ระดับปริญญาเอก(Doctoral Degree)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://updc.up.ac.th/handle/123456789/36

Browse

Browsing ระดับปริญญาเอก(Doctoral Degree) by Author "จิตรลดา มูลมา"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    การเปรียบเทียบทักษะการเขียนเชิงโต้แย้งแบบกลุ่ม แบบคู่ และแบบเดี่ยวในผู้เรียนภาษาอังกฤษ
    (มหาวิทยาลัยพะเยา, 2022) จิตรลดา มูลมา
    The aims of this research were to study the effects of the students' argumentative writing qualities by using collaborative writing activities, the students' self-assessments of the critical thinking skills practiced in writing activities, and the students' patterns of interaction during collaborative writing. The subjects of the study were thirty-two second-year English major students taking Writing II in the second semester of the academic year 2019 at a northern Thai university. The instruments consisted of individual and collaborative writing lesson plans that covered three weeks, with four hours in each class, and a writing model. Data was collected from the students' argumentative writing assignments, students' self-assessment of critical thinking practiced in writing activities through a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview, plus conversations observed and documented during collaborative writing activities. The data was analyzed by using descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation), and data linguistics were analyzed by Revised Bloom's Taxonomy and Storch's model. The results of the students' argumentative writing revealed that group work led to the highest scores in all proficiency levels. In groups, the students' critical thinking improved regarding analyzing, evaluating, and creating information when they brainstormed, shared, and discussed all the information. The highest degree of critical thinking skills practiced was found in groups, followed by pairs, and individuals, respectively. Regarding patterns of interaction, the advanced and intermediate students engaged and interacted better than novice students. The roles of advanced and intermediate students were shown to be expert and collaborative, whereas the novice students were found to be passive.