See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/394921510

Enhancing Writing Skills through Web-based Learning (WBL) in ESL/EFL

Classrooms: A Systematic Review

Article in International Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research · August 2025
DOI: 10.26803/ijlter.24.8.20

CITATIONS READS

0 37

3 authors, including:

Mazyani Mat Nur AINIL Sulaiman

Sultan Idris Education University National University of Malaysia
5 PUBLICATIONS 35 CITATIONS 42 PUBLICATIONS 294 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mazyani Mat on 25 August 2025.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 473

International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research

Vol. 24, No. 8, pp. 473-496, August 2025
[Link]
Received May 14, 2025; Revised Jul 26, 2025; Accepted Jul 31, 2025

Enhancing Writing Skills through Web-based

Learning (WBL) in ESL/EFL Classrooms:
A Systematic Review
Mazyani Mat*
Faculty of Education, National University of Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia
Faculty of Languages and Communication, Sultan Idris Education University,
Tanjong Malim, Malaysia

Harwati Hashim and Nur Ainil Sulaiman

Faculty of Education, National University of Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia

Abstract. Web-based learning (WBL) is an innovative approach to

education that empowers learners by offering them flexibility and control
over their educational journey. This systematic literature review aimed to
identify web-based instructional strategies for enhancing English as a
Second Language (ESL) and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing
skills that have been employed over the past decade. This review
employed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and
Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework across major academic databases,
including Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and the Education Resources
Information Centre (ERIC). Out of 97 articles, 18 journal articles were
selected based on set exclusion and inclusion criteria. The results
highlighted a significant finding in research on WBL as a means of
enhancing English writing skills worldwide. Accordingly, six types of
web-based instructional platforms can improve ESL/EFL writing skills:
1) cloud-based applications, 2) learning management systems (LMS), 3)
inquiry-oriented learning tools, 4) automated writing evaluation (AWE),
5) online grammar checking and editing tools, and 6) digital storytelling.
Furthermore, the review identified three significant themes: the use of
WBL methods improved collaborative writing, peer feedback increased
learners’ engagement and motivation and enhanced soft skills. Thus, this
study offers valuable insights into the role of technology-enhanced
language learning, specifically focusing on web-based instructional
methods to be implemented to enhance ESL writing skills.

Keywords: ESL learners; ESL writing skills; technology-enhanced

language learning; web-based learning (WBL)

*
Corresponding author: Mazyani Mat; mazyani@[Link]
©Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0
International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
 474

1. Introduction
The integration of technology to address writing difficulties among English as a
Second Language (ESL) learners have gained significant attention in recent years.
This multi-faceted approach not only enhances their writing proficiency but also
fosters overall language acquisition and confidence in using English in various
contexts, as well as their other skills (Almazroui & Awad, 2025; Asratie et al., 2022;
Gharehblagh & Nasri, 2020; Haerazi et al., 2020). Web-based learning (WBL), also
known as online learning or e-learning, offers interactive and engaging platforms
that cater to the diverse learning needs of English as a Second Language and
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. It can include multimedia
resources, collaborative writing tools, and feedback mechanisms that promote
active participation and skill development among the learners (Mohd Zaki &
Adnan, 2023; Yazid et al., 2024). By leveraging online environments, educators can
create tailored learning experiences that support language acquisition and writing
proficiency.

English writing is a complex skill that many ESL learners struggle with; it is
widely accepted as a challenging activity and difficult to master (Bora, 2023;
Karim, 2022; Kee et al., 2021; Singh et al., 2020; Taufiq et al., 2021) due to its
complexity in phonological, morphological, semantic, and syntactic structure
(Rao, 2019). Furthermore, writing involves several stages, including pre-writing,
drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. Additionally, writing comprises
multiple stages: pre-writing, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. During
the writing process, writers face challenges with two key aspects: the knowledge
stored in their long-term memory and their strategy for managing rhetorical
elements problems. Consequently, students often feel overwhelmed and lack
motivation in completing writing tasks, as they may struggle to express
themselves effectively. Hence, by having online platforms that provide
comprehensive content and practices, ESL learners can utilise them at their
convenience.

Recognising the effectiveness of technology-enhanced language learning,

especially in developing writing skills, there is a clear gap in the types of platforms
that teachers use to support English writing beyond the classroom. This study
aims to provide valuable insights for teachers and developers involved in
technology-assisted language learning, with the goal of enhancing English
writing skills. The primary objective of this study is to conduct a systematic
literature review on web-based learning strategies to enhance English writing
skills among ESL/EFL learners. Additionally, the goal also includes identifying
the instructional methods used in previous research and examining their impact
on other skills among ESL/EFL learners. This comprehensive study adheres to
the PRISMA protocol and examines the web-based instructional strategies
employed by previous researchers over the past decade (2015-2024). Furthermore,
this study aims to address the following specific research questions:

RQ1: Which platforms are used in a web-based learning strategy to enhance

writing skills?

[Link]
 475

RQ2: What are the additional benefits of using a web-based learning strategy in
ESL/EFL classrooms?

By thoroughly exploring these aims, this study seeks to gain a deeper

understanding of WBL for teaching and learning English writing skills, as well as
its impact on other skills. Our findings identify effective instructional methods
and provide practical insights for educators and developers of technology-
assisted language learning in the ESL/EFL context.

2. Literature Review
2.1 Web-based learning
Web-based learning (WBL) has become an important method in ESL/EFL
education, with many studies conducted on web-based learning across different
fields (Bashori et al., 2022; Cook, 2007; Destianingsih & Satria, 2017; Farah Amirah
& Nur Ehsan, 2023; Girard & Pinar, 2011; Kusumawati et al., 2025; Nordin et al.,
2016; Prystiananta et al., 2025). One benefit of WBL is its ability to create a flexible
learning environment that suits different learning styles and speeds. Kashefian-
Naeeini et al. (2024) noted that web-based vocabulary lessons offer a richer context
than traditional methods, enabling learners to navigate content more adaptively
and engage more meaningfully with the materials. This flexibility is essential in
helping various resources boost a learner’s ability to express ideas in writing.

2.2 Approaches to the Teaching of Writing

Several theories and approaches are recognised and adapted by ESL teachers in
the teaching of writing. Teachers often employ various teaching methods and
approaches, but they undoubtedly have their favourite method and approach
(Hyland, 2003). Some focus on the end product (product-based approach), while
others prefer the process-based approach. The product approach focuses on the
written product, which is the essay. In an ESL classroom, students are asked to
write an essay following a specific pattern provided by their teachers (Shahrina &
Norhisham, 2017). While completing a writing task assigned by the teacher,
students’ progress from pre-writing to composing the essay and, finally,
correcting the errors in the essay (Pasand & Haghi, 2013). The focus of this
approach is the final product, a writing that is coherent and error-free (Hyland,
2003).

On the contrary, Hyland (2003: 10) stated that “the process approach to writing
teaching emphasises the writer as an independent producer of texts, but it goes
further to address the issue of what teachers should do to help learners perform a
writing task”. The writing activity emphasises the writer as an independent
producer of text and further addresses the issue of how to help learners complete
a writing task. This highlights the teacher’s responsibility in guiding and
supporting students through the stages of writing in ESL/EFL classrooms. Since
students require continuous support and guidance, a web-based learning
platform can provide them with guidance as they can access it anywhere and at
any time.

[Link]
 476

2.3 Challenges of Learning Writing in Tertiary Education

The challenges faced by tertiary students in developing writing skills are
multifaceted and deeply rooted in pedagogical practices, student perceptions, and
institutional frameworks. Academic writing represents a significant hurdle for
students transitioning into higher education. One prominent challenge is the
perceived lack of adequate preparation and understanding necessary for effective
academic writing. Research by Arneback et al. (2017) emphasises that many
students struggle to navigate the conventions of academic writing, which often
prioritises adherence to structural and formatting rules over creative expression.
Moreover, students may find that developing critical and creative thinking skills
is overshadowed by an intense focus on learning these formal rules, which can
diminish their motivation and confidence in their writing abilities (Arneback et
al., 2017; Rossa et al., 2023).

Another significant issue is the pedagogical environment in which writing is

taught. Traditional methods often fail to effectively engage students, resulting in
a disconnect in the development of writing skills. The integration of technology
in writing instruction presents both challenges and opportunities. While digital
platforms and blended learning technologies can enhance writing skills, as Azizov
(2024) suggests, the effectiveness of these approaches heavily depends on how
they are implemented within the curriculum . Insufficient instructional support
in using these tools can lead to suboptimal outcomes, as students may struggle to
capitalise on the benefits of technology-enhanced learning (Ghamdi & Alnajami,
2022).

Based on the research highlighted above, there is a need of research pertaining the
platforms and instructional strategies used by ESL instructors in teaching writing
skills effectively. Further investigation is necessary to identify the types of online
platforms that effectively enhance ESL learners’ writing skills so that the findings
can serve as guidelines for utilising web-based instructional methods in teaching
and learning English writing skills.

3. Methodology
3.1 The Review Protocol (PRISMA)
This systematic review adhered to the established systematic review guideline of
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA
2020 statement) by Page et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement includes four
stages: identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion criteria. This updated
guideline for reporting systematic reviews offers numerous advantages that
enhance the quality and transparency of systematic reviews. One advantage is the
comprehensive 27-item checklist that provides a structured framework for
researchers to follow. This checklist ensures that systematic reviews are reported
thoroughly and precisely, thereby facilitating a better understanding of the
findings (Page et al., 2021). On the other hand, to conduct a systematic review,
researchers employed a series of scientific methodologies to minimise systematic
errors (bias) while locating, evaluating and synthesising relevant studies (Rose et
al., 2018). Figure 1 illustrates the application of the PRISMA 2020 framework in
this study.

[Link]
 477

Identification of studies via databases and registers

Articles identified from

databases: Duplicated articles (n = 1)
Scopus (n = 35) Articles identified as
Identification

Web of Science (WoS) ineligible by automation

(n = 17) tools (n = 9) due to book,
Education Resources systematic review articles,
Information Center (ERIC) and conference papers.
(n = 45)
Total = 97

Articles screened by title and

Articles excluded: (n = 58)
abstracts (n = 87)
Screening

Articles sought for retrieval Articles not retrieved

(n = 29) (n = 2)

Articles excluded (n = 9) as
Articles assessed for
the scope of studies did not
eligibility (n = 27)
fulfil the criteria.
Included

Articles included in review

(n = 18)

Figure 1: PRISMA 2020 flow diagram adapted from Page et al. (2021)

3.2 Resources
The primary data sources for this study were online database searches. The three
databases used are Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and the Education Resources
Information Center (ERIC). Scopus, the primary source for this systematic review,
is a comprehensive database and a crucial resource across various disciplines. It
is widely regarded as one of the largest databases, encompassing 23,500 journals,
194,000 books, and approximately 9 million conference papers (Cebrino & De la
Cruz, 2020). The second database used in this study was WoS, a robust source that
includes approximately 33,000 journal articles across more than 256 disciplines
(Ramalingam et al., 2022). The third database examined in this systematic review
was ERIC, a valuable tool for researchers in the educational field. Operated by the
U.S. Department of Education, this database offers free access to numerous full-

[Link]
 478

text documents, making it accessible to a broad international audience. Although

it is a U.S.-based database, it includes publications from several other countries,
making it a suitable resource for this study. Thus, all three databases offer
sufficient coverage to facilitate a deep and rigorous understanding and analysis
of web-based instructional methodologies and their impact on ESL/EFL learners.

3.3 Identification
The initial phase of the systematic review is identification, where key terms are
defined and related or synonymous terms are found using a thesaurus and
Boolean operators. The keywords for searching were “Web-based instructions”,
“ESL”, and “Writing skills”. Next, initial search strings were developed in
November 2024 based on the keywords. By searching the three databases, 97
studies were yielded. However, after a rigorous application of inclusion and
exclusion criteria, the final sample was narrowed down to 18 studies. Table 1
below displays the search strings used in this study for each database.

Table 1: Keywords used in the process of finding relevant literature

Database Search String

Scopus TITLE-ABS-KEY (("writing skills" OR "writing
proficiency" OR "writing ability" OR "composition
skills") AND ("web-based instruction" OR "web-based
teaching" OR "online instruction") AND ("English as a
second language" OR "ESL" OR "English for foreign
language" OR "EFL"))
Web of Science (WoS) TS = (("writing skills" OR "writing
proficiency" OR "writing ability" OR "composition
skills") AND ("web-based instruction" OR "web-based
teaching" OR "online instruction") AND ("English as a
second language" OR "ESL" OR "English for foreign
language" OR "EFL"))
Education Resources Web-based learning and writing skills and ESL or EFL
Information Center (ERIC)

3.4 Screening
Table 2 outlines the eligibility and exclusion criteria for our research, detailing the
parameters used to select and exclude participants.

Table 2: The eligibility and exclusion criteria

Criterion Eligibility Exclusion
Books, book series, book chapters,
Journal (Research
Article type systematic review articles and
articles)
conference proceedings.
Language English Non-English
Between 2015 and
Timeline Published in 2014 and earlier
2024
ESL/EFL learning & Other educational fields and language
Study area
writing skills. skills.

[Link]
 479

At this stage, the identified articles from the search are reviewed by the inclusion
and exclusion criteria. During the initial keyword search across the three
databases, a total of 97 studies were obtained (Refer to Figure 1). All studies were
assessed using four exclusion criteria (Table 2): article type, language, timeline,
and study area. After screening, 66 articles were excluded, leaving 31 studies for
further review.

3.5 Eligibility
In the third stage, by adopting a two-step evaluation of abstracts and full-text
analysis, 27 articles were identified as relevant to the scope of this study. Further
screening led to the exclusion of another nine articles because they did not meet
the study area’s criteria or the methods employed in those studies. Therefore, only
18 articles are suitable and relevant to this systematic review.

3.6 Included
This systematic review examined web-based instructional methods to enhance
ESL/EFL writing skills. The selected studies are presented in Table 3, which
shows that seven articles were sourced from Scopus, six from WoS, and five from
ERIC. These three databases were selected due to their reputation for high-quality
articles, particularly in the field of education. Additionally, 17 studies were
conducted in higher education, while only one study was completed in a high
school (Hoang & Hoang, 2022). As indicated in Table 3, most studies employed
an experimental research design involving pre-tests and post-tests to assess
students’ writing performance.

Table 3: Overview of the selected articles

Study Database Research Sample Aims Findings
design
(Wang, Scopus ER 48 first- To enhance Students
2015) year students' participating in
students business writing collaborative
skills through writing tasks
the use of wikis. developed
proficiency in
business writing
and appreciated the
challenge of this
new learning
experience.
(Huang, ERIC TA 57 under- To investigate Both students and
2016) graduates perceptions of teachers had
blogging in EFL positive attitudes
writing classes. towards blogging.
To assess the Blogging enhances
impact of blogs EFL writing
on writing motivation and
performance. To performance.
explore the Blogging improves
effectiveness of language ability

[Link]
 480

peer feedback and writing

through blogs. fluency.
(Hojeij & ERIC MM 37 pre- To explore app Students viewed
Hurley, intermedi functionality in that their writing
2017) ate facilitating improved through
learners of writing the process. They
English processes. developed a meta-
language to
evaluate their
work, leading to
clearer
assessments. As a
result, essays
showed progress
from draft to final
version.
(Cequeña Scopus QER 76 college To investigate Both instructional
, 2020) students correlations methods
among self- significantly
perception in enhanced writing
reading and skills. Reading
writing and to achievement
determine the positively
effectiveness of influences writing
web-mediated performance in
versus both groups. Self-
conventional perception in
writing reading is linked to
instruction. self-perception in
writing.
(Al WoS ER 43 first- To enhance Iraqi Participants
Asadi, year learners' writing demonstrated an
2020) students skills through enhanced
intercultural understanding of
awareness using intercultural
WebQuest. concepts in their
writing. Writing
skills improved,
but sentence
structure remained
weak. Cultural
awareness
positively impacted
writing skills.
(Chatta WoS QER 63 To study the The participants in
& Haque, students effect of Flipped the experimental
2020) of the Classroom group wrote more
Business Instruction on effective
College the writing paragraphs,
skills of Saudi showing a notable
EFL students. improvement in
their writing skills.
Both the students

[Link]
 481

and the instructor

displayed a
positive attitude
toward Flipped
Classroom
Instruction.
(Sajjadpo Scopus ER 30 EFL To explore the The experimental
ur, 2021) learners of influences of the group
a private Grammarly® outperformed the
language online website control group in
institute on correcting writing
Iranian EFL performance.
learners’ writing Significant
flaws and, as a differences were
result, found in overall
enhancing their writing
writing achievement
performance. between groups.
(Hoang WoS QER 24 high To examine the Students' overall
& Hoang, school potential impact academic writing
2022) students of regular skills significantly
collaborative improved.
activities using Significant
Google Docs on improvements in
students' task response and
English lexical resources
academic were noted.
writing skills.
(Salem, WoS ER 66 English This study Online digital
2022a) course investigates storytelling has
students how online significantly
digital improved
storytelling argumentative
influences EAP writing skills.
students’ Participants
argumentative reported positive
writing skills attitudes towards
and examines its blended learning.
role in
enhancing self-
directed
learning and
learner
autonomy in
language
education.
(Salem, Scopus ER 54 under- Examines how EAP students
2022b) graduates learning significantly
through a improved their
sheltered academic writing
Internet setting, skills. Writing
particularly the anxiety levels
“WebQuest”, decreased among

[Link]
 482

enhances the participants.

academic Positive
writing skills of perceptions of
non-native WebQuest as a
English learning tool
speakers in emerged. Students
English for expressed
Academic increased
Purposes (EAP). motivation and
engagement in
learning.
(Dousti Scopus ER 49 EFL Analyse and EFL learners'
& undergrad compare the writing skills
Amirian, uates effectiveness of improved
2023) web-mediated, significantly in all
blended, and groups. Significant
fully online differences were
instruction found in overall
methods on EFL writing
learners’ writing achievement scores.
achievement
within the
Iranian context.
(Elgün ERIC AR 40 To investigate Students found
Gündüz, university university wiki-based tasks
2023) students students’ motivating and
attitudes toward effective for
wiki-based writing. Wiki tasks
collaborative increased student
writing tasks motivation and
and how they engagement in L2
perceive these writing. Feedback
tasks' impact on from peers
their writing improved students'
development awareness of
within an EFL writing
(English as a weaknesses.
Foreign
Language)
setting in
Turkey.
(Peungch Scopus QER 28 first- To explore how The experimental
aroenkun year the process- group performed
& students genre approach, better on the post-
Waluyo, from the feedback, and tests compared to
2023) veterinary technology the pre-tests, with
college interact in L2 notable
writing among improvements in
Thai university task response and
students. lexical resources.
(Haro et WoS ER 221 To investigate The results showed
al., 2023) undergrad how directed notable differences
uates and undirected between the

[Link]
 483

enrolled in online peer conditions

a life feedback regarding the
science influence quality of feedback
course students’ peer given. They also
feedback demonstrated a
performance, significant boost in
argumentative students'
essay writing performance on
skills, and argumentative
domain-specific essays and their
knowledge domain-specific
acquisition. knowledge,
although no
significant
differences were
found among the
conditions.
(Guo & Scopus QER 64 EFL This study
Li, 2024) students investigates
how electronic
portfolio-based Electronic portfolio
writing instruction
instruction significantly
affects the improved writing
writing performance, with
performance notable
and self-efficacy improvements in
of Chinese EFL language use and
learners. It aims vocabulary scores.
to explore the The mechanics of
influence of this writing were
approach on enhanced in the
their ability and experimental
confidence in group. Writing self-
writing in a efficacy increased
second among participants
language. using Edmodo.
(He, ERIC QER 86 EFL The purpose is The experimental
2024) students to demonstrate group participants
how automated showed higher
writing motivation to write,
evaluation greater enjoyment
(AWE) of writing, stronger
influences academic
learners’ writing buoyancy, and
skills, more academic
motivation, success in writing
enjoyment, and compared to their
academic control group
resilience in peers.
open and
distributed
English as a

[Link]
 484

foreign
language (EFL)
learning.
(Pitukwo ERIC MM 53 To examine Thai Notable
ng & undergrad EFL university enhancement in
Saraiwan uates students’ writing skills
g, 2024) enrolled in perceptions of
following the use of
English two digital digital tools.
education writing tools, Students hold
Paragraph positive views of
Punch and Paragraph Punch
ProWritingAid, and
and to assess ProWritingAid.
their writing There is also
performance. increased
motivation and
engagement in
writing classes.
(Yildiz & WoS ER 38 English The aim is to AWE feedback
Gonen, Preparator assess how effectively reduced
2024) y Program effective AWE errors in mechanics
(EPP) feedback is in and usage. Teacher
students reducing errors feedback was more
of a in English effective in
foundatio writing and to addressing content
n explore and organizational
university. students' issues. AWE
opinions on the feedback improved
usefulness of errors related to ill-
AWE tools. formed verbs,
articles, and
punctuation. It
complements
teacher feedback,
enhancing the
development of
writing skills.
TA – Triangulation approach, MM = Mixed-Method, AR= Action Research, ER =
Experimental Research, QER = Quasi-experimental Research

3.7 Data Analysis Procedure

The selected articles were imported into the reference management software
Mendeley before conducting the thematic analysis. Next, a matrix table was
created in Microsoft Excel that included the research topics, detailing the year
each study was conducted, the design of the investigation, and the objectives of
each study. The data were thoroughly analysed for each article, and all relevant
information was collected to populate the matrix table. Through these analyses,
several themes emerged to address the following research questions:

RQ1: Which platforms are used in web-based instructional strategies to enhance

writing skills?

[Link]
 485

RQ2: What are the additional benefits of using web-based instructional strategies
in ESL/EFL classrooms?

As noted in the first research question, the platforms were classified into six types
of web-based platforms. Meanwhile, the second research question examined how
web-based instructional methods affected aspects beyond writing skills. The
findings of this systematic review are discussed in the next section.

4. Findings and Discussion

4.1 General Findings and Background of the Articles
This systematic review, analysing 18 articles published from 2015 to 2024, reveals
a growing trend of web-based instructional methods in ESL/EFL writing from
2020 onward. The 18 journal articles originated from diverse countries where
English is taught as a second or foreign language. Each study was grounded in
specific pedagogical frameworks and technological integrations, reflecting the
various challenges and innovations in language education. Figure 2 presents the
geographical distribution of the articles.

Netherlands
Turkiye
Vietnam
Thailand
Phillipines
Taiwan
China
UAE
Saudi Arabia
Iraq
Iran
Egypt
0 1 2

Figure 2: Geographical distribution of articles

Figure 2 illustrates the geographical contexts of these studies, which encompass

various regions, including the Middle East, Asia, and other global areas. Each
region offers unique educational settings that significantly shape the
methodologies and findings of the studies. The extensive geographical reach of
this research reflects a global trend towards investigating technology-enhanced
learning strategies for English writing. This distribution demonstrates that
leveraging technology is one of the most effective ways to enhance the learning
experience in higher education. It highlights the advantages of technology-
mediated learning and the efficacy of online learning compared to traditional
methods.

[Link]
 486

4.2 Samples of Studies

All studies examined the effectiveness of web-based instructional methodologies
on ESL/EFL learners in higher education, except for one conducted in a high
school (Hoang & Hoang, 2022). The summary of the sample used in the studies is
presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Sample of study

Types of learners Frequency Author
High school students 1 (Hoang & Hoang, 2022)
Language 2 (Sajjadpour, 2021)
academy/institute (Guo & Li, 2024)
College students 4 (Cequeña, 2020)
(Chatta & Haque, 2020)
(Peungcharoenkun & Waluyo, 2023)
(Salem, 2022a)
University students 11 (Al Asadi, 2020)
(Wang, 2015)
(Huang, 2016)
(Salem, 2022b)
(Dousti & Amirian, 2023)
(Pitukwong & Saraiwang, 2024)
(Hojeij & Hurley, 2017)
(Yildiz & Gonen, 2024)
(Elgün Gündüz, 2023)
(Haro et al., 2023)
(He, 2024)

The findings in Table 4 show that the samples are categorized into four main
learner groups: high school students, language academy/institute learners,
college students, and university students. A close examination of the table reveals
a significant imbalance in participant distribution, with a dominant focus on
university students. Out of the 18 studies analysed, 11 involved university
learners, comprising the majority of the sample. In contrast, only four studies
focused on college students, two on language academy or institute learners, and
one study addressed high school students. This distribution suggests a research
trend that heavily favours tertiary-level education, especially university contexts.
Such a pattern may reflect the accessibility of university students for academic
research, as well as the institutional emphasis on academic writing at this level.

However, it also highlights a potential limitation in the current body of literature.

The underrepresentation of non-tertiary groups, particularly high school
students, indicates a significant research gap. These learners, who are at critical
stages of language development, may have unique writing needs and challenges
that are not sufficiently captured in existing research. Similarly, learners from
language academies or institutes—who may include both adolescents and adults
in non-formal educational settings—are underrepresented, despite the increasing
popularity of such institutions globally.

RQ1: Which platforms are used in web-based learning to enhance writing skills?

[Link]
 487

Researchers have used various platforms to measure students’ writing

performance. Based on the literature review, there are six types of web-based
instructional platforms to enhance ESL/EFL writing skills: 1) cloud-based
applications, 2) learning management systems (LMS), 3) inquiry-oriented learning
tools, 4) automated writing evaluation (AWE), 5) online grammar checking and
editing tools, and 6) digital storytelling. Table 5 displays the platforms and writing
genres utilised in the research.

Table 5: Web-based instructional platforms

Types Platform Writing genre Articles
Collaborative- Google-docs A variety of types of (Elgün Gündüz, 2023)
based instructions Wikis essays (not specified)
Blogs Personal and (Hoang & Hoang,
informal writing 2022)
[Link] Narrative, (Huang, 2016)
argumentative, (Cequeña, 2020)
Wikispace descriptive (Peungcharoenkun &
Business writing Waluyo, 2023)
(Wang, 2015)
Learning Edmodo, Discursive (Hojeij & Hurley,
management Notability, Argumentative 2017)
system (LMS) Powtoon, Explain (Chatta & Haque,
Everything, 2020)
Schoology Paragraph writing (Haro et al., 2023)
Blackboard
Argumentative (Guo & Li, 2024)
An online
module

Inquiry-oriented WebQuest Not specified (Al Asadi, 2020)

learning tool (Salem, 2022b)
Adobe Connect Argumentative (Dousti & Amirian,
software 2023)
Automated Criterion Argumentative, (Pitukwong &
writing Paragraph Punch opinion Saraiwang, 2024)
evaluation (AWE) and Descriptive
ProWritingAid (Yildiz & Gonen,
2024)

Online grammar Grammarly Not specified (Sajjadpour, 2021)

checking and
editing tool
Digital Storybird Argumentative (Salem, 2022a)
storytelling writing

As shown in Table 5, six articles utilised collaborative-based instructions to

improve ESL/EFL writing skills (Cequeña, 2020; Elgün Gündüz, 2023; Hoang &
Hoang, 2022; Huang, 2016; Peungcharoenkun & Waluyo, 2023; Wang, 2015). The
platforms included Google Docs, Wikis, Blogs, [Link], and Wikispace.
The writing activities encompassed various types of essays, such as personal and
informal, narrative, argumentative, descriptive, and business writing. Huang

[Link]
 488

(2016) examined students' and teachers' perceptions of incorporating blog tasks

and peer feedback into EFL writing classes.

The findings indicate a positive attitude towards blogging, suggesting its potential
as a valuable instructional method, although it may not be suitable for all writing
tasks. Hoang and Hoang (2022) emphasised the collaborative nature of online
learning through Google Docs, aiming to enhance academic writing skills among
EFL students. This research illustrates the potential of collaborative platforms in
fostering effective writing instruction. Wang (2015) promoted collaborative
writing through wikis in an ESP context, showcasing how technology can advance
innovative and active learning strategies in language education.

Peungcharoenkun and Waluyo (2023) concentrated on combining the process-

genre approach, various feedback types, and technology in second language (L2)
writing instruction in Thailand university. This quasi-experimental study
examines the interaction of these elements to enhance students' writing skills,
highlighting the importance of integrating pedagogical strategies with
technological tools in higher education.

The second type of web-based learning platform is a learning management system

(LMS) that comprises Edmodo, Notability, Powtoon, Explain Everything,
Schoology, and Blackboard. In Saudi Arabia, Chatta and Haque (2020)
investigated the effectiveness of flipped classroom instruction to enhance
paragraph writing skills among EFL university undergraduates. The study's
findings contributed to the growing body of literature on active learning
strategies, demonstrating how innovative instructional methods can enhance
writing proficiency. A study by Hojeij and Hurley (2017) explored the use of
mobile learning for peers and self-editing among university students in Dubai,
discussing how technology can facilitate the writing process, enhance student
engagement, and promote ownership of learning, thereby reflecting innovative
educational practices in the UAE.

Finally, Haro et al. (2023) examined how online peer feedback affects
argumentative essay quality, discovering that the better the peer feedback, the
greater the improvement in students' essays. Higher-quality feedback resulted in
improved revisions and enhancements in the essays, suggesting that effective
feedback can effectively guide students in refining their arguments and overall
writing.

Another type of web-based learning platform is inquiry-oriented learning tools,

such as WebQuest (Al Asadi, 2020; Salem, 2022b) and Adobe Connect software
(Dousti & Amirian, 2023). A study conducted by Al Asadi (2020) investigated
Iraqi EFL learners' use of WebQuest to foster intercultural awareness and writing
skills and underscores the importance of integrating cultural dimensions into
language learning, particularly in regions where intercultural communication is
crucial. Dousti and Amirian's (2023) comparative study examined the impact of
web-mediated, blended and purely online learning on the writing achievement
of EFL learners in Iran, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Link]
 489

This research highlights the need to adapt educational practices to accommodate

the shift towards online learning, offering insights into how various instructional
models influence writing skills.

The next type is automated writing evaluation (AWE), including tools such as
Criterion (Yildiz & Gonen, 2024) and Paragraph Punch and Prowriting Aid
(Pitukwong & Saraiwang, 2024). AWE tools are not viewed as replacements for
teacher feedback but rather as complementary support. They enable teachers to
focus on content and organisation, while the AWE system addresses surface-level
errors, thereby reducing the teachers' workload (Yildiz & Gonen, 2024).
Meanwhile, another platform, known as Grammarly, which is categorised as an
online grammar-checking and editing tool, was used in a study conducted by
Sajjadpour (2021). This study investigates how the Grammarly website influences
the writing performance of Iranian EFL students. Employing a controlled
experimental design reveals how technology can assist in correcting writing flaws
and improving overall writing skills, emphasising the role of digital tools in
language education.

Finally, Salem (2022a) used a platform called Storyboard, a form of digital

storytelling that enhances students' argumentative writing, encourages self-
directed learning, and promotes learner autonomy. The study showed that both
offline and online digital storytelling tools effectively improved argumentative
writing, self-directed learning, and learner autonomy among EFL students.
Notably, digital stories positively influenced the post-test scores of the
experimental group, consisting of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) learners.
The results indicated that blended learning, combining online and offline
approaches, was an effective way for students to develop digital literacy and
critical thinking by creating content-based digital stories. Conversely, the control
group, taught with traditional storytelling methods, showed the least progress in
these areas.

RQ2: What are the additional benefits of using a web-based learning strategy in
ESL/EFL classrooms?

The researchers applied thematic analysis to identify common patterns in the

studies. The results are organized into two sections: i) benefits for students and ii)
benefits for instructors. The benefits for students, along with the related study
references, are shown in Table 6 below.

[Link]
 490

Table 6: Benefits of using web-based learning strategies for students

Benefits Frequency Author
Improve collaborative skills 3 (Haro et al., 2023; Hojeij & Hurley, 2017;
and peer feedback Wang, 2015)
Increase learners’ 7 (Al Asadi, 2020; Guo & Li, 2024; Haro et al.,
engagement and boost 2023; He, 2024; Huang, 2016; Salem, 2022b;
motivation Wang, 2015)
Enhancement of soft skills 3 (Al Asadi, 2020; Salem, 2022b; Wang, 2015)
Better Critical Thinking &
2 (Al Asadi, 2020; Haro et al., 2023)
Analytical Skills
Digital Literacy (Al Asadi, 2020; Cequeña, 2020;
3
Development Sajjadpour, 2021)
Flexibility and accessibility 2 (Guo & Li, 2024; Yildiz & Gonen, 2024)

Based on the thematic analysis, several benefits were identified from the
reviewed articles, prominently the role of collaborative writing and peer
feedback in enhancing writing skills. Wang's exploration of wikis as a
collaborative tool demonstrates how such platforms can promote innovative
learning strategies in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) contexts (Wang, 2015).
Similarly, Hojeij and Hurley (2017) discuss how mobile learning apps can
support peer and self-editing processes, thereby increasing student ownership
of their writing (Hojeij & Hurley, 2017). Haro et al. (2023) demonstrate how
online peer feedback influences the quality of argumentative writing,
emphasizing the role of feedback systems in the writing process. These studies
underscore the value of collaborative methods in fostering a supportive learning
environment that improves writing results.

Secondly, the use of web-based instructional methods increased learners’

engagement and boosted their motivation (Al Asadi, 2020; Guo & Li, 2024; Haro
et al., 2023; He, 2024; Huang, 2016; Salem, 2022b; Wang, 2015). The use of web-
based instructional methods has increased engagement among ESL learners,
thanks to the interactive nature of online platforms, which enables learners to
participate actively in discussions and feedback processes (Haro et al., 2023).
Platforms such as Edmodo (Guo & Li, 2024), WebQuest (Al Asadi, 2020; Salem,
2022b), wikis (Wang, 2015), and blogs (Huang, 2016) were reported to be engaging
and interactive, which increased learners’ motivation to participate in writing
activities. This heightened motivation contributed to their overall writing
performance and student engagement in the learning process.

Furthermore, web-based learning encourages students to take ownership of their

learning, leading to a more active and engaged approach to their education
(Salem, 2022b). Likewise, Huang (2016) reported that students found writing blog
assignments easier and more motivating due to the freedom to choose their topics.
This autonomy contributed to a more engaging writing experience compared to
traditional assignments. Moreover, Al Asadi (2020) noted that the use of
WebQuest as a learning medium facilitated active participation and engagement
among students (Al Asadi, 2020) who expressed enthusiasm in researching
intercultural topics and completing assignments, which contributed to their
motivation to learn.

[Link]
 491

Thirdly, this systematic review revealed another significant benefit: the use of
web-based instructional methods contributed to the enhancement of soft skills
such as communication and collaboration (Al Asadi, 2020; Salem, 2022b; Wang,
2015). Salem (2022b) reported that students in the experimental group
demonstrated improved soft skills, particularly in communication and
collaboration, fostered through the interactive nature of the WebQuest. Similarly,
Al Asadi (2020) stated that when students engaged in discussions and group
activities, their ability to work together and express their ideas effectively was also
enhanced.

Similarly, engaging in wiki-based assignments supported ESL learners in

enhancing their collaboration abilities and taking greater control of their learning
process (Wang, 2015). Furthermore, they appreciated the convenience of working
at their own pace and the peer-to-peer learning opportunities that wikis provided.
Thus, using web-based instructional methods in teaching writing skills not only
enhanced ESL learners' writing performance but also helped improve their soft
skills, as evidenced by previous studies. Next, students also benefited from
enhanced critical thinking and analytical skills, particularly when engaged in
problem-solving tasks and peer evaluations using tools such as WebQuests and
AWE platforms (Al Asadi, 2020; Haro et al., 2023).

Moreover, activities using those web-based learning strategies also promote

students’ deeper thinking skills. Another benefit is the development of digital
literacy, a crucial skill for academic and professional contexts. Students learned to
navigate various platforms, utilize digital writing tools, and communicate
effectively in online environments (Cequeña, 2020; Al Asadi, 2020), preparing
them for future academic and workplace demands. Finally, flexibility and
accessibility of web-based learning tools allowed students to learn anytime and
anywhere, which is especially advantageous for learners balancing multiple
responsibilities or facing physical/geographical constraints (Guo & Li, 2024;
Yildiz & Gonen, 2024).

Table. Benefits of using web-based learning strategies for instructors

Benefits Frequency Author
Efficient Feedback & 3 Sajjadpour (2021); Yildiz & Gonen
Assessment (2024); He (2024)
Monitoring Student 4 Huang (2016); Hojeij & Hurley (2017);
Progress Guo & Li (2024)
Timesaving & Reduced 3 Sajjadpour (2021); Yildiz & Gonen
Workload (2024); He (2024)
Differentiated & 2 Wang (2015); Guo & Li (2024)
Personalized Instruction
Promotion of Active & 3 Al Asadi (2020); Chatta & Haque (2020);
Collaborative Learning Peungcharoenkun & Waluyo (2023)
Innovative Pedagogical 2 Salem (2022a); Elgün Gündüz (2023)
Strategies
Professional Development 2 Al Asadi (2020); Guo & Li (2024)

[Link]
 492

From the teacher’s perspective, web-based learning offers numerous

instructional, managerial, and professional benefits. A primary benefit is
efficiency in feedback and assessment. Technologies like Grammarly and
Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) systems streamline error detection and
provide immediate, detailed feedback, reducing teachers’ marking load and
freeing up time for more personalized and strategic instruction (Sajjadpour, 2021;
Yildiz & Gonen, 2024; He, 2024). Next, monitoring and tracking student progress
becomes more manageable with digital tools that document revision history,
student contributions, and engagement levels (Huang, 2016; Hojeij & Hurley,
2017). This data-driven insight allows for more targeted interventions and
supports formative assessment practices.

Moreover, web-based tools also promote differentiated instruction. Teachers can

customize content, tasks, and feedback to suit learners' varied proficiency levels
and learning styles (Wang, 2015; Guo & Li, 2024). This adaptability promotes
equity and enhances the overall effectiveness of instruction. Nevertheless, the use
of collaborative online environments encourages active and student-centered
learning. Teachers are able to design more interactive lessons that focus on peer
learning and learner autonomy (Al Asadi, 2020; Chatta & Haque, 2020). These
practices foster a more dynamic classroom atmosphere and improve student-
teacher interaction. Additionally, teachers benefit professionally by expanding
their pedagogical strategies and enhancing their technological competence.
Engaging with innovative tools like Edmodo, WebQuests, and AI-powered
platforms cultivates reflective teaching practices and provides opportunities for
ongoing professional development (Salem, 2022a; Elgün Gündüz, 2023).

Furthermore, web-based instruction is particularly advantageous in blended or

remote learning settings, as it provides continuity and flexibility in teaching
during disruptions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Al Asadi, 2020). Platforms
that support asynchronous instruction enable teachers to manage time more
effectively while maintaining instructional quality. Lastly, teachers reported
higher job satisfaction as they observed students becoming more motivated,
autonomous, and successful in their writing tasks. This positive classroom
dynamic contributes to a more fulfilling teaching experience (Pitukwong &
Saraiwang, 2024; Peungcharoenkun & Waluyo, 2023).

5. Conclusion
Web-based learning in ESL/EFL education offers multifaceted advantages for
both students and teachers. For students, it enhances not only their writing
proficiency—including grammar, structure, and coherence—but also promotes
greater autonomy, motivation, and collaborative learning. Digital tools such as
blogs, wikis, and Google Docs provide platforms for authentic communication,
peer feedback, and interactive engagement, which foster improved self-
regulation, confidence, and critical thinking. Furthermore, the flexibility and
accessibility of online learning environments support personalized learning
experiences, making education more inclusive and student-centred.

[Link]
 493

For teachers, web-based instruction improves instructional efficiency, enabling

more timely and targeted feedback through tools like Grammarly and Automated
Writing Evaluation (AWE) systems. Teachers gain deeper insights into student
learning through continuous monitoring, data-driven feedback, and formative
assessment. These technologies also facilitate differentiated instruction,
collaborative classroom dynamics, and professional development. Importantly,
the shift towards digital pedagogies helps educators foster more student-centred,
interactive, and adaptive teaching environments, ultimately enhancing teaching
effectiveness and learner outcomes.

In conclusion, this study reveals a rich tapestry of educational innovations and

challenges in ESL/EFL writing instruction across various countries and contexts.
The integration of technology, innovative pedagogical approaches, and an
emphasis on cultural awareness are common themes that highlight the ongoing
evolution of language education. Additionally, this review helps educators and
practitioners select appropriate technology-based tools and resources for
teaching and learning ESL writing skills. Moreover, the studies on web-based
learning strategies empower language educators to incorporate technology-
based training as a supplemental educational approach.

This review demonstrates that technology tools support ESL/EFL learning,

particularly in developing language skills such as academic writing. This opens
up more opportunities to incorporate additional tech-based tools into ESL
teaching and learning. Therefore, using technology in language education not
only enhances learners' language abilities but also promotes their personal
development and adds to overall educational progress.

6. References
Al Asadi, S. S. (2020). Intercultural awareness and writing through the use of WebQuest:
Iraqi students at Al- Awsat Technical University as a case study. Arab World
English Journal, Special Is(6), 379–392. [Link]
Almazroui, K., & Awad, C. (2025). Integrating social media into language education:
Designing a digital literacy pedagogical framework through a mixed methods
approach in the UAE. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational
Research, 24(6), 471–496. [Link]
Arneback, E., Englund, T., & Solbrekke, T. D. (2017). Student teachers’ experiences of
academic writing in teacher education– on moving between different disciplines.
Education Inquiry, 8(4), 268–283. [Link]
Asratie, M. G., Aylet, Y. T., & Alebachew, M. G. (2022). Attitudes and practices to improve
english language skills through mobile applications: in the case of secondary
schools english language teachers awi zone, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. Education
and Information Technologies, 27(6), 8489–8518. [Link]
022-10905-z
Azizov, S. (2024). Utilization of blended learning technologies in improving students’
writing skills: Technology Integration Models. The American Journal of Social
Science and Education Innovations, 6(6), 190–202.
[Link]
Bashori, M., van Hout, R., Strik, H., & Cucchiarini, C. (2022). Web-based language learning
and speaking anxiety. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(5–6), 1058–1089.
[Link]

[Link]
 494

Bora, P. (2023). Importance of Writing Skill to Develop Students’ Communication Skill.

Journal of Research Scholars and Professionals of English Language Teaching, 7(35), 1–
6. [Link] 1
Cequeña, M. B. (2020). Correlations of self-perception in reading and in writing, reading
and writing performance in web-mediated and conventional writing instruction.
Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 1067–1083.
[Link]
Chatta, B. S., & Haque, M. I. (2020). Improving paragraph writing skills of Saudi EFL
university students using flipped classroom instruction. Arab World English
Journal, 6(6), 228–247. [Link]
Cook, D. A. (2007). Web-based learning: Pros, cons and controversies. Clinical Medicine,
Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London, 7(1), 37–42.
[Link]
Destianingsih, A., & Satria, A. (2017). A study on students’ need analysis on web-based
English learning materials. Inovish Journal, 2(1), 48.
[Link]
Dousti, M., & Amirian, Z. (2023). The effect of web-mediated, blended, and purely online
learning on EFL learners’ writing achievement in the Iranian context: A
comparative study. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 1675–1696.
[Link]
Elgün Gündüz, Z. (2023). Teaching writing with wiki-based collaborative writing tasks in
an EFL context at higher education. Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy,
Literature, and Culture, 8(1), 68–86. [Link]
Farah Amirah, M. F., & Nur Ehsan, M. S. (2023). ESL pre-university learners’ needs
analysis for web-based English academic vocabulary learning resource.
International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(4), 195–216.
[Link]
Ghamdi, H. A. A.-, & Alnajami, M. M. (2022). A Literature Review on the Impact of Digital
Games on Improving Students. Paripex - Indian Journal of Research, 11(5), 109–111.
Gharehblagh, N. M., & Nasri, N. (2020). Developing EFL elementary learners’ writing
skills through mobile-assisted language learning (MALL). Teaching English with
Technology, 20(1), 104–121.
Girard, T., & Pinar, M. (2011). A usability study of interactive web-based modules. Turkish
Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 27–32.
Guo, H., & Li, D. (2024). The effect of electronic portfolio-based writing instruction on the
second language writing performance and writing self-efficacy of EFL learners: A
mixed methods study. SAGE Open, 14(2), 1–18.
[Link]
Haerazi, Utama, I. M. P., & Hidayatullah, H. (2020). Mobile applications to improve
english writing skills viewed from critical thinking ability for pre-service teachers.
International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 14(7), 58–72.
[Link]
Haro, A. V., Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Banihashem, S. K. (2023). How
does the type of online peer feedback influence feedback quality, argumentative
essay writing quality, and domain-specific learning? Interactive Learning
Environments, 1–20. [Link]
He, Y. (2024). The metaphor of AI in writing in English: A reflection on EFL learners’
motivation to write, enjoyment of writing, academic buoyancy, and academic
success in writing. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,
25(3), 271–286. [Link]
Hoang, D. T. N., & Hoang, T. (2022). Enhancing EFL students’ academic writing skills in
online learning via Google Docs-based collaboration: a mixed-methods study.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 37(7), 1504–1526.

[Link]
 495

[Link]
Hojeij, Z., & Hurley, Z. (2017). The Triple Flip: Using technology for peer and self-editing
of writing. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(1), 1–
4. [Link]
Huang, H.-Y. C. (2016). Students and the teacher’s perceptions on incorporating the blog
task and peer feedback into EFL writing classes through blogs. English Language
Teaching, 9(11), 38. [Link]
Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. In Second Language Writing.
[Link]
Karim, R. A. (2022). The effect of a Mobile-Assisted Mind Mapping Technique toward ESL
undergraduate students’ argumentative writing skills performance.
[Link]
Kashefian-Naeeini, S., Hosseini, S. A., Dabiri, A., Rezaei, S., & Kustati, M. (2024). A
comparison of the effects of web-based vocabulary instruction vs. the
conventional method on EFL learners’ level of L2 lexical knowledge. Forum for
Linguistic Studies, 6(1), 1–15. [Link]
Kee, T. P., Hashim, H., & Ainil Sulaiman, N. (2021). The use of technology in teaching of
writing among Malaysian ESL secondary school teachers. Arab World English
Journal, 7(Special Issue), 314–330. [Link]
Kusumawati, E. T., Solihati, N., & Sari, Z. (2025). Integration of Web-Based Intelligent
Tutoring System (TuinLec) into Text Structure Strategy to Improve Text Strategy
Memory and Reading Comprehension Skills. International Journal of Learning,
Teaching and Educational Research, 24(4), 52–71.
[Link]
Mohd Zaki, N. A., & Adnan, N. H. (2023). ESL teachers’ perceptions of web-based
collaborative writing activity. International Journal of Academic Research in
Progressive Education and Development, 12(4), 1368–1392.
[Link]
Nordin, N., Norman, H., & Embi, M. A. (2016). Technology Acceptance of Massive Open
Online Courses in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 1–16.
[Link]
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D.,
… Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for
reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88(April), 1–9.
[Link]
Pasand, P. G., & Haghi, E. B. (2013). Process-product approach to writing: The effect of
model essays on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics and English Literature, 2(1), 75–79.
[Link]
Peungcharoenkun, T., & Waluyo, B. (2023). Implementing process-genre approach,
feedback, and technology in L2 writing in higher education. Asian-Pacific Journal
of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8(1). [Link]
023-00211-7
Pitukwong, K., & Saraiwang, S. (2024). Exploring the effectiveness of digital writing tools
on Thai EFL students’ writing. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(3), ep519.
[Link]
Prystiananta, N. C., Noviyanti, A. I., & Udhiyanasari, K. Y. (2025). The Impact of Assistive
Technologies in Enhancing English Learning Outcomes for Students with
Disabilities: A Meta-Narrative Analysis. World Journal of English Language, 15(2),
296–308. [Link]
Rao, P. S. (2019). Effective Teaching of Writing Skills to the English Language Learners.
International Journal of English Language, Literature and Translation Studies, 6(4), 196–
205. [Link]

[Link]
 496

Rose, H., Briggs, J. G., Boggs, J. A., Sergio, L., & Ivanova-Slavianskaia, N. (2018). A
systematic review of language learner strategy research in the face of self-
regulation. System, 72, 151–163. [Link]
Rossa, R., Zuleni, E., Marfilinda, R., Muzayyanah, M., & Tulljanah, R. (2023). Enhancing
Higher Education Writing Achievement: An Experimental Exploration Of
Problem-Based Learning And Technological Integration. Edumaspul: Jurnal
Pendidikan, 7(2), 5816–5821. [Link]
Sajjadpour, N. (2021). How Grammarly® website influences the Iranian EFL learners’
writing performance. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 22, 119–139.
[Link]
Salem, A. A. M. S. (2022a). Multimedia presentations through digital storytelling for
sustainable development of EFL learners’ argumentative writing skills, self-
directed learning skills and learner autonomy. Frontiers in Education, 7(June), 1–
14. [Link]
Salem, A. A. M. S. (2022b). The impact of WebQuest-based sheltered instruction on
improving academic writing skills, soft skills, and minimizing writing anxiety.
Frontiers in Education, 7(April), 1–18. [Link]
Shahrina, M. N., & Norhisham, M. (2017). The best of two approaches: Process/Genre
based approach to teaching writing. The English Teacher, XXXV, 75–85.
[Link]
Singh, C. K. S., Mohtar, T. M. T., Kepol, N., Abdullah, N. Y., Mat, M., Moneyam, S.,
…Rahmayanti, H. (2020). ESL Teachers’ scaffolding strategies to teach writing.
Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(7), 3064–3076.
[Link]
Taufiq, M. A., Zaim, M., & Asri, Y. (2021). Analyzing students’ needs for essay writing
course at university. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Languages
and Arts (ICLA 2021), 599(Icla), 14–19.
[Link]
Wang, Y. C. (2015). Promoting collaborative writing through wikis: a new approach for
advancing innovative and active learning in an ESP context. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 28(6), 499–512. [Link]
Yazid, N. H. M., Hashim, H., & Sulaiman, N. A. (2024). A systematic literature review of
web-based learning and digital pedagogies in grammar education ( 2015-2024 ).
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(9), 2524–
2542. [Link]
Yildiz, H., & Gonen, S. I. K. (2024). Automated writing evaluation system for feedback in
the digital world: An online learning opportunity for English As a foreign
language students. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 25(3), 184–206.
[Link]

[Link]

View publication stats