Enhancing Saudi EFL Learners’ CAF in Narrative Writing Through Native Speaker Kids’ Reading Website

Talal Musaed Alghizzi, Abdul Aziz Mohamed Ali El Deen


This novel study investigated the impact of English native speaker kids’ reading website on enhancing Saudi EFL university students’ complexity, accuracy and fluency (CAF) in narrative writing. The rationale for this study is the scant literature in the area of estimating narrative writing in terms of CAF. The quasi-experimental method was adopted in this study through a pre-/ post-test in narrative writing. Eleven level three participants were recruited from in this study. Instruments of the study included a pre-post-test in narrative writing, and the CAF measures. A Wilcoxon signed-Rank and Mann Whitney were used in the analysis. The study results found no significant differences at 0.05 level regarding the post administration of syntactic complexity ratios except (CP/T, CP/C, and CN/C) whose results were significant. The sub-constructs of lexical density and lexical variation were enhanced partially, and as a whole, whereas there was no increase/decrease regarding lexical sophistication. For accuracy measure, the results were significant in all ratios at 0.05 level except (EFC/C, and EFTC/S ratios). Concerning fluency measures, the results were insignificant at 0.05 in all ratios except (MLC ratio). The results of the study and their pedagogical implications were discussed.


Website, Narrative Writing, Complexity, Accuracy, Fluency, Reading Writing Relationship, Saudi Learners

Full Text:



Abdel Latif, M.M.M (2013). What do mean by writing fluency and how can it be validly measured? Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 99-105. http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams073.

Abdi Tabari, M. (2016). The effects of planning time on complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexical variety in L2 descriptive writing. Asian- Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(10), 1-15.

Abdi Tabari, M. (2017). Investigating the effects of planning time on the complexity of L2 argumentative writing, TESL-EJ. 21 (1). 1-24.

Abdi Tabari, M. (2018). The effects of planning time conditions on complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language written narratives. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 10792190).

Ahmadi-Azad, Sh. (2014). The effect of coded and uncoded written corrective feedback types on Iranian EFL learners' writing accuracy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 1001-1008. doi:10.4304/tpls.4.5.1001-1008.

Ahmadian, M.J, Tavakoli, M., & VahidDastjerdi, H. (2015). The combined effects of online planning and task structure on complexity, accuracy, and fluency of L2 speech. The language learning journal. 43 (1), 41-56.

Ai, H. (2017a). Web-based L2 syntactical complexity analyzer. Retrieved from http://aihaiyang.com/software/l2sca/.

Ai, H. (2017b). Web-based lexical complexity analyzer. Retrieved from http://aihaiyang.com/software/lca/ .

Al-Fadda, H. (2012). Difficulties in academic writing: From the perspective of King Saud University postgraduate students. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 123–130.

Al-Freih, S. (2015). Exploring the intentions of female teachers to adopt web 2.0 applications in their future teaching using DTPB. Journal of Educational Sciences, 27(2), 323-347.

Alghezzi, T.A. (2017) Complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) development in L2 writing: the effects of proficiency level, learning environment, text type, and time among Saudi EFL learners. PhD Thesis, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. Available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/.

Alghizzi, T. M. (2011). The role of English writing instruction methodologies on the types of written mistakes/errors EFL graduate diploma students can identify in their writings (Unpublished graduate diploma thesis). Dublin International Foundation College, Dublin, Ireland.

Alghizzi, T. M. (2012). The role of English writing instruction methodologies on the types of written mistakes/errors Saudi EFL pre-university students can identify in their writings (Unpublished Master’s thesis). University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.

Al Fadda, H. (2012). Difficulties in academic writing: From the perspective of King Saud University postgraduate students. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 123–130.

Almasi, E., & Tabrizi, A. (2016). The Effects of Direct vs. Indirect Corrective Feedback on Iranian EFL Learners' Writing Accuracy. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3 (1), pp. 74-85.

Aref, G.S & Mojavezi, A. (2019). The Impact of Pre-Task Instruction and Task Rehearsal on Fluency, Accuracy and Complexity of Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 281-288. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1002.09.

Atasoy, A & Temizkan, M. (2016). Evaluation of secondary school students’ writing Fluency. Educational sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1457-1484.Doi 10.12738/estp. Available at www.estp.com.tr.

Aydin, F. (2019). Investigating the relationship between metalinguistic knowledge and L2 writing among intermediate-level adult Turkish EFL learners. Issues in Language Studies Volume, 8 No, 1. https://doi.org/10.33736/ils.1246.

Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153–160.

Baleghizadeh, S. & Gordani, Y. (2012). Academic writing and grammatical accuracy: The role of corrective feedback. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, 6, pp. 159-176.

Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2013). Discourse characteristics of writing and speaking task types on the TOEFL iBT Test: A lexico-grammatical analysis. (TOEFL iBT Research Report RR-19) Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Biria, R., & Jafari, S. (2013). The impact of collaborative writing on the writing fluency of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 164-175. doi:10.4304/jltr.4.1.164-175.

Boumans, J (2004). Cross-media e-content report 8. ACTeN Anticipating Content Technology Needs. Available at https://talkingobjects.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/jak-boumans-report.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2015.

Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2015). Evaluating short-term changes in L2 complexity development. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 63, 42–76.

Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Computational assessment of lexical differences in L1 and L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(2), 119–135. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2009.02.002

Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K., & James, M. (2006). Analysis of discourse features and verification of scoring levels for independent and integrated tasks for the new TOEFL. (TOEFL Monograph No.MS-30 RM 05–13). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task-based performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 3-34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Farahani, A.A.K. & Meraji, S.R. (2011). Cognitive task complexity and L2 narrative writing performance. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. 2(2). 445-456.

Fellner, T. & Apple, M. (2006). Developing writing fluency and lexical complexity with blogs. The JALT CALL Journal, 2(1), 15-26.

Fenty, N. (2007). Effects of computer-based and print-based fluency instruction on students at risk for reading failure (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3281522).

Foster, P. & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, pp.299-323.

Fowler, M.D (2016) L2 Learners’ Experiences with Reading and Writing and their Perceptions of the Connections between the Skills. Unpublished M.A Thesis. The University of Toledo. USA, University Microfilm International (UMI) No 10393351.

Gebril, A., & Plakans, L. (2013). Toward a transparent construct of reading-to-write tasks: The relationship between discourse features and proficiency. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10, 9–27.

Ghavamnia, M., Tavakoli,M., & Esteki, M. (2013). The effect of pre-task and online planning conditions on complexity, accuracy and fluency on EFL learners’ written production. Porta Linguarium.

Godwin-Jones, R. (2003). Emerging technologies: Blogs and Wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 12-16. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/emerging/default.html.

Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 461-473. http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp048.

Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 31(4):51–55. Available at https://er.educause.edu/-/media/files/article-downloads/eqm0848.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2015

Hung, H.-C & Young, S. S.-C (2015) The Effectiveness of Adopting E-Readers to Facilitate EFL Students’ Process Based Academic Writing. Institute of Information Systems and Applications, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan Institute of Learning Sciences, National Tsing Hua University.

Jisc, (2016). Introduction to e-Learning. Available at http://www.jiscdigitalmedia.ac.uk/guide/introduction-to-elearning. Accessed 20 May 2015.

Kim, J. Y. (2014). Predicting L2 writing proficiency using linguistic complexity measures: A corpus-based study. English Teaching, 69(4), 27–51.

Kim, Y., Petscher, Y., Wanzek, J & Al Otaiba, S. (2018). Relations between reading and writing: a longitudinal examination from grades 3 to 6. Springer Science Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature. Read Write 31:1591–1618 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9855-4.

Kowal, I. (2014). Fluency in second language writing: A developmental perspective. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 131: 229–246. www.ejournals.eu/Studia-Linguistica. doi:10.4467/20834624SL.14.013.2321.

Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007b). Task complexity and measures of linguistic performance in L2 writing. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 261–284.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2009). Adjusting expectations: The study of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30, 579–589.

Lenon. P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40,387-417.

Li-Te, L. (2012). Embracing the diversity: Learning from EFL students' self-selected reading and writing. TESL Reporter, 45(2), 41-62.

Long, R., & Tabuki, M. (2014). Comparing EFL learners and native speaker fluency. In H. Y. -H. Lee (Ed.), Proceedings of the international conference on language and communication: Innovative inquiries and emerging paradigms in language, media and communication (pp. 14–35). Bangkok, Thailand: The Graduate School of Language and Communication and the National Institute of Development Administration.

Lorenzo, F., & Rodríguez, L. (2014). Onset and expansion of L2 cognitive academic language proficiency in bilingual settings: CALP in CLIL. System, 47, 64–72.

Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. 1–28. Retrieved from http://personal.psu.edu/xxl13/papers/Lu_inpress_ijcl.pdf.

Lu, X. (2012). The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners' oral narratives. 1–26. Retrieved from http://www.personal.psu.edu/xxl13/papers/Lu_inpress_mlj.pdf

Mazgutova, D., & Kormos, J. (2015). Syntactic and lexical development in an intensive English for Academic Purposes programme. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 3–15.

McGivern, Y. (2009). The practice of market research (3rd ed.). Gosport: Ashford Colour Press LTD.

Mermelstein, D. A. (2015). Improving EFL Learners’ Writing Through Enhanced Extensive Reading. Reading in a Foreign Language. Soochow University. Taiwan.

Nordin, S. M. (2017). The best of two approaches: Process/genre-based approach to teaching writing. The English Teacher, XXXV, 75-85.

Nosratinia, M. & Razavi, F. (2016). Writing complexity, accuracy, and fluency among EFL learners: Inspecting Their Interaction with Learners’ Degree of Creativity. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 1043-1052.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0605.

Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24,492-518. http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.4.492.

Pallotti, G. (2009). Defining, redefining, and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30, 590–601.

Plakans, L., Gebril, A & Bilki, Z (2016) Shaping a score: Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in integrated writing performances. Language Testing. sagepub.co.uk/journals DOI:10.1177/0265532216669537 ltj.sagepub.com.

Quintero, K., Inagaki, Sh., & Kim, H. (1998). Second Language Development in Writing: Measures of Fluency, Accuracy & Complexity. University of Hawai’I Press. United States of America. Available at http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/nflrc.

Reppen, R. (2002). A genre-based approach to content writing instruction. In J. C. Richard & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An Anthology of current practice (pp. 321-327). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Roy, D. (2014). Website analysis as a tool for task-based language learning and higher order thinking in an EFL context. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265340959.Vol. 27, No.5 395-421 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/5 395 421 09588221.2012.751549.

Savage, L., & Mayer, P. (2005). Effective academic writing 2: The short essay. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.

Seifeddin, A.H & El-Sakka, S (2017) The Impact of Direct-indirect Corrective E-feedback on EFL Students’ Writing Accuracy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 166-175, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0703.02.

Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), pp.38-62.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Skehan, P. (2001). Tasks and language performance assessment. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36, 1-14.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183-205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

So, L. (2015). L2 Writing Instruction in Blended Learning for the Development of Fluency, Complexity, and Accuracy in Higher Education. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning 18(4) 121-147 http://www.kamall.or.kr.

Tang, X. (2010). The Investigation of Learning Websites in Teaching English to College Students. Wuhan University of Science and Engineering. International Conference on Optics, Photonics and Energy Engineering.

Tsai, S. -C. (2013). EFL Business Writing with Task-based Learning Approach: A Case Study of Student Strategies to Overcome Difficulties. K.U.A.S. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 10(2), 217–238 .

Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. -Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy & complexity. Hawai'i, USA: Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.

Yang, W. (2014). Mapping the relationships among the cognitive complexity of independent writing tasks, L2 writing quality, and complexity, accuracy and fluency of L2 writing (Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University). Retrievedfromhttps://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=alesl_diss.

Yoon, H. -J., & Polio, C. (2014). A longitudinal study of linguistic complexity in twogenres[PowerPointslides].Retrievedfromhttp://www.vub.ac.be/TALK/sites/default/tiles/H.%20Yoon%20%20A%20longitudinal%20study%20of%20linguistic%20complexity%20in%20two%20genres.pdf .

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.9n.6p.67


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2021 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.