SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sakarya University Journal of Education / 2026 / Volume: 16 Issue: 1

Engagement in Exploratory Action Research to Improve Teaching Practice in EFL Writing

Semra Özdemir(PENDİK TURK TELEKOM SEHİT MURAT MERTEL VOCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL ANATOLIAN HIGH SCHOOL)0009-0006-9091-2709
Ece Genç Yöntem(YEDITEPE UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-3871-184X
Sibel Ergün Elverici(YILDIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-6921-5013
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-04-13
🏛️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)

Besides, the reflective report of the teacher researcher pointed out doing EAR supported professional development by stimulating reflective practice and enhancing instructional awareness and classroom rapport.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Despite the widely-accepted role of teachers’ research engagement in their professional development, classroom-based action research conducted by in-service teachers in their own contexts is still a rare practice.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Contributing to the literature on exploratory action research (EAR), this study documents how an English language teacher engages in EAR in her own context to address a puzzling situation related to teaching paragraph writing to ninth grade English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students in a Turkish state school.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Besides, the reflective report of the teacher researcher pointed out doing EAR supported professional development by stimulating reflective practice and enhancing instructional awareness and classroom rapport.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Exploratory Action Research · Teacher Research · Reflective Practice

Abstract

Despite the widely-accepted role of teachers’ research engagement in their professional development, classroom-based action research conducted by in-service teachers in their own contexts is still a rare practice. Contributing to the literature on exploratory action research (EAR), this study documents how an English language teacher engages in EAR in her own context to address a puzzling situation related to teaching paragraph writing to ninth grade English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students in a Turkish state school. After receiving training on conducting EAR as part of a professional development module she was enrolled in, the teacher researcher adopted a two-stage EAR cycle, involving exploration and action. Accordingly, the teacher researcher explored how instructional changes affect the students, while gathering multiple sources of qualitative data in the recurring stages. Lesson observations, student interviews, and the teacher’s reflective report indicated that not all instructional changes were effective; for example, rather than collaborative group writing, differentiated instruction on writing worked well in terms of enhancing students’ writing engagement. The positive changes were associated with students’ attitudes towards writing, reduced writing anxiety, and perceived vocabulary gains from the teacher researcher’s perspective. Besides, the reflective report of the teacher researcher pointed out doing EAR supported professional development by stimulating reflective practice and enhancing instructional awareness and classroom rapport.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özdemir, S., Yöntem, E. G., Elverici, S. E. (2026). Engagement in Exploratory Action Research to Improve Teaching Practice in EFL Writing. Sakarya University Journal of Education, Volume: 16 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.1459802

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (82)

  1. Adas, D., & Bakir, A. (2013). Writing difficulties and new solutions: Blended learning as an approach to improve writing abilities. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(9), 254-266.
  2. Afrin, S. (2016). Writing problems of non-English major undergraduate students in Bangladesh: An Observation. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3)104-115. https://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jss.2016.43016
  3. Akyel, A. (2000). Collaboration to explore teaching: A case study report. TESL Canada Journal, 18(1), 58-74.
  4. Aldabbus, S., & Almansouri, E. (2022). Academic writing difficulties encountered by university EFL learners. British Journal of English Linguistics, 10(3), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.37745/bjel.2013/vol10n3111
  5. Alisha, F., Safitri, N., & Santoso, I. (2019). Students’ difficulties in writing EFL. Professional Journal of English Education, 2(1), 20-25.
  6. Amalia, H., Abdullah, F., & Fatimah, A. S. (2021). Teaching writing to junior high school students: A focus on challenges and solutions. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(S2), 794-810. https://search.informit.org/doi/epdf/10.3316/informit.140747797320761
  7. Atay, D. (2006). Teachers’ professional development: Partnership in research. TESL- EJ, 10, 1-15. https://www.tesl-ej.org/ej38/a8.html
  8. Atay, D. (2008). Teacher research for professional development. ELT Journal, 62, 139-147. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl053
  9. Bauer, J., Prenzel, M., & Renkl, A. (2015). Evidenzbasierte praxis -im lehrerberuf? Einführung in den thementeil. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 43, 188–192.
  10. Bayrakçı, M. (2009). In-service teacher training in Japan and Turkey: A comparative analysis of institutions and practices. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 10-22. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2009v34n1.2
  11. Békés, E. (2019). A handbook for exploratory action research (Review). ELT Journal, 73(2), 232–234. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccy058
  12. Borg, S. (2007). Research engagement in English language teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 731-747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.03.012
  13. Borg, S. (2010). Language teacher research engagement. Language teaching, 43(4), 391-429.
  14. Borg, S. (2013). Teacher research in language teaching: A critical analysis. Cambridge University Press.
  15. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  16. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology: Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57-71). American Psychological Association.
  17. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806
  18. Burns, A. (2009). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. Routledge.
  19. Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching. Routledge.
  20. Burns, A. (2017). Innovating teacher development: Transformative teacher education through classroom inquiry. In Innovative practices in language teacher education: Spanning the spectrum from intra-to inter-personal professional development (pp. 187-203). Springer International Publishing.
  21. Byrne, D. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56(2), 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
  22. Cabaroglu, N. (2014). Professional development through action research: Impact on self-efficacy. System, 44, 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.03.003
  23. Castellanos, J. (2008). Journal writing and its benefits in an upper intermediate EFL class. PROFILE, 9(9), 111–128.
  24. Chen, Y. M. (2002). The problems of university EFL writing in Taiwan. The Korea TESOL Journal, 5(1), 59-79.
  25. Choi, Y. H., & Lee, J. (2006). L1 use in L2 writing process of Korean EFL students. English Teaching (영어교육), 61(1), 205-225. http://kate.bada.cc/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/kate_61_1_10.pdf
  26. Dersingh, R., & Vuong, K. T. M. (2024). Empowering teachers through a training on exploratory action research. Pasaa Paritat Journal (วารสาร ภาษา ปริทัศน์), 39, 259-281. https://doi.org/10.58837/CHULA.PPJ.39.13
  27. Dikilitaş, K., & Comoglu, I. (2022). Pre-service English teachers’ reflective engagement with stories of exploratory action research. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(1), 26-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1795123
  28. Dueraman, B. (2012). Teaching EFL writing: Understanding and rethinking the Thai experience. Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences, 4(1), 255-275.
  29. Elma, C., & Bütün, E. (2015). Teachers’ opinions about primary and secondary school students writing skills. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education Faculty, 15(2), 104–131. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2015.15.2-5000161315
  30. Fan, M. Y. (2000). The dictionary look-up behavior of Hong Kong students: A large-scale survey. Education Journal, 28(1), 123-138.
  31. Georgiou, D., Mok, S. Y., Fischer, F., Vermunt, J. D., & Seidel, T. (2020). Evidence-based practice in teacher education: The mediating role of self-efficacy beliefs and practical knowledge. Frontiers in Education, 5, Article 559192. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.559192
  32. Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning. Heinemann.
  33. Graham, S., Tavsanli, O. F., & Kaldirim, A. (2022). Improving writing skills of students in Turkey: A meta-analysis of writing interventions. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 889–934. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09639-0
  34. Güvenç, G. (2018). The flipped classroom approach in teaching writing: An action research. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 4(3), 421-432. https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.434493
  35. Han, Y., & Wang, Y. (2021). Investigating the correlation among Chinese EFL teachers' self-efficacy, work engagement, and reflection. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 763234. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.763234
  36. Henson, R.K. (2001). The effects of participation in teacher research on teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 819-836. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00033-6
  37. Jong, Y. O. (2009). An investigation into the benefits of collaborative writing for the development of EFL children’s communication skills: A reflective report of a teacher researcher [Doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick]. https://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/3743/
  38. Kayacan, A., & Razı, S. (2017). Digital self-review and anonymous peer feedback in Turkish high school EFL writing. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(2), 561-577. https://izlik.org/JA79CF79PE
  39. Khatib, M., & Meihami, H. (2015). Languaging and writing skill: The effect of collaborative writing on EFL students’ writing performance. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(1), 203-211.
  40. Kırkgöz, Y. (2015). A collaborative action research teacher development programme. In K. Dikilitaş, R. Smith, & W. Trotman (Eds.), Teacher researchers in action (pp. 387–398).
  41. Kılıç, M. (2019). Vocabulary knowledge as a predictor of performance in writing and speaking: A case of Turkish EFL learners. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 57, 133-164. https://doi.org/10.58837/CHULA.PASAA.57.1.6
  42. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
  43. Korucu, S. (2011). The use of action research as a model in the professional development of an English teacher: A case study [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Selçuk University.
  44. Köroğlu, Z. Ç. (2023). Enhancing EFL learners’ free writing skill with a web 2.0 tool ‘Storybird’: Action research. Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature and Culture, 8(2), 343-351.
  45. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.
  46. Le, H. V., & Nguyen, L. Q. (2024, June). Promoting L2 learners’ critical thinking skills: the role of social constructivism in reading class. In Frontiers in Education (9, p. 1241973). Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1241973
  47. Leki, I. (2001). A narrow thinking system: Non-native English-speaking students in group projects across the curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 39– 57.
  48. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
  49. Loughran, J. (2002). Teacher as researcher’ The PAVOT project. In J. Loughran, I. Mitchell & J. Mitchell (Eds.) Learning from Teacher Research. Allen and Unwin.
  50. Medgyes, P. (2017). The (ir)relevance of academic research for the language teacher. ELT Journal, 71(4), 491–498. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccx034
  51. Ministry of National Education (MONE). (2018). Ortaöğretim İngilizce dersi öğretim programı. Ankara. https://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=342
  52. Muliyah, P., & Aminatun, D. (2020). Teaching English for specific purposes in vocational high school: Teachers' beliefs and practices. Journal of English Teaching, 6(2), 122-133. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1266048
  53. Obwegeser, N., & Papadopoulos, P. M. (2016). Integrating research and teaching in the IS classroom: Benefits for teachers and students. Journal of Information Systems Education, 27(4), 249-258.
  54. Özmat, D., & Senemoğlu, N. (2021). Difficulties in learning English by EFL students in Turkey. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 54(1), 141-173. https://doi.org/10.30964/auebfd.742803
  55. Peacock, D. P. (1990). Teacher as reflective practitioner: Some implications for professional development [Doctoral dissertation, University of Tasmania].
  56. Richards, K. (2009). Trends in qualitative research in language teaching since 2000. Language teaching, 42(2), 147-180. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444808005612
  57. Ridha, N. (2012). The effect of EFL learners' mother tongue on their writings in English: An error analysis study. Journal of the College of Arts, 60, 22-45. https://un.uobasrah.edu.iq/papers/2945.pdf
  58. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Arena.
  59. Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching in the professions. Jossey-Bass.
  60. Selçuk, H. (2017). Peer affective factors in peer collaboration: Facebook-based collaborative writing activity among Turkish high school EFL learners. In Tomorrow’s learning: Involving everyone. Learning with and about technologies and computing: 11th IFIP TC 3 World Conference on Computers in Education (WCCE 2017), Dublin, Ireland, July 3–6, 2017, revised selected papers (pp. 314–322). Springer International Publishing.
  61. Shanti, V. M., & Koto, I. (2016). Project-based learning approach to improve students’ ability to write descriptive text (A classroom action research at grade X SMAN 1 Bengkulu Selatan). JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics & Literature), 1(2), 46–54.
  62. Shrestha, S., Laudari, S., & Gnawali, L. (2023). Exploratory action research: Experiences of nepalese EFL teachers. ELT Journal, 77(4), 407-415. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccac029
  63. Siekmann, L., Parr, J. M., & Busse, V. (2022). Structure and coherence as challenges in composition: A study of assessing less proficient EFL writers’ text quality. Assessing Writing, 54, Article 100672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2022.100672
  64. Smith, R., Connelly, T., & Rebolledo, P. (2014). Teacher-research as continuing professional development: A project with Chilean secondary school teachers. In D. Hayes (Ed.), Innovations in the continuing professional development of English language teachers (pp. 111–132). British Council.
  65. Smith, R. (2015). Exploratory action research as workplan: Why, what and where from. In K. Dikilitaş, R. Smith, & W. Trotman (Eds.), Teacher researchers in action (pp. 37–45). IATEFL.
  66. Smith, P., Geng, G., & Black, P. (2017). Teachers as reflective practitioners. In The challenge of teaching: Through the eyes of pre-service teachers (pp. 25-32). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2571-6
  67. Smith, R., & Rebolledo, P. (2018). A handbook for exploratory action research. British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/pub_30510_BC%20Explore%20Actions%20Handbook%20ONLINE%20AW.pdf
  68. Smith, R., & Rebolledo, P. (2022). Exploratory action research for enhanced teaching and learning. British Council. https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/exploratory_action_research_for_enhanced_teaching_and_learning.pdf
  69. Sokolik, M. (2003). Writing. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language teaching. (pp. 87-108). McGraw-Hill.
  70. Sönmez, G., & Akyel, A. S. (2017). Effects of an in-service teacher education course on language teachers’ research knowledge and practice. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 13(4), 734-758.
  71. Stringer, T. (2024). Synthesisability and optimising exploratory action research for continuing professional development. Educational Action Research, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2024.2362706
  72. Tseng, F. P. (2009). EFL students' "Yahoo!" online bilingual dictionary use behavior. English Language Teaching, 2(3), 98-108. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v2n3p98
  73. Türkben, T. (2021). Examination of classroom writing practices in the context of process-based approaches to teaching writing. Journal of Language & Linguistic Studies, 17, 619–644.
  74. Wang, W. (2014). Students’ perceptions of rubric-referenced peer feedback on EFL writing: A longitudinal inquiry. Assessing Writing, 19, 80-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.008
  75. Wang, P. L. (2015). Effects of an automated writing evaluation program: Student experiences and perceptions. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 12(1). https://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v12n12015/wang.pdf
  76. Wang, J. (2018). Qualitative research in English language teaching and learning. Indonesian EFL Journal: Journal of ELT, Linguistics, and Literature, 4(2), 116–132.
  77. Wingersky, J. (1999). Writing paragraphs and essays: Integrating reading, writing, and grammar skills. Wadsworth Publishing.
  78. Wiseman, A. W. (2010). The uses of evidence for educational policymaking: Global contexts and international trends. Review of Research in Education, 34, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X09350472
  79. Wyatt, M. (2011). Teachers researching their own practice. ELT Journal, 65(4), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq074
  80. Wyatt, M., & Dikilitaş, K. (2016). English language teachers becoming more efficacious through research engagement at their Turkish university, Educational Action Research. 24(4), 550-570. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1076731
  81. Yavuz, A. C. (2020). The effects of differentiated instruction on Turkish students’ L2 achievement, and student and teacher perceptions. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 313-335. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.776002
  82. Yundayani, A., & Ardiasih, L. S. (2021). Task-based material design for academic purposes: Learners' English writing skill improvement. Studies in English Language and Education, 8(1), 258-275. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v8i1.18169.