THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROCESS–PRODUCT APPROACH IN DEVELOPING UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY IN WRITING RECOUNT TEXTS
Keywords:
Process–Product Approach, Creativity, Recount Text Writing, Writing InstructionAbstract
This quasi-experimental study investigated the effectiveness of the process–product approach in enhancing the creativity of EFL university students in writing recount texts. The study involved 80 third-semester Islamic Broadcasting Communication (KPI) students selected through cluster sampling, with KPI-D (n = 40) assigned as the experimental group and KPI-E (n = 40) as the control group. Creativity and recount writing performance were measured through pre- and post-tests using an analytical rubric evaluating fluency, originality, elaboration, and organization. The experimental group showed substantial improvement, increasing from M = 63.75 (SD = 7.90) to M = 80.55 (SD = 6.80), while the control group improved from M = 64.50 (SD = 7.35) to M = 73.02 (SD = 6.88). Paired-samples t-tests revealed significant gains in both groups, with the improvement in the experimental group being markedly greater, t(39) = –14.88, p < .001, compared to the control group, t(39) = –7.45, p < .001. An independent-samples t-test further confirmed a significant difference in post-test scores between the groups, t(78) = 8.65, p < .001. Analysis of writing subcomponents revealed that students taught through the process–product approach outperformed their peers in content elaboration, grammar accuracy, vocabulary use, and coherence. These results demonstrate that the process–product approach is highly effective in fostering creativity and improving the overall quality of students’ recount writing.
Abstract
This quasi-experimental study investigated the effectiveness of the process–product approach in enhancing the creativity of EFL university students in writing recount texts. The study involved 80 third-semester Islamic Broadcasting Communication (KPI) students selected through cluster sampling, with KPI-D (n = 40) assigned as the experimental group and KPI-E (n = 40) as the control group. Creativity and recount writing performance were measured through pre- and post-tests using an analytical rubric evaluating fluency, originality, elaboration, and organization. The experimental group showed substantial improvement, increasing from M = 63.75 (SD = 7.90) to M = 80.55 (SD = 6.80), while the control group improved from M = 64.50 (SD = 7.35) to M = 73.02 (SD = 6.88). Paired-samples t-tests revealed significant gains in both groups, with the improvement in the experimental group being markedly greater, t(39) = –14.88, p < .001, compared to the control group, t(39) = –7.45, p < .001. An independent-samples t-test further confirmed a significant difference in post-test scores between the groups, t(78) = 8.65, p < .001. Analysis of writing subcomponents revealed that students taught through the process–product approach outperformed their peers in content elaboration, grammar accuracy, vocabulary use, and coherence. These results demonstrate that the process–product approach is highly effective in fostering creativity and improving the overall quality of students’ recount writing.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 JR-ELT (Journal of Research in English Language Teaching)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright notice:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
