Mixed-methods approach improved argumentative essay skills in Thai undergraduates, indicating enhanced academic writing performance.
This study evaluates a 10‐week genre‐based intervention that combined model essay analysis, explicit instruction, and process‐based writing to enhance Thai undergraduates' argumentative essay performance. Informed by genre‐based pedagogy, the intervention proceeded through a structured cycle of reading, analysis, writing and reflection. The study adopted a mixed‐methods design. Quantitative data from pre‐ and post‐intervention questionnaires ( N = 26) were analysed with descriptive and inferential statistics to assess perceived development across four core dimensions of writing. Results revealed significant gains in self‐perceived task response ( M = 2.63–4.21), coherence and cohesion ( M = 2.85–4.26), lexical resource ( M = 2.69–4.29) and grammatical range and accuracy ( M = 2.50–4.06), with large effect sizes (Cohen's d = 2.03–2.77; all p < 0.001). Students reported greater confidence and control in structuring ideas, using academic vocabulary, and applying complex grammar. Qualitative data from semi‐structured interviews ( n = 26), focus group discussions (six groups of 4–5 participants) and reflective journals ( n = 26) were subjected to deductive content analysis. Findings revealed enhanced genre awareness, improved metacognitive regulation, and stronger engagement with academic discourse. Participants described a clearer understanding of essay types, more coherent paragraphing, and a transition from surface‐level strategies toward purposeful, audience‐oriented writing. Emotional developments, including reduced anxiety and increased autonomy, were also noted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dueraman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: