Technical Writing Difficulties Faced by High School Students in Dzongkha Subject
Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies,
This study explores the technical difficulties and the causes of writing difficulties school students face in writing in Dzongkha. Using social constructivism, 16 participants (ten students and six teachers) were involved. In addition to document analysis, the participants were also interviewed to find the problems of writing in Dzongkha. The findings suggest that application of Dzongkha in its written form was one of the most difficult tasks among the four language skills. The writing difficulties faced by the students were the usage of correct spelling, grammar, vocabulary, word structure, sentence structure, paragraph structure, expression and handwriting. Among these, spelling was one of the most difficult parts while writing in Dzongkha. The causes of writing difficulties in Dzongkha were the poor foundation of Dzongkha writing and reading skills, low prestige of Dzongkha language/subject, time constraint, pronunciation related problems, limited resource/facility and professional support for the Dzongkha teachers, less career scope for Dzongkha background students and poor reading habit. It was also due to lack of additional Dzongkha medium based subject, inadequate modern ways of teaching learning strategies, and also because of minimal parents’ support, less personal interest and perseverance to learn and write in Dzongkha. The solutions to the writing problems were to give adequate time for Dzongkha subject, maintain reading and writing portfolios to enhance genres writing, teaching the clear meaning and concept of different words and terminologies having same pronunciation, and adequate teacher written response needs to be emphasized and implemented. Based on the findings of the study, recommendations to different stakeholders are also provided.
- high school writing problem
- qualitative study
How to Cite
Rinchen S. Why do children fare better in English than Dzongkha (National language) in the schools of Bhutan in all grade levels?; 1999.
Thinley N. Language use in Thailand a comparative study to the case of Bhutan; 2002.
Gyatso L. Difficulty in teaching Dzonghka in an English medium system; 2004.
Van Driem G. Language policy in Bhutan. Bhutan: Aspects of culture and development. Gartmore: Kiscadale Publications; 1994.
Gibson SA. An effective framework for primary-grade guided writing instruction. The Reading Teacher. 2008;62(4):324–334.
Gyamtso DC, Dukpa N. Curriculum development for primary and secondary education. Notes. 1998;56:28.
Hyland F, Hyland K. Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of second language writing. 2001;10.3:185–212.
Jamtsho S. Relationship between teacher attitudes and learners' perceptions of classroom learning environment in Bhutanese schools. University of New Brunswick (Canada); 2001.
Badger R, White G. Product, process and genre: Approaches to writing English language training Journal. 2000;54(2):153-160. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Barbeiro LF. What happens when I write? Pupils’ writing about writing. Reading and writing. 2011;24(7):813–834.
Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. California: Sage Publication, Inc; 1998.
Dorji J. The quality of education in Bhutan: The story of growth and change in the Bhutanese education system. Thimphu, Bhutan: KMT Publisher; 2005.
Namgyel S. Language web of Bhutan. Thimphu: KMT Publisher; 2003.
Jena PC. Status and functioning of distance education in Bhutan: an evaluative study. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences. 2014;(10):91–99.
Wangyal T. 2001. Ensuring Social Sustainability: Can Bhutan’s education system ensure intergenerational transmission of values. Journal of Bhutan Studies. 2000;3(1)106–131.
Dorji CT. An introduction to Bhutanese languages, Vikas Publishing House, Delhi; 1997.
Peha S. What is good writing; 2002.
Rinzin L, Sacco R, n.d. A language for rules, another for symbols: Linguistic Pluralism and Interpretation of Statutes in the Kingdom of Bhutan;
Tenzin K. Attitudes of grade eight students in Bhutan toward national history. University of New Brunswick (Canada); 2002.
Ezza E. Arab EFL learners’ writing dilemma at tertiary level. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Canadian Center of Science and Education Publication; 2010.
Namgyel S. Quality of Education in Bhutan: Historical and Theoretical Understanding Matters. Thimphu, DSB Publication Communication (2 ed). India: Library of congress cataloguing in publication data; 2011.
Gyeltshen T. A student guide to academic writing and referencing and documentation. Paro: PCE Publication; 2010.
Gonzalez V, Chia-Yin C, Sanchez C. Cultural thinking and discourse organizational patterns influencing writing skills in a Chinese English-as-a-foreign language (EFL) learner. Bilingual Research Journal. 2001;25(4):627–652.
Wangchuk D. The birth of Dzonglish; 2010.
Navsaria I, Pascoe M, Kathard H. It’s not just the learner, it’s the system!’ Teachers’ perspectives on written language difficulties: Implications for speech-language therapy. South African Journal of Communication Disorders. 2011;58(2):95.
Peha S. An introduction to the writing process: Tools and techniques for helping students turn raw ideas into polished prose. USA, Canada: Teaching That Makes Sense Inc; 2010.
Mahon T, Yau R. Introducing a process approach in the teaching of writing in a lower primary classroom. ILEJ. 1992;9:23-29.
Cheung M, Chan A. Teaching Writing as a Process. Hong Kong: Education Department; 1994.
Goldstein AA, Carr PG. Can students benefit from process writing, NCES Report. 1996;3(1):96-845.
Jacob G, Talshir P. Creative Writing. English Teachers’ Journal. 1998;64-65.
Hyland K. Second language writing. Ernst Klett Sprachen; 2003.
Hyland K, Hyland F. Feedback on second language students’ writing; 2006.
Creswell JW. Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches (3rd ed). Sage Publication, London; 2009.
Creswell JW. Research design; qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. California. New Delhi: Sage publications; 2009.
Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. New Delhi: Sage Publication, Inc; 2007.
Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003.
Bogdan RC, Biklen SK. Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed). U.S.A: Allyn& Bacon; 1998.
Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. Hand book of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003.
Sherab K, Dorji P. The teachers’ pedagogical orientation in the primary classes: A factor on quality of education. In EDUC 507: Qualitative Research Course Pack. Paro: Paro college of Education; 2007.
Wangmo T. A simple scaffold for researching. RABSEL the CERD Educational Journal. Paro. Bhutan. 2009 ;XIII, Autumn :49.
Wangmo T. Examining ‘funds of knowledge’ of pre-primary children as they transition from home to school in Bhutan: In a context of ‘Educating for Gross National Happiness’.University of New England, Armidale, NSW. 2014;2351.
Williams J. Tutoring and revision: Second language writers in the writing center. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2004;13(3):173-201.
Williams J. Undergraduate second language writers in the writing center. Journal of basic writing. 2002;21.2:73–91.
Nezakatgoo B. The Effects of Portfolio Assessment on Writing of EFL Students. English language teaching. 2011;4(2):231–241.
Cheng, W, Warren M. Hong Kong students’ attitudes toward peer assessment in English language courses. Asian journal of English language teaching. 1996;6:61–75.
Chaudron C. The effects of feedback on students’ composition revisions. RELC Journal. 1984;15.2:1–15.
Curtis A. Hong Kong student teachers’ responses to peer group process writing. Asian journal of English language teaching. 2001;11:129–143.
O'Toole EC. Writing ability and academic performance of first-year psychology students in South Africa. Unpublished honours thesis, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; 2010.
British Sociological Association; 2002.
Abstract View: 570 times
PDF Download: 185 times