SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 19 Sayı: 2

Unlocking CEFR Potentials: Insights from Scaffolded Instruction to Boost EFL low-performing students' Writing Performance

CEFR Potansiyelini Ortaya Çıkarmak: Başarısı Düşük EFL Öğrencilerinin Yazma Performansını Artırmak için Basamaklı Öğretimden Elde Edilen Bulgular

Faiza Benaicha(Abdelhamid Ibn Badis University. Study of Gender, Languages and Sociolinguistic Diversity GSLSD Laboratory [email protected])0000-0003-0692-029X
Amel Ghermaoui(Abdelhamid Ibn Badis University)0000-0001-5493-3971
Mustapha Boudjelal(Abdelhamid Ibn Badis University)0000-0003-4499-8733
Pages
357–377
Publication Date
2026-04-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Additionally, a CEFR-focused differentiation mechanism to scaffolding students' writing, especially for low-performing learners, is presented along with its implications particularly those related to merging this CEFR-driven mechanism with Artificial Intelligence.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Assisting students in achieving proficiency in writing has been a longstanding priority for teachers worldwide, particularly in the Algerian context where official exams heavily rely on written performance.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It does not only seek to investigate teachers' perceptions regarding the effectiveness of CEFR-based instruction in achieving proficiency in writing but also aims to identify strategies for scaffolding EFL students' writing performance.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Additionally, a CEFR-focused differentiation mechanism to scaffolding students' writing, especially for low-performing learners, is presented along with its implications particularly those related to merging this CEFR-driven mechanism with Artificial Intelligence.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:CEFR · Basamakli Ogretim · Ogretim

Abstract

Assisting students in achieving proficiency in writing has been a longstanding priority for teachers worldwide, particularly in the Algerian context where official exams heavily rely on written performance. In this regard, the application of the CEFR Framework holds the potential to address this issue. Therefore, this article delves into the role of CEFR-based instruction in scaffolding the development of writing skills among students with beginner-level proficiency in English. It does not only seek to investigate teachers' perceptions regarding the effectiveness of CEFR-based instruction in achieving proficiency in writing but also aims to identify strategies for scaffolding EFL students' writing performance. To accomplish this, a sequential exploratory mixed methods design was employed. Various data collection tools were utilized, including researchers' reflections, semi-structured interviews with 5 local teachers, and a questionnaire surveying 56 national teachers across 19 wilayas. The findings shed light on the main CEFR-focused strategies that range from sequential learning, skill integration, real-life focused content to natural skill development, modelling, supplementary materials and cross-cultural awareness. Additionally, a CEFR-focused differentiation mechanism to scaffolding students' writing, especially for low-performing learners, is presented along with its implications particularly those related to merging this CEFR-driven mechanism with Artificial Intelligence.

Özet

Öğrencilerin yazma becerilerinde yeterlilik kazanmalarına yardımcı olmak, dünya genelinde öğretmenler için uzun süredir öncelikli bir hedef olmuştur. Bu durum, özellikle resmi sınavların büyük ölçüde yazılı performansa dayandığı Cezayir bağlamında daha da önem kazanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, Avrupa Dilleri Ortak Çerçeve Programı (CEFR)'nin uygulanması bu soruna çözüm getirme potansiyeline sahiptir. Bu makale, İngilizceye başlangıç düzeyinde hâkim olan öğrencilerin yazma becerilerinin gelişimini desteklemede CEFR temelli öğretimin rolünü incelemektedir. Yalnızca öğretmenlerin, CEFR tabanlı öğretimin yazma becerilerinde yeterlilik sağlamadaki etkinliğine ilişkin algılarını araştırmayı değil, aynı zamanda İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen öğrencilerin yazılı performanslarını desteklemeye yönelik stratejileri belirlemeyi de amaçlamaktadır. Bu amacı gerçekleştirmek için sıralı keşifsel karma yöntem araştırma deseni kullanılmıştır. Araştırmacıların yansımaları, 5 yerel öğretmenle yapılan yarı yapılandırılmış mülakatlar ve 19 vilayetten 56 ulusal öğretmeni kapsayan bir anket dâhil olmak üzere çeşitli veri toplama araçları kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, ardışık öğrenme, beceri entegrasyonu, gerçek yaşam odaklı içerik, doğal beceri gelişimi, modelleme, tamamlayıcı materyaller ve kültürlerarası farkındalık gibi çeşitli CEFR odaklı stratejilere ışık tutmaktadır. Ayrıca, özellikle düşük başarı gösteren öğrenciler için yazma becerilerini desteklemeye yönelik CEFR merkezli bir farklılaştırma mekanizması sunulmakta ve bu mekanizmanın Yapay Zeka ile birleştirilmesine ilişkin çıkarımlar ele alınmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Benaicha, F., Ghermaoui, A., Boudjelal, M. (2026). Unlocking CEFR Potentials: Insights from Scaffolded Instruction to Boost EFL low-performing students' Writing Performance. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 2, 357–377. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.1804136

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (37)

  1. Abed, M. G. (2015). A consideration to two main ethical issues in educational research, and how may these be addressed. Journal on Educational Psychology, 8(3), 1-14.
  2. ALTE. (2014). The CEFR grid for writing tasks (Version 3.1). https://www.alte.org/Materials
  3. Amerian, M., & Tajabadi, A. (2020). The role of culture in foreign language teaching textbooks: an evaluation of New Headway series from an intercultural perspective. Intercultural Education, 31(6), 623-644.https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2020.1747291
  4. Beacco J. C. et al. (2016a), Guide for the development and implementation of curricula for plurilingual and intercultural education, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, available at https://rm.coe.int/16806ae621
  5. Brown, K., & Hood, S. (1989). Writing matters: Writing skills and strategies for students of English. Cambridge University Press
  6. Chhin, V., Roussos, J., Michaelson, T., Bana, M., Bezjak, A., Foxcroft, S., Hamilton, J., & Liu, F. (2017). Leveraging mobile technology to improve efficiency of the consent-to-treatment process. JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics, 1, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.17.00041
  7. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press. https://rm.coe.int/1680459f97
  8. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications. https://bayanbox.ir/view/236051966444369258/9781483344379-Designing-and-Conducting-Mixed-Methods-Research-3e.pdf
  9. Doerr, M., Moore, S., Barone, V., Sutherland, S., Bot, B., Suver, C., & Wilbanks, J. (2020). Assessment of the All of Us research program’s informed consent process. AJOB Empirical Bioethics, 12, 72-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2020.1847214.
  10. Firkins, A., Forey, G., & Sengupta, S. (2007). Teaching writing to low proficiency EFL students. ELT Journal, 61(4), 341-352. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ775572
  11. Fuentes, C. M. M. (2008). Pathways from interpersonal violence to sexually transmitted infections: A mixed method study of diverse women. Journal of Women’s Health, 17, 1591-1603. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2008.0885
  12. Gaidi, H., & Mizab, M. (2024). Dissecting intercultural competence: The case of the New Headway intermediate textbook. The Journal of El-Ryssala for Studies and Research in Humanities, 2(3), 71-78. https://asjp.cerist.dz/en/downArticle/223/9/3/254285
  13. Govil, P. (2013). Ethical considerations in educational research. International Journal of Advancement in Education and Social Sciences, 1(2), 17-22.
  14. Guirao, J. C., de Larios, J. R., & Coyle, Y. (2015). The use of models as a written feedback technique with young EFL learners. System, 52, 63-77.
  15. Haines, K., Schmidt, N., Jansma, P., & Lowie, W. (2013). EMBEDding the CEFR in academic writing assessment: A case study in training and standardization. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.2.1.08hai
  16. Harsch, C., & Seyferth, S. (2020). Marrying achievement with proficiency–Developing and validating a local CEFR-based writing checklist. Assessing Writing, 43, 100433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100433
  17. Hasselgreen, A. (2013). Adapting the CEFR for the classroom assessment of young learners’ writing. Canadian Modern Language Review, 69(4), 415-435. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.1705.415
  18. Haussen, D., Doppelheuer, S., Schindler, K., Grossberg, J., Bouslama, M., Schultz, M., Perez, H., Hall, A., Frankel, M., & Nogueira, R. (2017). Utilization of a smartphone platform for electronic informed consent in acute stroke trials. Stroke, 48, 3156–3160. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018380
  19. Huy, N. T. (2015). Problems affecting learning writing skill of grade 11 at Thong Linh high school. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3(2). www.multidisciplinaryjournals.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/PROBLEMS-AFFECTING-LEARNING-WRITING-SKILL-OF-GRADE-11.pdf
  20. Laksmi, E. D. (2006). Scaffolding students’ writing in EFL class. TEFLIN Journal, 17(2), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v17i2/152-165
  21. Liang, J. (2007). Language scaffolding in second language writing. The CATESOL Journal, 19(1), 71-88. http://www.catesoljournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CJ19_liang.pdf
  22. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  23. Nagai, N., Birch, G. C., Bower, J. V., & Schmidt, M. G. (2020). CEFR-informed learning, teaching and assessment. Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5894-8
  24. Negishi, M., Takada, T., & Tono, Y. (2013). A progress report on the development of the CEFR-J. In Exploring language frameworks: Proceedings of the ALTE Kraków Conference (pp. 135–163).
  25. Nhung, P. T. H. (2019). Implementing the CEFR at a Vietnamese university—General English language teachers’ perceptions. CEFR Journal, 41, 41-67. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/60326178/CEFR-1-1-libre.pdf
  26. North, B., Ortega, A. & Sheehan, S. (2015). A core inventory for general English. British Council/ EAQUALS 2nd edition. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/pub-british-council-eaquals-core-inventoryv2.pdf
  27. Osamu, H. (2006). Noticing from models and reformulations: A case study of two Japanese EFL learners. Sophia Linguistica: Working Papers in Linguistics, 54, 167-192.
  28. Pham, Thi Hong Nhung. 2017. Chapter 6. Applying the CEFR to renew a general English curriculum: Successes, remaining issues and lessons from Vietnam. In Fergus O’Dwyer et al. (eds.), Critical, constructive assessment of CEFR-informed language teaching in Japan and beyond, 97-117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1130000795386789504
  29. Piamsai, C. (2020). The effect of scaffolding on non-proficient EFL learners' performance in an academic writing class. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 13(2), 288-305. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1258629.pdf
  30. Shermis, M. D. (2018). Establishing a crosswalk between the Common European Framework for Languages (CEFR) and writing domains scored by automated essay scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 31(3), 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2018.1464451
  31. Skelton, E., Drey, N., Rutherford, M., Ayers, S., & Malamateniou, C. (2020). Electronic consenting for conducting research remotely: A review of current practice and key recommendations for using e-consenting. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 143, 104271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104271
  32. Van Der Stuyf, R. (2002). Scaffolding as a teaching strategy. http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/./scaffolding_as_a_teaching_strategy.pdf
  33. Van Aertselaer, J. (2013). Contextualizing EFL argumentation writing practices within the Common European Framework descriptors. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 198-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.010.
  34. Vonna, Y., Mukminatien, N., & Laksmi, E. D. (2015). The effect of scaffolding techniques on students’ writing achievement. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 3(1), 227-233. https://www.academia.edu/download/100243255/2401.pdf
  35. Walqui, A. 2006. Scaffolding Instruction for English Language Learners: A Conceptual Framework. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159-178 https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050608668639
  36. Zou, S., & Zhang, W. (2017). Exploring the adaptability of the CEFR in the construction of a writing ability scale for test for English majors. Language Testing in Asia, 7(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-017-0050-3
  37. Van Der Stuyf, R. (2002). Scaffolding as a teaching strategy. http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/./scaffolding_as_a_teaching_strategy.pdf