Abstract
This case study explored the revision strategies of four Malaysian native speakers of English when they composed aloud while writing an argumentative essay. Think aloud verbal protocols were analysed using the grounded theory approach in conjunction with written texts.
The findings suggest that contextual factors influenced classroom practices. The contextual factors included a teacher who was not provided with adequate training, administrative policies which did not provide support for the development of writers based on their abilities, writing instruction which viewed revision as a process of error correction and public assessment practices which were non-transparent. These classroom practices influenced the participants' beliefs about revision. These beliefs affected the quality of their essays as judged by Malaysian public examiners. Additionally, the findings suggest a mismatch between classroom instruction and public examination.
Suggestions are made to address these concerns by considering the theoretical underpinnings of the cognitive process, socio-cultural and community of practice models of writing and learning. These include instruction on revision strategies, considering alternative assessment practices, providing formative feedback, ability streaming, focussing on critical reading skills and providing adequate support to the teacher.