Integrating Structured Writing Workshops with Metacognitive Instruction to Enhance Vietnamese Secondary Students’ Argumentative Writing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v14i4.22176Keywords:
Argumentative writing, Writing skills, Metacognitive instruction, Structured writing workshops, Writing self-regulationAbstract
Argumentative writing requires learners to coordinate reasoning, evidence, organization, audience awareness, language use, and revision, yet secondary-school EFL students often receive limited support for regulating these interconnected processes. This qualitative study investigated how integrating structured writing workshops with metacognitive instruction influenced students’ argumentative-writing performance and their awareness and regulation of writing. Four EFL teachers and 13 secondary-school learners participated in the study. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and classroom observations and analyzed thematically using deductive and inductive coding. The findings indicated perceived improvements in the organization of arguments, thesis alignment, use of supporting evidence, consideration of counterarguments, and revision of higher-order textual features. Structured workshop stages, including planning, drafting, peer response, revision, and editing, provided external scaffolding that made argumentative writing more manageable. Metacognitive prompts and tools supported learners in identifying goals, considering audience, monitoring claim–evidence relationships, recognizing weaknesses, and evaluating revision priorities. However, the development was uneven. Planning improved more consistently than monitoring and independent self-evaluation, while less-proficient learners continued to depend on teacher guidance, peer support, and checklists. Peer feedback also varied in quality, indicating the need for sustained feedback-literacy instruction. The study concludes that combining workshop-based scaffolding with explicit metacognitive regulation offers a promising framework for developing argumentative writing in secondary EFL settings.
References
AlKadi, S. Z. (2024). CLASSIC-TPACK PDP for teaching composition: A suggested professional developmental program for teaching L2 writers. Journal of Education and Training, 12(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5296/jet.v12i1.22317
Almashour, M., & Davies, A. (2023). Exploring learning strategies used by Jordanian university EFL learners in argumentative writing tasks: The role of gender and proficiency. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1237719. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1237719
Anson, I. G., Anson, C. M., & Andrews, K. L. (2023). Teachers’ beliefs about the language of peer review: Survey-based evidence (pp. 17–40). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.01
Azizah, S. I. N., & Soraya, S. (2023). A closer look at Indonesian EFL students’ writing process: The application of cognitive and metacognitive strategies. REILA: Journal of Research and Innovation in Language, 5(2), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.31849/reila.v5i2.10687
Carbone, N. (2023). The potential of peer review software that focuses on the review, not the draft (pp. 229–244). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.11
Corbett, S. J. (2023). Accepting, sharing, and surrendering control: Combining the best of old and new in peer review and response (pp. 245–256). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.3.3
Deane, P. (2020). Building and justifying interpretations of texts: A key practice in the English language arts. ETS Research Report Series, 2020(1), 1–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12304
Djatmika, D., Prihandoko, L. A., & Nurkamto, J. (2022). Students’ profiles in the perspectives of academic writing growth mindsets, self-efficacy, and metacognition. International Journal of Instruction, 15(3), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.1537a
Dung, Đ. T. X., & Ket, M. V. (2023). English discourse awareness in Vietnamese tertiary education. Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science: Social Sciences, 13(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.46223/hcmcoujs.soci.en.13.1.2773.2023
Halasek, K. (2023). Interrogating peer review as “proxy”: Reframing peer response within connective practice (pp. 75–97). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.04
Hanušová, S., Dontcheva-Navrátilová, O., Vališová, M. L., & Matulová, M. (2020). Process genre approach to L2 academic writing: An intervention study. XLinguae, 13(4), 30–51. https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2020.13.04.03
He, M., & Lu, W. (2024). Implementing assessment as learning in online EFL writing classes. RELC Journal, 56(2), 468–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231224966
Huang, Y., & Zhang, L. J. (2022). Facilitating L2 writers’ metacognitive strategy use in argumentative writing using a process-genre approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1036831. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1036831
Jackson, P. (2023). Learning from peer review online: Changing the pedagogical emphasis (pp. 205–227). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.10
Jackson, P., & Weaver, C. (2023). Rethinking and reframing peer review (pp. 3–14). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.1.3
Jımola, F. E., & Olaniyan, A. S. (2021). Conceptualisation of critical literacy and argumentative writing as an essential tool for the development of dialectic reasoning among students. Interdisciplinary Journal of Sociality Studies, 1, 8–15. https://doi.org/10.51986/ijss-2021.vol1.02
Kamil, G. K. (2024). Exploring the impact of learning activities on self-efficacy in academic writing among Iraqi EFL learners. Batara Didi English Language Journal, 3(2), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.56209/badi.v3i2.111
Kharroubi, S., & ElMediouni, A. (2024). Conceptual review: Cultivating learner autonomy through self-directed learning and self-regulated learning: A socio-constructivist exploration. International Journal of Language and Literary Studies, 6(2), 276–296. https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlls.v6i2.1649
Kramer, B. (2023). Multimodal peer review: Fostering inclusion in mixed-level college classrooms with ELL learners (pp. 169–184). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.08
Li, W., Kau, K., & Shiung, Y.-J. (2023). Pedagogic exploration into adapting automated writing evaluation and peer review integrated feedback into large-sized university writing classes. SAGE Open, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231209087
Liu, D. (2024). Incorporating peer feedback in academic writing: A systematic review of benefits and challenges. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1506725. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1506725
Marrugo, A. G., & Anson, D. W. J. (2024). The impact of an online doctoral writing group. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 48(2), 273–296. https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.24012.gar
Martínez, M. E., & Gómez, V. (2023). Effect of feedback and strategy training on undergraduate students’ writing ability. Acta Pedagogia Asiana, 2(1), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v2i1.169
Mayberry, B. (2023). Resisting theory: The wisdom of the creative writing workshop (pp. 41–57). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.02
McCook, N. (2023). Positioning peer review for transfer: Authentic audiences for career readiness and workplace communication (pp. 119–144). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.06
Munroe, W. (2023). Misleading higher-order evidence and rationality: We can’t always rationally believe what we have evidence to believe. Episteme, 22(1), 99–125. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2023.45
Negretti, R., Sjöberg-Hawke, C., Persson, M., & Cervin-Ellqvist, M. (2023). Thinking outside the box: Senior scientists’ metacognitive strategy knowledge and self-regulation of writing for science communication. Journal of Writing Research, 15(2), 333–361. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.04
Oanh, N. T. H. (2024). The impact of feedback on first-year university students’ writing development: A study at a university in Hanoi, Vietnam. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 7(8). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i08-107
Oktoma, E., Rafli, Z., & Rahmat, A. (2020). Metacognitive learning strategies in argumentative writing skills. English Review: Journal of English Education, 9(1), 183–192. https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v9i1.3795
Olson, C. B., Maamuujav, U., Chung, H. Q., Wang, H., Arshan, N., Baker, T., Black, R. W., Dean, D., Doerr-Stevens, C., Early, J. S., Fisher, L. I., Peitzman, F., Sanders, J., & Stephens, L. (2025). Conducting a national expansion of a text-based argument writing intervention for secondary students using a cognitive strategies approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 117(4), 582–602. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000941
Öztürk, N. (2022). Place of metacognition in the Turkish national curriculum of reading. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 51(233), 837–861. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.792872
Pallo, V. (2023). Leveling the playing field for ELL students: The case for moving peer review to an online environment (pp. 187–203). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.09
Rizqiyyah, R., Nurkamto, J., & Rochsantiningsih, D. (2021). From pandemic to new normal: Portraying EFL graduates’ metacognitive strategy in thesis writing. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 13(2), 1103–1113. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v13i2.500
Scott, K. A. (2020). Chemistry departments should facilitate graduate-level second-language writing instruction. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(12), 4220–4224. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00896
Stanton, C. (2023). Peer persuasion: An ethos-based theory of identification and audience awareness (pp. 99–117). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.05
Teng, M. F., & Yue, M. (2022). Metacognitive writing strategies, critical thinking skills, and academic writing performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Metacognition and Learning, 18(1), 237–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09328-5
Turner, E. (2023). Peer review and the benefits of anxiety in the academic writing classroom (pp. 147–167). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.07
Tuyen, L. T. N. (2024). The influence of writing workshops on first-year English-majored students’ writing skills: A study at a university in Vietnam. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 7(8). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i08-60
Weaver, C. S. (2023). A troubled practice: Three models of peer review and the problems underlying them (pp. 59–72). https://doi.org/10.37514/PER-B.2023.1961.2.03
Yu-min, W., & Xie, Q. (2022). Diagnostic assessment of novice EFL learners’ discourse competence in academic writing: A case study. Language Testing in Asia, 12(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00197-y
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Milly Poon, Vinh Long Huy, Chen Lee Lin, Honjo Akira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
License and Publishing Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and publishing agreement.
Copyright
Authors who publish with JOLLT Journal of Languages and Language Teaching agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Licensing for Data Publication
-
Open Data Commons Attribution License, http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ (default)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
