Approaches to Teaching ESL Academic Writing: A Multiple Case Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2025.22.2.5Keywords:
ESL/EFL lecturers, academic writing, teaching approaches, Malaysian tertiary educationAbstract
Purpose - Academic writing skills are fundamental for students at tertiary level. Possessing these skills can aid students in their studies as they are mostly assessed based on their proficiency in writing skills. Due to this, the teaching of English academic writing has become pivotal for English as a second language (ESL) lecturers in ensuring students’ abilities to write academically, while at the same time achieving the course learning outcomes. Therefore, this study aims to explore the teaching approaches employed by ESL lecturers in teaching English academic writing at Malaysian universities.
Methodology - Grounded in a multiple case study, four ESL lecturers from four different universities (i.e., two public and two private universities) were purposively selected as the research participants. Data collection was done through in-depth interviews, lesson observations, and document analysis. The data were analyzed thematically using thematic analysis and cross-case analyses which compare differences and similarities across cases.
Findings - Findings indicate that Malaysian ESL lecturers at public and private universities employed various teaching approaches, such as teacher-centered traditional approach, process-genre approach, humanistic approach, and collaborative writing approach in teaching English academic writing. These teaching approaches were employed by the ESL lecturers based on their knowledge of pedagogy, teaching experience and exposure to English academic writing, while at the same time adhering to the syllabus of their universities when catering to various students’ writing proficiency.
Significance – This study provides insightful guidance to ESL/EFL lecturers teaching English academic writing. The findings will help them to select suitable teaching approaches to meet their students’ needs, proficiency levels and to achieve learning objectives. ESL lecturers are also urged to enhance their content, pedagogical, and technological pedagogical content knowledge in meeting the needs of 21st century students.
References
Adi Badiozaman, I. F. (2017). ‘I’m getting there’: An investigation of academic writing developments of undergraduate students in a foreign branch campus in Malaysia. Issues in Language Studies, 6(1), 40–60. https://doi.org/10.33736/ils.476.2017
Ahmadi, M. R. (2018). The use of technology in English language teaching: A literature review. International Journal of Research in English Education, 3(2), 116–125.
Azmar, K., & Razali, A. B. (2024). Problems in teaching English academic writing among ESL lecturers at public and private universities in Malaysia. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 82(4), 434–455. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/24.82.434
Azmar, K., & Razali, A. B. (2024). Teaching and learning English academic writing in Malaysian tertiary context. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 12(3), 49–56. https://doi.org/10. 13189/ujer.2024.120301
Boud, D., & Cohen, R. (Eds.). (2014). Peer learning in higher education: Learning from and with each other. Routledge.
Bowen, G. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bueno-Alastuey, M. C., & Martinez, P. (2017). Collaborative writing in the EFL secondary education classroom comparing triad, pair and individual work. Huarte de San Juan. Filologíay Didáctica de la Lengua, 17, 254–275. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6408523.
Burhansyah., & Masrizal (2021). A review of the effectiveness of product-based approach in the teaching of writing. Proceedings of The 11th Annual International Conference (AIC) on Social
Sciences, Universitas Syiah Kuala, September 29–30, 2021, Banda Aceh, Indonesia. https://jurnal.usk.ac.id/AICS-Social/article/view/24382
Caldwell, E. G. (2012). The teaching of academic writing by practicing ESL teachers in an intensive English program. (Unpublished master’s thesis). https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_ all/467/
Che Mat, N. H. (2020). Understanding academic writing practices in Malaysian university classrooms. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/77862/
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.
DeMarrais, K. (2004). Qualitative interview studies: Learning through experience. Foundations for Research. Erlbaum
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. https://www.jstor.org/stable/356600?origin=JSTOR-pdf
Gustafsson, J. (2017). Single Case Studies vs Multiple Case Studies: A Comparative Study. https://www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:1064378/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. In C. N. Candlin & D. R. Hall (Eds). Applied Linguistics in Action Series. Pearson Education.
Johari, S. K. (2018). The effects of task-based process writing approach on the academic writing skills among second language tertiary learners. Journal of ELT Research, 3(1), 1–20. https://journal. uhamka.ac.id/index.php/jer/article/view/1064
Kee, L. L., & Razali, A. B. (2019). Idea sharing: Process-based approach to writing in Malaysian English education. Journal of Language Teaching and Learning (PASAA) July – December 2019, 58, 319–341. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1227023.pdf
Maarof, N., Yamat., H., & Kee, L. L. (2011). Role of teacher, peer and teacher-peer feedback in enhancing ESL students’ writing. World Applied Sciences Journal, 15, 29–35. http://www. idosi.org/wasj/wasj15(IPLL)11/6.pdf
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
Nordin, S. M., & Mohammad, N. (2017). The best of two approaches: Process/genre-based approach to teaching writing. The English Teacher (11). https://www.melta.org.my/journals/TET/ downloads/tet35_01_06.pdf
Pazilah, F. N., Hashim, H., & Yunus, M. (2019). Using technology in ESL classroom: Highlights and challenges. Creative Education, 10, 3205–3212.
Pour Mohammadi, M., Abidin, Z. M. J., & Cheong, L. F. (2012). The effect of process writing practice on the writing quality of form one students: A case study. Asian Social Science, 8(3), 88–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v8n3p88
Rahman, M. A. (2017). Using blogs to facilitate ESL writing among students in a tertiary institution. Man in India, 97(16), 275–291. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321126759_ Using_blogs_to_facilitate_ESL_writing_among_students_in_a_tertiary_institution
Rajadurai, J. (2010). “Malays are expected to speak Malay”: Community ideologies, language use and the negotiation of identities. Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 9, 91–106.
Rhalmi, M. (2018). How to teach writing skills to ESL and EFL students. https://www.myenglish pages.com/blog/how-to-teach-writing/
Serin, H. (2018). A Comparison of teacher-centered and student-centered approaches in educational settings. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 5(1), 164–167. http://dx.doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v5i1p164
Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 16). Unites States of America: Cambridge University Press.
Singh, M. K. (2019). Academic reading and writing challenges among international EFL master’s students in a Malaysian university: The voice of lecturers. Journal of International Students, 9(4), 972–992. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v9i3.934
Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Sage.
Staples, S., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Academic writing development at the university level phrasal and clausal complexity across level of study, discipline, and genre. Written Communication, 33(2), 149–183. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/074108831 6631527
Storch, N. (2011). Collaborative writing in L2 context: Process, outcomes, and future directions. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 275-288. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/annualreview-of-applied-linguistics/article/abs/collaborative-writing-in-l2-contexts-processesoutcomes-and-future-directions/7BDC9F3256EF7573447387110724DEE4
Tolstova, O., & Levasheva, Y. (2019). Humanistic trend in education in a global context. https://www.shsconferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2019/10/shsconf_cildiah2019_00121/shs conf_cildiah2019_00121.html
Too, W. K. (2017). English language teaching and Policies at the tertiary level in Malaysia. In E. S. Spolsky, English Education at the Tertiary Level in Asia (pp. 109–129). Routledge.
Winarti, W., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2020). Collaborative writing and process writing approach: The effect and students’ perception. Journal of English Education Society, 5(2). https://www.researchgate. net/publication/346542939_Collaborative_writing_and_process_writing_approach_The_effec t_and_students_perception
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.
Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications design and methods (6thed). Sage Publications.
Yunus, M., & Chan, H. C. (2016). The use of mind-mapping strategy in Malaysian University English Test (MUET) writing. Creative Education, 7(4), 619–626.
Zhai, X., Razali, A. B., Sulaiman, T., & Luo, S. (2022). Idea sharing: Some thoughts on Chinese and Malaysian popular writing instructions. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(5), 3963–3970. https://journalppw.com/index.php/jpsp/article/view/6959/4581
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
Research impact
Harvested 2026-09-21Counts differ between services because each indexes a different body of literature. None of them is the whole picture.
