university. Consequently, 76.6% of the
students were not satisfied with their English writing classes in Kurdistan. This could
illustrate that the students do not only suffer from the non-native environment, even though
they did not have adequate information on writing. This could be the evidence that shows that
Kurdish students use direct translation from their L1, as explained by Crerand (1992), Keow
(2001) and Storch (2009). The lack of practising academic writing means that the students

41
suffer when they write in English. This finding could indicate that the students need more
guidance and help to improve their academic writing. It seems that the lack of writing
instructions in the classes and the lack of writing practise could be a barrier for the students
and that these factors will decrease their interest to learn and write in English. This could be
the reason why most of the Kurdish students have more problems in their writing than the
other tasks, and this finding is supported by their IELTS or USEPT exam results. Almost all
of the students (n=28), that is 93.3%, got less than a score of 6.5 in the writing band when
they came to the UK, but an improvement could be found in their writing now.
The responses to these background questions show that the students’ problems could be due
to different factors, one of which could be their previous educational and academic
background because they do not have a strong foundation and base for their writing.
Moreover, most of the students were dissatisfied with their English language ability in
general and academic writing in particular, and the reason for this is due to the lack of
sufficient teachers and adequate instructions. The findings indicate that the weak foundation
of their previous academic system and few opportunities to practise pure English could be
another problem underlying their writing performance; this could be supported by the work
of Bacha (2002) and Yamada (2004). This section has provided a brief explanation on the
students’ previous academic background at university in Kurdistan.
The second section of the questionnaire will commentate on the students’ problems, factors
underlying the problems, and the development in students’ writing that they have experienced
since they began studying at the ELTC. The problem of idea transfer has had a wide range of
discussion in the field of second language academic writing due to the fact that it is the matter

42
of the fossilization of limited information in the mind of NNS (Kroll, 1990; Silva, 1992; Silva
and Matsuda, 2001; Hinkel, 2002, 2011). Kurds, like any other nationalities, such as Arabs
and Chinese, have the same problems, as was admitted by the most of the students (n=21).
Moreover, 63.3% of the students affirmed that their Kurdish language will help them to write
in English. This finding is also found in the studies by both Wang and Wen (2002) and Darus
and Ching (2009) in relation to Chinese students. The survey of the Kurdish students proved
that their L1 affected their L2 writing and made them face difficulty while they were writing
in English. Consequently, the students think of an idea in Kurdish, but they mistranslate it
into English. Effectively, this is an obstacle for the students to continue their writing, as 90%
of the students confirmed. This result could be due to the non-native environment, as
explained in the results to the background information question. Furthermore, the students
cannot balance two languages in their disposal at the same time, and this will handicap their
writing, as was explained by Carson and Kuehn (1992). As is expected, this transfer may be
due to their cultural and educational background, as was explained by Crerand (1992).
However, Kobayashi and Rinnert (2008) stood against such an idea, and claimed that
students need both first and second languages to write in English.
Additionally, usually NNS suffer from writing problems, and this has become the focal point
of many linguists’ research, as both Crème and Lea (1997) and Hyland (2004) identified the
situation. Here, the problems of the Kurdish students will be identified. Each component was
graded by the Kurdish students. The choice graded as the most problematic is grammar; this
component was selected by 33.33%, 13.33% and 23.33% of students as the first, second and
third most problematic choice, respectively, whilst only 10% chose each of the last three

43
choices (see Figure 1.). This means that the students’ most problematic issue according to the
questionnaire is grammar.
By contrast, content problems are the second most problematic issue. Two thirds of the
students (n=20) graded this component as the second most problematic component and one
third graded it as the fifth and sixth choice. In addition, an average of 20% of the students
selected vocabulary problems as their first, second and third choices. Additionally, 23.33% of
the students (n=7) graded vocabulary problems as their sixth choice, while 10% of the
students selected the grammar component as the 6th
choice. This shows that the students have
more problems with grammar than vocabulary, because the findings assert that the number of
students who chose grammar as the most problematic issue was more than the number of
students who chose both vocabulary and content problems, by an average of 10%.
In addition, academic style and referencing may not be a big problem for many Kurdish
students and it comes as the fourth most problematic component, because only 13.33% of the
students graded it as their first choice, while 50% graded it as their fifth and sixth choice.
However, only five students graded it as their third and fourth choice. Moreover, organisation
and structuring could be another problem; one third of the students (n=10) graded it as their
first choice and five students graded it as their second and third choice. Lastly, the least
problematic issue could be mechanical problems, in which only 6.66% of the students (n=2)
selected the component as their first choice, while 30% graded it as their fourth choice. See
Figure (1) and Appendix (G) for more clarification. Lately, in discussion chapter more
support for the writing problems can be found and explained through different past studies.

44
In the previous discussion, the Kurdish students’ writing problems were declared and the data
were reported; now the factors underlying these difficulties will be clarified. A lack of
English-proficient teachers is defined as the most important reason by students, with 60% of
the students agreeing upon this factor. However, the non-native environments, the use of the
Kurdish language in the classrooms, and there being few opportunities to practise the
language were each selected as the second most frequently-chosen factors, with 4% fewer
students selecting this option compared with the first choice. Almost the same problems and
factors could be found with Arab students, as can be seen in the works of Bacha (2002) and
Al-Khasawneh (2010).
Another factor could be the lack of sufficient teaching methods for English academic writing
and the weak foundation for learning academic writing; almost half of the students (n=15)
selected this component as the minor factor. By contrast, interest and motivation were not
important points for the students, and only 20% selected this choice, as is shown in Figure
(3). As has explained in the discussion of the background question, these factors stand as a
major issue for the students’ problems in academic writing. Kurdish students’ problems relate
to different factors, as previously mentioned, but the non-native environment and the use of
the Kurdish language in lectures are considered as the focal point, as Umair (2011) found in
his study. Consequently, it will not be an unexpected matter when they transfer from their L1
and become stuck while they are writing.
Additionally, another question was asked about which component the students had improved
the most during their study at the ELTC. Grammar and structuring were each selected as the
first choice for the students’ development, with 63.33% of the students stating that they had

45
improved in each component. In addition, 60% of the students (n=18) learned a wide range of
vocabulary during their studies. However, other components were graded as low or even
unimproved components. The students did not see the improvement they expected in either
spelling or content knowledge; 83.33% of the students (n=15) did not show any
improvements in either component (see Figure (4)). Moreover, only 30% of the students
improved in terms of style and referencing. The improvement may relate to students’
motivation or the centre’s method of teaching. Further explanation and support can be found
in the interview section and the essay analysis.
Moreover, another question was asked to ascertain the students’ opinions on different
statements; see Figure (5) below. Most of the students (n=17) admitted that they can write
about any topic in English and that knowledge of grammar will help him/her to write in
English, but only two strongly disagreed with the statement and 17 students disagreed with
the statement. A slight difference of 10% can be seen between the agree and disagree totals
for the statement ‘the use of wide range of vocabulary’. This means that half of the students
(n=15) can use a wide range of vocabulary in their writing, while the other half did not
improve to that extent.
Additionally, the component of the students’ writing that frustrates them the most appears to
be spelling, and it is accounted for as the major problem. Almost all of the students (n=27)
have problems with spelling and punctuation in their academic writing, as can be seen in their
essays in Appendix (D). Furthermore, only 10% maintained that spelling was an obstacle in
their writing. The problem here could be the way that the students use different words.
However, this idea appears to contrast with the major problems of the students noted in the

46
second question of the questionnaire. In the second question, the students admitted that their
mechanical problems are minor problems or they give the least importance to these problems,
while here almost all the students showed that they have problems with spelling; this could be
seen as a limitation for the paper. Furthermore, 25 students showed that they can organize
their ideas adequately, but only five did not agree with the statement. The results and
percentages are clearly demonstrated in Figure (5).
The last two questions are open-ended; the students were asked about whether the ELTC has
helped them in their English academic writing, and also asked them about the activities they
did in the ELTC. For the first question, the students declared that the teachers helped them a
lot and they instructed them to write in English all the time. Some of the students (n=8)
admitted that they could write essays with the correct grammar and a wide range of
vocabulary nowadays. They stated that their English was poor before they came to the UK,
but that it had since improved dramatically. Moreover, they learned many instructions on
writing. In addition, organisation and structuring is another point that many students (n=8)
discussed. Moreover, two students stated that they learned different types of writing, such as
problem-solution, cause-effect, descriptive essays...etc. However, eight students answered
this question with the response ‘no improvement’, which means they did not learn as they
expected.
In the last question, the students assigned their assignments and essay homework as being the
most useful activities in the ELTC. Almost half of the students (n=16) stated that the tutors’
feedback were useful. Additionally, some students (n=4) illustrated that they shared their
homework and that they discuss it with other classmates. Furthermore, presentation,

47
summarizing and practising different types of essays produced a huge benefit for the
students’ writing. Moreover, the students have tutorials every week to identify their mistakes
and to improve their writing. Lastly, the students looked at the model answers to practise
their language and writing. This can be clarified in the essay analysis section.

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
t
h
e
P
r
o
b
l
e
m
s

53
4.1.2. Interview Results and Discussion
Five Kurdish students and three English native teachers agreed to participate in the interview.
The questions were all open-ended to give them the opportunity to talk freely . The teachers
were asked to identify the Kurdish students’ major and minor problems in English academic
writing. They were also asked whether the problems faced by the Kurdish students are
different from those of students of other nationalities. Lastly, they were asked to suggest
some appropriate solutions for the problems faced by the students in developing their
academic writing. Moreover, the students were asked to discuss their problems in writing and
to identify the factors underlying their problems. They were also asked about the ways in
which their writing could be improved. Lastly, they were asked whether they have seen any
progress in their writing since they have been at the ELTC.
The teachers were asked several questions, as can be seen in Appendix (B). Firstly, the
teachers stated that the Kurdish students do not write for their own purposes, unless they were
asked to do so; one teacher said that “they do academic writing...but not for their own
purposes, but for the purpose of the course”. However, another teacher answered that “it is
the mixture, some of the students do ... IELTS type writing ... they just come and say I have
done some writings can you look at them”. Two thirds of the students did not do it, whilst
only “30%” did it. Another teacher stated that “... a lot of them do not, some possibly do, but
many do not”. This means that the students do not bother themselves with writing if they are
not asked to do it. This could be a factor underlying their writing problems. Surprisingly, this
could be a problem for Kurdish students, since they are not taught to practise their writing
independently. It is expected that the lack of practising writing made students face much
difficulty when they were asked to produce their own writing.

54
Furthermore, the teachers were asked to identify the Kurdish students’ major, secondary and
minor problems. The teachers clarified that the Kurdish students “... are not thinking very
critically about what they read”. One of the teachers mentioned that “... for the Kurdish
students, grammar is never a major problem, because we can get pass the grammar”; usually
the teachers will understand what the students mean because “grammar is the surface”.
However, this could contrast with the aforementioned ideas. In contrast, their organisation
and linking ideas could be their major problems. For example, another teacher explained that
“... organisation could be in a micro level” and word classes could be their major problem. He
stated “there is an overgeneralization on the use of the passive voice on the part of the
Kurdish students” because they had been taught to use this tense frequently in their academic
writing.
Additionally, referencing and punctuation are the secondary problem because “they do not do
enough background reading to be well-informed; they just take the article and use it”. Finally,
their minor problem is “the use of the correct tense”. Another teacher explained that spelling
could be the students’ major problem. Moreover, idea transfer could be the secondary
problem and this affected their academic writing. Teachers’ evaluation of the students may
differ according to the classes they taught and the students they had. These problems can be
accounted for as the Kurdish students’ problems in academic writing, from the viewpoint of
the teachers; more detail can be found in the later section of the chapter, when the research
questions will be answered.

55
In another question, the teachers answered that the Kurdish students are not different from
students of other nationalities, and they are similar to the Arab students in that their writings
are very descriptive rather than being critical. In addition, the teachers saw good
improvements in the students’ writing: “they improved in cohesion, coherence, referencing
and critical thinking... especially in top classes”. Another teacher mentioned that a good
improvement has been seen in the Kurdish students’ writing; accuracy is one of those
improvements. Additionally, the students developed in their use of “word classes, based on
the feedbacks that were given by the teachers and students become more creative in their
ideas”. Furthermore, a significant development can be seen in the students’ grammar and
vocabulary; their development will be based on their productivity.
The teachers suggested to “keep practising, keep working on all the things that they have
been taught on the course”, and that they should “work on the corrective feedbacks” that the
teachers gave them and work on the parts they have problems with, in order to solve their
problems and improve their academic writing. Moreover, “they should practise
independently” for better improvements. Furthermore, reading could be a key point: “read
extensively... start analyzing... look at how vocabulary... the grammar... the sign posts are
used... they need to go and do this outside the class”; from this, they will learn self-correction
and this will improve their writing.
Moreover, the above can be viewed as a brief illustration and discussion of the teachers’
interviews, since some of their answers will be annotated extensively and adequately in
response to one of the research questions in the later part of the chapter.

56
The Kurdish students were asked different questions in the interview; see Appendix (B).
Most of the students did not write any kind of English writing independently unless they have
been asked to do so. Another student stated that “it depends on the mood if I found something
interesting which related to my field I will write about”, but usually they do prefer to not
write in English. As the teachers said, the students do not wish to work independently to
practise their writing. However, it could be argued that the students wrote only to improve
their writing for the IELTS exam to meet the university score requirement, and one student
said “I really do writing to pass the exam”; this supports the argument put forward by
Rabab’ah (2002).
The lack of motivation in Kurdistan and the absence of specific classes for writing in
Kurdistan could be a factor underlying the students’ disinterest in academic writing;
moreover, the same factor can be found in Belcher and Braine’s (1995) study. The teachers in
Kurdistan did not show any tendency to instruct students because they did not have enough
information on the language, and one student said “how come students expect motivation
from them?” However, they achieved a good source of motivation in the ELTC by receiving
corrective feedback and writing instructions. Nevertheless, the students admitted that “in
ELTC supporting might depend on the mood of the tutor and it may differ from one to
another”. This motivation and instruction needs a longer time to show the effect on the
Kurdish students’ writing.
In addition, it was difficult for the Kurdish students to write in the correct English and to use
a wide range of vocabulary in their writing before their time at the ELTC, and the students
could not distinguish between academic and general English. By contrast, it is much easier

Academic Writing For English Foreign Learners

Academic Writing For English Foreign Learners

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Academic Writing For English Foreign Learners

Similar to Academic Writing For English Foreign Learners (20)

More from Dustin Pytko

More from Dustin Pytko (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Academic Writing For English Foreign Learners