Analysing Communication Quality in Undergraduate Essay Writing

This article is published by the Zamfara International Journal of Humanities.

I.G. Mustapha *¹ Hannatu Isa Dodo PhD^*2

¹  Department of English and Linguistics, Federal University Dutse, Jigawa - Nigeria ² Department of Languages, National Open University of Nigeria,

1  igmustaphasays@gmail.com 08065951233
2  Hanatuisadodo@gmail.com  08100104741

Abstract: This study attempts to examine a communication quality in students written texts from four selected universities in north western Nigeria with a view to identifying students’ level of success in their written activity. The researcher uses Crjcie and Morgan (1990) sampling table and selects at random from four selected universities one hundred (100) students and fifty (50) texts for analysis. The said scripts have been analyzed using The English Language Testing Service (ELTS) for analysis. Students’ good and bad usage of writings have been highlighted and discussed. The study reveals students’ level of success as experts, and very good writers while good and competent writers found were very few. The modest writers were predominantly identified as the most frequent student writers with 40%percent. The study highlights students’ performances with 34% percent, which means student writers comprise of marginal and limited writers (below averages). The study reveals that some students have problem of spelling, Punctuations and grammar in their written texts while very few student- writers have expressed a sense of mastery of the language and of the ability to handle the topic with complete competence. The study reveals students’ level of success as expert and very good are not found. It also reveals students’ level of success as good or competent writers are very few while students’ level of success as modest writers is predominantly discovered.

 

Keywords: Communication quality, students’ level of success, short comings

INTRODUCTION

_Writing plays a central role in the development of language skills. In many institutions, writing is used within school being a complement of language skills activity. Rules, conventions, instructions, statements of mission and aim and teacher directions are often couched in writing. They appear in notices, in handbooks and in letters to parents and students. Inevitably, these written missives carry the weight of authority and control; their attempt is to create a community, but it is a community that is run by adults for the benefit of young people. Writing is used by schools to assess the progress of students. It is the principal mode and medium used in the examination system (Matsuda 2003).

 

Writing is considered as a mere representation of speech. It provides a way of monitoring students' language production and of providing linguistic material because the technology for sound recording was not widely available. For researchers, it has always provided a source of tangible and relatively stable data for analysis as well as a way of recording speech. In the early years of Applied Linguistics, however, writing was not considered to be one of the proper goals of language learning, it was used only to the extent that it assisted in the learning of speech. (Leki 2000).

 

In the early half of the twentieth century, writing, or written discourse, and the teaching of writing began to receive significant attention as an important area of inquiry within Applied Linguistics. With the growth of composition studies in the United Stated of America (USA) and parallel development of the field of second language writing, the act of writing also became an important focus of research and instruction in first and second language writing. More recently, prompted by the recognition of the complexity of writing and the teaching of writing, second language writing has evolved into an interdisciplinary field of inquiry involving many related fields, including Applied Linguistics and composition studies, which are themselves highly interdisciplinary (Matsuda 2003).

 

Literature Review

 

Rummel (2010) analyses ‘Communicative Quality in Undergraduates of English Written-Texts’. His investigation has shown that discourse-oriented English teaching could encourage writers to switch their attention away from the sentence level aspects of writing and enables them to produce better English prose. The outcome reveals that students’ level of success in written-English texts was a ‘Marginal students-Writers’.

 

Lawal (2012), analyses some students fail to communicate because they cannot state clearly their intentions in English-written. They make some sentences too broad and vague which at the end become incomplete and incoherent. He further argues that one of the forms of communication difficulty is the students’ inability to produce a meaningful structure. Badamasi (2011) describes that some students have problems of using punctuations, particularly full stops and commas which are very important for demarcating two simple sentences. In relation to this study, research evidence has shown that students have difficulties in their efforts to achieve coherence in written-English texts; Muhammad (1998) argues that sometimes students keep repeating and restarting the sentence that is why they fail to achieve coherence. The essays might also have been written in a hurry to meet the submission time.

 

Ahmad (2014), Esimaje (2014) identify such unskilled writers do not bother to revise their writing because they are not intimidated by the thought of error and expect the teacher to make all the corrections. Garba (2012) views words choice is what can be termed faulty synonymy or using two words as alternative but which do not have the same meaning. He further argues that the use of alternative words by some student writers is undecided on either of the two verbs which are not synonymous.

 

Akabue (2004) analyses sometimes students use more than two alternatives in the name of synonyms. Yet, there is also difference in meaning. The wrong use of synonyms causes strain to the reader. He further argues that another aspect of writing which causes problems to the students is faulty word division. It could be argued that the students find it difficult to divide word correctly at right-hand margins, because they were not used to regular or wide reading. Disko (2012) opines that many students do not engage to their books until the weeks for starting examinations even if the books are available in the libraries. Lawal (2012) suggests that students have problems of singular subject for singular verb or plural subject for plural verb. Muhammad (2013) sees some students use ‘a’ in place of ‘the’ and others omit unknowingly or deliberately. She further argues that students use articles in a reciprocal way, for instance, using article in a zero place and omitting article where is supposed to.

 

Statement of the Problem

 

Some students face stiff challenges in the acquisition of mastery of the English language skills particularly in writing skills. Investigations have shown that many researchers have examined various aspects of written English among the undergraduates of English in many Nigerian universities. In previous studies, the linguistic analysis of second language writers’ text involved Contrastive Analysis (comparing the grammatical structures of two languages, for example, Arabic and English, Hausa and English, Ibo and English, Yoruba and English or any other Nigerian language and English in the attempt to ascertain structural differences which are believed to pose the greatest problems to second language writers), Error Analysis, (which involves locating, counting and categorizing errors to discern pattern errors in written texts) formal features examined lexical and syntactic phenomena (features such as number of word per-unit and clause structure have been used to measure fluency, accuracy and complexity in the second language writers text). The present study is addition to previous ones seeks to examine communication quality in undergraduate written activity.

 

Aim and Objectives

 

The aim of this research is to examine students’ level of success in written English. The study has the following objectives:

 

i-To find out ways students communicate in their written activity from four selected universities;

 

ii-To find out students level of success in their written communications and

 

iii- To identify the short comings in the written English of undergraduate students.

 

Scope and Delimitation

 

This study examines undergraduates written English. The researcher focuses on communication quality being one of the aspects of writing English text (Communication Quality, Organization, Argumentation, Linguistic Accuracy and Linguistic Appropriateness) which make up the marking scheme of the English Language Testing Service (IELTS 2003).

 

This study is limited to the final year undergraduates of English from four selected universities in North Western Nigeria. The researcher examines only four out of the sixteen universities. The researcher uses simple random sampling technique and select at random four universities as follows: The schools are: Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Bayero University, Kano, Usman Danfodio University, Sokoto and Umar Musa Yar’ Aduwa University Katsina, to ascertain how they achieve success in their written English texts.

 

Significance of the Study

 

Research on written text analysis is germane to the profound enhancement of language usage. Students of English as a second language (ESL) face stiff challenges in the acquisition of mastery of the English language especially student writers. This study, if successfully conducted, will be significant in a number of ways:

 

First, the study finds out the level of success students achieve in their written activity. It also reveals the students short comings in their written expressions. Second, the studies highlights appropriate ways of presenting a free error or extremely refined essay writing. Third, it would be useful to teachers of the English language as adequate materials for teaching students different ways of essay writing strategies. The present study is addition to the previous or present investigations. This study seeks to examine communication in written of undergraduate students in selected universities.

 

Theoretical Framework

this study. The secondary sources of data comprises of previous

The theoretical framework for this study is eclectic. The first

researches in  the area of focus, texts materials such as books,

approach   is   Zamel’s   (1982)   ‘Process   Perspective

journals, articles and theses relevant to this project, Libraries,

Approach’. The advent of the 'process approach’ focuses on

Department  of  English  and  literary  studies,  Department

the person (the writer) and the process (the strategies) involved

Linguistics, and Department English-Education.

in writing. The objective is to help students develop viable

Concerning the population and sample size of this research,

strategies for getting started, drafting, revising and editing. The

there  is  total  number  of  one  hundred  (100)  final  year

writer is engaged in the discovery and expression of meaning.

undergraduates of English from four selected universities. The

The reader is engaged in interpreting that intended meaning.

researcher uses the simple random sampling technique and

The product (the written text) is a secondary concern whose

select fifty (50) scripts for marking and analysis.

form is a function of its content and purpose.

Analysis of the students’ essays is related to the International

The second approach is Badger and White’s (2000) ‘Genre-

English Language Testing Service. An IELTS Assessment-

Guide is very accurate in helping to determine the students'

Based Approach.’ In addition to general treatments of genre,

proficiency in writing in English. The marking guide is used

many studies of particular written genres have appeared such as

for the purpose of grading the students’ performance in writing

narrative, descriptive and argumentative writing as well as

academic

English

at  universities  (New  Profile  Method  II,

personal, academic and legal texts. A number of more specific

1983). See Appendix VI. This procedure has a scale of (10-1)

text types addressed include summaries, essay, research papers,

band  containing

criterion  which

specifies  the  quality  of

theses, dissertations, research articles and reports. This tradition

academic writing as it will guide marker in awarding marks.

is meant to help students work successfully within the academic

The marks at  grading  the students writers level thus;  if the

context.

writers are  awarded 9 marks they are called expert writers, 8

Methodology

marks very good

writers, 7 marks

good  writers, 6  marks

The research design for this work is both quantitative

and

competent writers, 5 marks modest writers, 4 marks marginal

qualitative. The research

uses quantitative characteristics for

writers,

3 marks

limited writers, 2 and 1 marks are non-

converting the International English Language Testing Service

writers.(New Profile Method  2013).

(IELTS 1983:19) written English Assessment Guide to Measure

The marks at communication quality level range from ten to

Central Tendency

(means, mode) and percentile scores. On the

one (10-1) marks. It consists of a criterion which specifies the

other  hand,  the

research

discusses  the  respondents’

written

quality of academic writing. The researcher reads marks and

exercises

that

give

an

explanation

of

the

qualitative

analyses

the  essays  using  the  Writing  Assessment  Scale

characteristics of student-writers’ written strategies, control and

(1983:33). The scores of each student mark on communication

mastery in their written English activity.

level in a Profile Scale and convert them to a Measure of

The final year undergraduates of English from four selected

Central Tendency and Percentile Scores.

universities

of north

western Nigeria

are

the

subject of

this

Result and Discussions

research, they are to write an essay of their choice from a given

Analysis of the students’ essays relates to the International

instruction. Each respondent answers only one question from a

English Language Testing Service. An IELTS Assessment-

list  of  questions

that  comprises

of

Narrative,

Descriptive,

Guide is very accurate in helping to determine the students'

Expository

and

Argumentative.  This

enables  them

to

have

proficiency in written in English. The marking guide is used for

ample time and

minimal interference to

work through their

the purpose of grading the students’ performance in writing

composing processes.

academic English at universities. This procedure has a scale of

The researcher focuses on a variable named

communication

(9-1) band containing criterion which specifies the quality of

quality ’or analysis of students’ written activity. This variable is

academic writing as it guides marker in awarding marks. See

one  of

the  criteria

contains  in

the  International

English

appendix one. (ELTS, New Profile Method 2013).

Language

Testing

Service  (IELTS

1983)  written

English

The marks at Linguistic Accuracy level range from ten to one

Assessment Guide. This procedure is administered in Britain

(9-1) marks. It consists of a criterion which specifies the quality

universities

for

the

purpose

of

grading

The

students’

of academic writing. The researcher reads marks and analyses

performance. It is very accurate in helping to determine the

the essays using The Writing Assessment Scale (1983).

students'

proficiency

in  written-English.  It  accounts

for

the

Quantitative Analysis

relations

between

the  writer  and

the

marker

With

regard

to

The scores of each student marked based on Communication

mastery and control of written- English texts.

Quality level in a Profile Scale and is converted to a Measure

The sources of data collection comprises of both primary and

of Central Tendency where mean and Percentage Scores used

secondary sources. Concerning the primary source of data, the

for justifying the quantitative work, see Appendix 2. The study

researcher

administers

written

texts

from

final

year

uses  measure of

central tendency as  means of quantitative

undergraduates

of

English.  The

researcher  reads

marks

and

analysis and justifies students’ level of success in their written

analyses the scripts based on the tool for analysis selected for

activity. The study concentrates on both good and bad usage of

students written texts. The Mean score shows 5 marks, as well as Median and Mode 5 marks each. This identifies that the 5 band become the highest frequency indicates position of Modest Writer.

 

More so, the students’ level of success at percentage phase, (See Appendix 3) categorizes three parts as follow: Firstly, the study reveals that students identify with above average performances obtain twenty six percentages (26%). This comprises of two percents (2%) as expert writers, four percents (4%) as Very Good writers, two percents (8%) as Good writers and twelve percents (12%) as Competent Writers. Secondly, the study find out that students with average performances obtain forty percentages (40%). This comprises of modest writers which is the most frequent discovered student writers. Thirdly, the study shows that students with below average performances obtain thirty six percentages (36%). This consists of twenty four percents (24%) as Marginal writers and ten percents (10%) as limited writers.

Summary

 

1-   The study reveals that some students have problem of spelling, Punctuations and grammar in their written texts while very few student- writers have expressed a sense of mastery of the language and of the ability to handle the topic with complete competence.

 

2-   The study reveals the modest student- writers are predominant.

 

3-   According to the data used for this study, some students are found marginal and limited writers.

 

4-   The study shows students level of success in their written activity is both good control and bad usage of, Spelling, Punctuation, Grammar and Vocabulary.

 

Conclusion

 

This work examines a communication quality in students essay writing from four selected universities in north western Nigeria namely; Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Bayero University, Kano, Usman Danfodio University, Sokoto and Umar Musa Yar’ Aduwa University Katsina, to ascertain how they achieve success in their written English texts. The said scripts have been analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative analysis of student written activity. Students’ good and bad usage of writing skills have been highlighted and discussed. The study reveals students’ level of success as expert and very good are not found. The study also reveals students’ level of success as good or competent writers are very few. Students’ level of success as modest writers is predominantly discovered.

References

 

Ahmad,           M. M. (2014) Writing in English in Tertiary Institutions: 31^st NESA Conference September, 2014.

 

Badamasi, K. (2011) A communicative Competence Studies on the English by Lerd I Students: Unpublished M. A. Thesis Bayero University Kano.

 

Bardger, R. and White, G. (2000) A process Genre Approach to teaching writing.ELT Journal 54(2).

 

Datti, U. (2011) The Problem of Communication Competence in English among Primary School Teachers and their Pupils in Jigawa State: Unpublished M. A. Thesis Bayero University, Kano.

 

Disko, H. U. (2012) An Investigation on Communicative Competence among ESL learners of secondary school in Zamfara State: Unpublished M. A. Thesis Bayero University, Kano: Nigeria

 

English Language testing service (ELTS) (1983) New profile method 2: London: The British Council.

 

Esimaje, A. U. (2014) Learner corpora ESL learning and University Students writings: 30^th Annual Conference Nigeria English study Association Bayero University, Kano.

 

Lawal, S. (2011) A Syntactic Analysis of the Use of Preposition in Selected Academic Writing: Unpublished M. A. Thesis, A.B.U Zaria.

 

Matsuda, P. K. (2003) Process and Post Process: A discursive history Journal of second Language Writing 12(1).

 

Muhammad, U. S. (2013) Strategies Towards the Achieving Communicative Competence in the English Language in Mass Media 30^th Annual Conference: Nigeria English Study Association: held at Bayero University Kano.

 

Morgan and Cryicie (1971) Determining Sample Size For Research Activities. Educational And Psychological Measurement Vol. 3

 

Bardger, R. and White, G. (2000) A process Genre Approach to teaching writing.ELT Journal 54(2).

 

Garba, M.I. (2004) Writing in English in Tertiary Institutions: Investigation Into the use of Present Tense in Students Academic Writing.

 

Garba, M.I. (2012) Sentence Maintenance in Students Academic Writing in Senior Secondary School in Kano State: Unpublished N. A. Thesis Bayero University Kano, Nigeria.

 

Rummel, K. (2010) A focus on English Academic Writing Non-Native Writers Perceptions of Quality Texts in New Approaches on Teaching English in a Multi-Cultural World.

 

Zamel G. (1982) A process perspective Approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal 54(2)

V=Vocabulary, S= spelling, P= punctuation, G= grammar)

 

 

 

APPENDIX-II

 

Frequency Table Determine the Measure of Central

Tendency of Syntactic Analysis of Linguistic Accuracy 

From the table above, the Mean is 5mark, median is 5mark

and the highest frequency is 20 frequencies (students) with 5

marks.

Writing assessment scale.(New Profile Scale and Profile

method 2, Method 2013).