Teacher’s Perspective on challenges and strategies in Teaching English Writing to Students with Learning Disabilities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35696/jwx0jz29Keywords:
Writing Instruction, Formative Assessment, Muli-Sensory Instruction, Scaffolding, Task DecompositionAbstract
The study at hand looks at teachers' opinions on the difficulties they meet when instructing English writing to students with learning Disabilities and examines the strategies they believe to be the most effective. Using a qualitative exploratory method, the data was gathered through semi-structured interviews with the sample of educators in the Qassim area. Recurring themes in the data were discovered through thematic analysis. Teachers said that traditional, rigid methods are inadequate, while adaptive implementations of evidence-based practices—such as task decomposition, visual scaffolding, and gamified repetition—are seen as extremely successful. The current study presently shows that teachers attribute writing challenges primarily to deficits in phonemic awareness, working memory, and visual perception, rather than simply a lack of drive. Task decomposition (chunking), visual scaffolding, routine-based repetition, collaborative learning, and technological support that are some of the successful tactics that have been documented. This study recommended that reforms at the policy level, such as longer evaluation times and specific teacher training in neuro-educational methods, considering these results of the study.Downloads
References
Agili, E. & Prabhashini C. (2021). A study on classroom discourse in enhancing metacognition to develop writing skill in Saudi EFL students. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume, 12(3), 450-463.
Alharbi, K. N. (2022). Female Saudi ESL Learners’ Attitudes Toward Communication in Mixed Gender Classes in the USA. Arts for Linguistic & Literary Studies, 1(13), 7-30. https://doi.org/10.53286/arts.v1i13.838
Al-Khatib, H. (2017). The five tier model for teaching English academic writing in EFL contexts. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 8(2), 74-86.
Al-Moushaki, M. A. H. (2024). Attitudes of Yemeni EFL Students at Thamar University towards Desuggestopedia Method. Journal of Arts, 12(3), 677-693. https://doi.org/10.35696/arts.v12i3.2116
Apridayani, A. Han, W. & Sakkanayok, K. (2024). Enhancing English writing competence in higher education: A comparative study of teacher-only assessment versus teacher and student self-assessment approaches. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 9(1), 1-20.
Bai, B. Shen, B. & Mei, H. (2020). Hong Kong primary students’ self-regulated writing strategy use: Influences of gender, writing proficiency, and grade level. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 65, Article, 100839.
Brodsky, A. Buckingham, S. Scheibler, J. & Mannarini, T. (2016). Introduction to qualitative approaches. In F. A. [Editor Initials] Last Name & S. B. [Editor Initials] Last Name (Eds.), Handbook of methodological approaches to community-based research: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods (pp. 13–22). Springer.
Bui, H. Nguyen, L. & Nguyen, T. (2023). An investigation into EFL pre-service teachers’ academic writing strategies. Heliyon, 9(3), 1-12.
Cheng, X. & Liu, Y. (2022). Student engagement with teacher written feedback: Insights from low-proficiency and high-proficiency L2 learners. System, 109, Article, 102880.
Cheng, X. Zhang, L. & Yan, Q. (2025). Exploring teacher written feedback in EFL writing classrooms: Beliefs and practices in interaction. Language Teaching Research, 29(1), 385-415.
Cheung, Y. L. (2011). Teacher training for effective writing instruction: Recent trends and future directions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, Article, 531-534.
Copland, F. Garton, S. & Burns, A. (2014). Challenges in teaching English to young learners: Global perspectives and local realities. Tesol quarterly, 48(4), 738-762.
Engeström, Y. (2014). Activity theory and learning at work. In Tätigkeit-Aneignung-Bildung: Positionierungen zwischen Virtualität und Gegenständlichkeit (pp. 67-96). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Evans, N. Hartshorn, K. McCollum, R. M. & Wolfersberger, M. (2010). Contextualizing corrective feedback in second language writing pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 445-463.
Fonkamo, D., & Zeru, A. (2022). Exploring the impediments on the application of reflective teaching in EFL paragraph writing classes. Cogent Education, 9(1), Article, 2109648.
Graham, S. Collins, A. & Ciullo, S. (2023). Special and general education teachers’ beliefs about writing and writing instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 56(3), 163-179.
Guo, Q. & Xu, Y. (2021). Formative assessment use in university EFL writing instruction: a survey report from China. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 41(2), 221-237.
Guo, Q. (2025). Exploring teacher assessment conceptions in University EFL writing instruction. SAGE Open, 15(1), Article, 21582440251324746.
Habibi, H. & Kaur, M. (2015). The effect of reading on improving the writing of EFL students. Available at SSRN, Article, 5291630.
Karatsareas, P. (2022). Semi structured interviews. In P. Karatsareas (Ed.), Research methods in language attitudes (pp. 99–113). Cambridge University Press.
Lee, I. & Mao, Z. (2024). Writing teacher feedback literacy: Surveying second language teachers’ knowledge, values, and abilities. Journal of Second Language Writing, 63, Article, 101094.
Lee, I. & Yuan, R. (2021). Understanding L2 writing teacher expertise. Journal of Second Language Writing, 52, Article, 100755.
Lee, I. (2010). Writing teacher education and teacher learning: Testimonies of four EFL teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 143-157.
Lee, I. (2014). Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. Tesol Quarterly, 48(1), 201-213.
Li, D., & Zhang, L. (2022). Exploring teacher scaffolding in a CLIL-framed EFL intensive reading class: A classroom discourse analysis approach. Language Teaching Research, 26(3), 333-360.
Liu, C. & Chen, M. (2022). A genre-based approach in the secondary school English writing class: Voices from student-teachers in the teaching practicum. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 992360.
Liu, X. (2024). Formative writing assessment: An EFL teacher’s beliefs and practices. Changing English, 31(2), 200-210.
Mleiki, A. K. (2025). Exploring Saudi EFL Learners’ Perspectives on Digital Writing Tools for Mitigating Emotional Challenges in Foreign Language Writing. Arts for Linguistic & Literary Studies, 7(1), 577-590. https://doi.org/10.53286/arts.v7i1.2373
Moodie, I. (2016). The anti-apprenticeship of observation: How negative prior language learning experience influences English language teachers’ beliefs and practices. System, 60, 29-41.
Mustafa, A. Arbab, A. & El Sayed, A. (2022). Difficulties in academic writing in English as a second/foreign language from the perspective of undergraduate students in higher education institutions in Oman. Arab World English Journal, 13(3), 41-53.
Nazari, M. & Alizadeh Oghyanous, P. (2023). Contributions of a genre-based teacher education course to second language writing teachers’ cognitions. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 17(2), 265-277.
Neuendorf, K. (2018). Content analysis and thematic analysis. In Advanced research methods for applied psychology (pp. 211-223). Routledge.
Ruth, E. (2024). EFL teacher beliefs about collaborative writing at Swedish primary school. Education Inquiry, 1-19.
Sedgwick, P. & Greenwood, N. (2015). Understanding the Hawthorne effect. Bmj, 351.
Shan, Z. Yang, H. & Xu, H. (2023). The mediating role of curriculum configuration on teacher’s L2 writing assessment literacy and practices in embedded French writing. Assessing Writing, 57, 100742.
Terry, G. Hayfield, N. Clarke, V. & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology, 2(17-37), 25.
Wang, Y. Derakhshan, A. Pan, Z. & Ghiasvand, F. (2023). Chinese EFL teachers’ writing assessment feedback literacy: A scale development and validation study. Assessing Writing, 56, 100726.
Yan, Q. Zhang, L. & Cheng, X. (2021). Implementing classroom-based assessment for young EFL learners in the Chinese context: a case study. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(6), 541-552.
Yu, S. Xu, H. Jiang, L. & Chan, I. (2020). Understanding Macau novice secondary teachers’ beliefs and practices of EFL writing instruction: A complexity theory perspective. Journal of Second Language Writing, 48, 100728.
Yu, S. Yuan, K. Zhou, N. & Wang, C. (2023). The development and validation of a scale for measuring EFL secondary teachers’ self-efficacy for English writing and writing instruction. Language Teaching Research, 13621688231174701.
Yu, S., Jiang, L., Liu, C., & Zhou, N. (2022). Profiles of Chinese secondary students’ L2 writing motivation and engagement. Educational Psychology, 42(8), 972-990.
Zhang, T. & Zhang, L. (2021B). Taking stock of a genre-based pedagogy: Sustaining the development of EFL students’ knowledge of the elements in argumentation and writing improvement. Sustainability, 13(21), 11616.
Zhao, H. (2018). Exploring tertiary English as a Foreign Language writing tutors’ perceptions of the appropriateness of peer assessment for writing. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1133-1145.
Zheng, X. & Zhang, L. (2021A). Sustaining university English as a foreign language learners’ writing performance through provision of comprehensive written corrective feedback. Sustainability, 13(15), Article, 8192.
Zheng, Y. Yu, S. Liu, C. & Jiang, L. (2022). Mapping research on second language writing teachers: A review on teacher cognition, practices, and expertise. System, 109, 102870.
Zhu, J. Yang, Y. & Yan, Z. (2024). Relationships between teacher feedback and English writing proficiency in Chinese students: The mediating effect of writing self-regulated learning strategies. System, 123, 103338.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licensing
For all articles published in journal, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work.
How to Cite
