Writing apprehension relates to a reluctance to write or even fear of writing and little research has been done on this phenomenon in the South African context, especially in terms of compulsory academic literacy and academic linguistic modules. This article aimed at determining the nature of writing apprehension in these two modules in terms of the Daly and Miller’s Writing Apprehension Test (DM-WAT), essay marks and gender at a South African university. The DM-WAT was conducted with two groups of first-year students. An exploratory factor analysis was administered and this led to the identification of four distinct factors which are also associated with related aspects in the literature: positivity towards writing, negativity towards writing, evaluation apprehension and self-efficacy and writing. It is evident that in the context of this study, the chosen instrument could not be used to measure writing apprehension, rather the four identified factors. No linear relationships between essay marks and the identified constructs were clear. Also a practical significant difference between genders was found in terms of the identified constructs. Significantly, students in the compulsory academic literacy module showed a greater tendency towards apprehension in terms of the four identified factors than students from the linguistics module. The chosen instrument could be used to gauge the identified factors. Writing in compulsory academic literacy modules should be taught through individualised student-centred methods, affective support and reflective instruction, positive personal feedback, with additional support through counselling as well as effective modelled writing behaviour from lecturers.
This article explores writing apprehension amongst first-year students in a compulsory academic literacy module and a student-selected Afrikaans linguistics module at a South African university. Daly and Miller (
Apart from Daly and Miller’s initial work (Daly
This article aims at exploring the use of the DM-WAT with two South African Afrikaans-speaking groups of first-year students in order to determine the nature of writing apprehension in an academic linguistics module versus an academic literacy module in terms of the DM-WAT, essay marks and gender in a selected South African university.
The concept of writing apprehension is explored in this article, followed by some study background in terms of the research population, ethical considerations and the instrument, the DM-WAT, used in this study. The final section of this article relates to the data analysis with the focus on collection and statistical analysis, construct validity and reliability of the measuring instrument, as well as a discussion on the main findings and some recommendations.
Some individuals experience writing as a very challenging task. Furthermore, the act of writing is often viewed as a very daunting experience (Brennan
This study falls within the theoretical framework of the affective model (cf. Hayes
Apart from avoidance of writing altogether, some typical characteristics of the nature of writing by writing apprehensives have been identified. The writing of highly apprehensive individuals is shorter, syntactically restricted, has fewer qualifications, shows lower levels of language intensity and is of poorer quality (cf. Cornwell & McKay
An important factor influencing writing apprehension is writing self-efficacy (cf. Martinez
The relationship between writing apprehension and performance is evident from the literature. Daly (
Earlier work on the phenomenon of writing apprehension included observational interviews by Phillips as well as the measuring of physiological measures (e.g. galvanic skin response and heartbeat measures) by researchers such as Porter (cf. Daly & Miller
It is also important to note that writing apprehension may be associated with other, more general language-related fears. Writing apprehension is, for example, also related to communication apprehension (cf. Atkinson
Gender differences have been reported in previous studies, with boys having higher levels of ‘negative writing satisfaction’ as well as ‘less writing enjoyment’ (Hansen
Writing apprehension is not necessarily established at university. Students’ confidence in terms of writing is already formed at school level (Pajares & Johnson
The article also poses the following research questions:
What is the nature of writing apprehension in an academic linguistics module versus an academic literacy module, offered at a South African university, as measured by the DM-WAT?
Is there a relationship between writing apprehension and essay marks obtained by first-year students in an academic linguistics module and in an academic literacy module?
Does gender influence writing apprehension levels in a selected group of South African students?
Two groups of first-year students (
Participation in the study was entirely voluntary and informed consent was obtained from all the participants. Furthermore, participants were allowed to withdraw from the study at any point. As the authors of this article are also lecturers of the selected participants, a student assistant conducted the data collection outside the official class times. Ethical clearance for this research was granted (ethics number NWU-00330-14-A7) by the North-West University Research Ethics Regulatory Committee (NWU-RERC) as part of a project on academic literacy.
The phenomenon of writing apprehension has been measured by means of observational interview approaches, physiological measures as well as factor-based self-report instruments (Daly & Miller
Daly and Miller developed the DM-WAT to measure writing apprehension amongst students (Daly & Miller
It is clear from the literature that the DM-WAT has shown validity and reliability for specific research populations (Cornwell & McKay
Although not the focus of this study, it is important to note that DM-WAT has also been used in second language (L2) learning contexts (cf. Cornwell & McKay
For the purposes of this study, the DM-WAT (cf.
The DM-WAT was completed by students at the beginning of the semester before any intervention or feedback on writing assignments by lecturers. The writing assignments involved essays completed by the students as part of the continuous assessment of both modules. For the sake of comparison, both sets of assessment criteria were similar and the raters compared and discussed ratings of the first 10 randomly selected essays from both groups in order to ensure that the assessment was done in a similar manner. The data were captured in Microsoft Excel and the incomplete questionnaires (two in total) were removed. Statistical Analysis System (SAS) software (
An exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the 26 items of the DM-WAT. For the sake of statistical analysis, the directions of the questionnaire items were adapted so that they were all negative statements. In contrast to the DM-WAT (Daly & Miller
Factor loadings.
Questions | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 | Factor 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Question 10 | 0.84748 | - | - | - |
Question 15 | 0.83968 | - | - | - |
Question 17 | 0.83761 | - | - | - |
Question 19 | 0.71725 | - | - | - |
Question 9 | 0.63104 | - | - | - |
Question 3 | 0.52635 | - | - | - |
Question 5 | −0.44918 | - | - | 0.37881 |
Question 1 | −0.57873 | - | - | - |
Question 8 | −0.70594 | - | - | - |
Question 26 | - | 0.81533 | - | - |
Question 24 | - | 0.8112 | - | - |
Question 18 | - | 0.71761 | - | - |
Question 16 | - | 0.69458 | - | - |
Question 22 | - | 0.67665 | - | - |
Question 7 | - | 0.53545 | - | - |
Question 13 | - | 0.53139 | - | - |
Question 21 | - | 0.50866 | - | - |
Question 14 | - | −0.43027 | - | 0.34495 |
Question 23 | - | −0.58685 | - | - |
Question 2 | - | - | 0.78232 | - |
Question 6 | 0.32439 | - | 0.37404 | - |
Question 25 | - | 0.43728 | −0.53820 | - |
Question 4 | - | - | −0.65793 | - |
Question 12 | - | - | - | 0.69058 |
Question 11 | - | −0.46453 | - | 0.42391 |
Question 20 | 0.37081 | - | - | 0.4236 |
Exploratory factor analysis and Kaiser’s measure of sample adequacy.
Factor | Question | MSA | Variance explained (%) | Communalities variance | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Factor 1: Positivity towards writing | 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 15, 17 and 19 | ||||
Factor 2: Negativity towards writing | 7, 13, 14, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 26 | 545 | 0.94 | 56.1 | 0.33–0.62 |
Factor 3: Evaluation apprehension | 2, 4, 6 and 25 | ||||
Factor 4: Self-efficacy and writing | 11, 12 and 20 |
MSA, measure of sample adequacy.
The above-mentioned four factors were identified and named according to the questionnaire contents and the related literature (cf. Cornwell & McKay
The value of MSA in
Furthermore, the reliability of the results of the four different factors was also determined.
Cronbach’s alpha for the four identified factors.
Factor | Cronbach’s α |
---|---|
1 | 0.88 |
2 | 0.89 |
3 | 0.71 |
4 | 0.70 |
In all four instances, the value has been satisfactory with Cronbach’s alpha higher than 0.60, which is acceptable for exploratory research (cf. Hair
In this study, essay marks and gender were also considered in the statistical analysis. According to Pearson’s correlation coefficient, no linear relationships between essay marks and any of the constructs could be identified. Furthermore, the data grouped together under the four factors were also compared in terms of gender and module. However, no practical significance was determined.
The respondents came from two distinct modules: an Afrikaans language module and an Afrikaans-medium compulsory academic literacy module. The results obtained from the two groups of students are shown in
Comparison by module.
Factor | Afrikaans mean | Academic literacy mean | Degrees of freedom | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Factor 1: Positivity towards writing | 3.89 | 3.25 | 9.34 | 543 | < 0.001 |
0.8 |
Factor 2: Negativity towards writing | 3.68 | 3.26 | 7.13 | 543 | < 0.001 |
0.6 |
Factor 3: Evaluation apprehension | 3.64 | 3.44 | 2.88 | 543 | 0.004 |
0.25 |
Factor 4: Self-efficacy and writing | 3.28 | 2.86 | 4.80 | 543 | < 0.001 |
0.41 |
Practically significant according to Cohen.
Medium effect in practice according to Cohen.
Statistically significant at 0.05 level according to
Because the research population was drawn from two distinct modules (an Afrikaans language module and an Afrikaans-medium compulsory academic literacy module), the groups were therefore compared. It is evident from
An important result of this study is the fact that, in this context and with this specific research population, the DM-WAT cannot be interpreted as a single factor (writing apprehension). Rather, the results obtained in this study suggest that four distinct factors are measured with this instrument. Hence, for this specific population, the DM-WAT seems to be (especially in its current format) an outdated research instrument; however, the responses of the test could still be meaningful if a factor analysis is conducted. Importantly, the identified factors do relate to the four factors singled out by Cornwell and McKay (
Factors comparison of the DM-WAT and Cornwell and McKay.
Factors | Relevant statements |
---|---|
Positivity towards writing | 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 15, 17, 19 |
Enjoyment of writing | 1, 3, 8, 10, 15, 17 |
Negativity towards writing | 7, 13, 14, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26 |
Negative perceptions about writing ability | 7, 11, 13, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26 |
Evaluation apprehension | 2, 4, 6, 5 |
Fear of evaluation | 2, 4, 5, 25 |
Self-efficacy and writing | 11, 12, 20 |
Showing my writing to others | 6, 9, 12, 14, 19, 20 |
DM-WAT, Daly and Miller’s Writing Apprehension Test.
Although the descriptions from the two studies do not correspond exactly in all statements from the DM-WAT, the similarity of the factors is clear. Cornwell and McKay (
The four identified factors are briefly discussed in terms of the relevant literature, followed by an overview of the implications of this study in terms of essay marks, gender and the type of module.
This factor relates to not only lower (or even the absence of) writing apprehension, but also a tendency to enjoy writing and being content in having others read what has been written. In this regard, Brunton (
The negativity towards writing factor relates to anxiety when writing, inability to write, experiences of poor evaluations as well as doubts in writing abilities and standards. As with the previous factor, attitudinal and motivational issues are also very relevant for this factor. Despite the fact that poor evaluation is envisaged under this factor, a distinct factor relating to fear of evaluation was also evident. Hence, evaluation apprehension was also considered.
The statements grouped together under this factor focus on four fairly similar issues: fear of being assessed, not feeling good when handing in written work, not liking essays being assessed and fear of writing essays when they are intended for assessment. These statements do not relate to fear of writing, rather to a fear activated by the possibility of being evaluated or assessed. In terms of evaluation apprehension, Daly and Miller (
Especially, the evaluation associated with writing would influence self-esteem. According to Daly and Wilson (
This factor can also potentially lead to certain attitudinal and motivational issues concerning writing (cf. factors 1 and 2) as well as influence self-efficacy and writing as discussed in the next section.
The final factor involves having self-confidence in being able to express ideas in writing, liking it when friends are reading one’s written work and enjoying discussing one’s writing with others. These issues also relate to students’ self-efficacy (cf. Martinez
People’s behaviour is influenced by their self-efficacy or beliefs that are maintained about their capabilities (cf. Pajares
Bandura (
Moreover, Pappalardo (
Apart from the four factors mentioned above, essay marks, gender and the type of module were also regarded as important variables in this study as they are associated with the concept of writing apprehension in the literature.
Despite the fact that Daly and Miller (
According to the literature (Pajares & Johnson
The literature tends to show higher writing apprehension amongst either females (Martinez
This study involved students from a compulsory academic literacy module and a student-selected Afrikaans linguistics module. The fact that the respondents from the academic literacy module showed a greater tendency towards apprehension in terms of the four identified factors links up with the literature. In this regard, Daly (
Clearly, compulsory academic literacy courses that were designed to support students with their writing may end up alienating many students. Powers, Cook and Meyer (
The result of this study emphasises the importance of sensitivity towards writing apprehension (and, by implication, attitude towards writing, evaluation apprehension and self-efficacy and writing) in compulsory academic literacy modules. Furthermore, a subject-specific approach to writing seems to be a better alternative for writing instruction, at least in terms of writing apprehension. However, this aspect needs to be researched further in other fields and contexts.
It is crucial to acknowledge some limitations in terms of the research conducted. Firstly, the conclusions derived from this study cannot be generalised as the research population used in this study is but a selection from a larger population at a selected South African university. In addition, the population is limited to a specific university and to Afrikaans language speakers. Furthermore, the conclusions are limited in terms of the methodology where writing apprehension was only investigated in terms of the DM-WAT. In this regard, future research and follow-up studies should include qualitative data to further examine the reasons behind writing apprehension. However, despite the limitations of the research population and the methodology used, this study has led to more insights into the phenomenon of writing apprehension amongst Afrikaans-speaking university students.
Based on the aforementioned exploration of writing apprehension, and specifically attitude towards writing, evaluation apprehension and self-efficacy and writing, a few practical recommendations are made for language classrooms.
Firstly, the way in which writing is integrated in teaching and learning needs to be addressed. Fox (
Similarly, Reeves (
Apart from teaching strategies, specific individualised instructional materials can be useful, as Faigley
The nature of feedback on writing seems to be a very important aspect. In a study on how students cope with writing apprehension, Atkinson (
In this case, the instructor’s message would be centered on their belief in the student’s abilities and respect for the work ethic and academic maturity displayed. The constructive criticism dealing with writing as the practice of a craft could be sandwiched in a message to focus the need for improvement from a skills perspective.
Despite the merits of positive feedback, Fox (
Additional support for writing apprehensives can also be beneficial. According to Daly and Miller (
The writing of lecturers or teachers themselves (as well as their own approaches and apprehensions towards writing) may also prove instrumental in classroom contexts (cf. Reeves
Writing apprehension relates to a reluctance to write or even fear of writing. The DM-WAT has been successfully used in the past to investigate this construct. In this study, involving two groups of South African Afrikaans-speaking students enrolled in an Afrikaans linguistics module as well as an academic literacy compulsory module, four distinct factors were determined from the factor analysis of the collected data. These factors were
In the context of this study, and with this specific research population, it was determined that the DM-WAT can be used to gauge specific aspects (e.g. positivity towards writing, negativity towards writing, evaluation apprehension and self-efficacy and writing). However, there were no linear relationships between essay marks and the identified constructs in this study. A comparison between writing apprehension and module marks, as well as scores from standardised academic literacy tests, could possibly show different results. Furthermore, no practical significant difference in genders was determined in terms of the identified constructs.
However, a significant amount of students in the compulsory academic literacy module showed a greater tendency towards writing apprehension in terms of the four identified factors. In terms of instruction, writing apprehension must be considered by lecturers. It is therefore important for writing, especially in compulsory academic literacy modules, to be taught through individualised student-centred methods, with affective support and reflective instruction, positive personal feedback, additional support through counselling as well as effective modelled writing behaviour from lecturers.
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
L.O. and J.O. were both equally responsible for the collection and analysis of data as well as the writing of this article.
Question | Answer |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Strongly agree | Agree | Uncertain | Disagree | Strongly disagree | |
1. I avoid writing. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2. I have no fear of my writing being evaluated. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
3. I look forward to writing down my ideas. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
4. I am afraid of writing essays when I know they will be evaluated. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
5. Taking a composition course is a very frightening experience. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
6. Handing in a composition makes me feel good. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
7. My mind seems to go blank when I start to work on my composition. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
8. Expressing ideas through writing seems to be a waste of time. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
9. I would enjoy submitting my writing to magazines for evaluation and publication. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
10. I like to write down my ideas. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
11. I feel confident in my ability to express my ideas clearly in writing. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
12. I like to have my friends read what I have written. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
13. I am nervous about writing. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
14. People seem to enjoy what I write. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
15. I enjoy writing. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
16. I never seem to be able to write down my ideas clearly. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
17. Writing is a lot of fun. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
18. I expect to do poorly in composition classes even before I enter them. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
19. I like seeing my thoughts on paper. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
20. Discussing my writing with others is enjoyable. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
21. I have a terrible time organising my ideas in a composition course. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
22. When I hand in a composition, I know I am going to do poorly. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
23. It is easy for me to write good compositions. (−) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
24. I do not think I write as well as most other people do. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
25. I do not like my compositions to be evaluated. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
26. I am not good at writing. (+) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |