A Phenomenological Diagnosis of the ProDuct-based Instruction in EFL’s Writing Class: Barriers and Strategies to Tackle

Piyawan Rungwaraphong(1*),

(1) Prince of Songkla University Thailand
(*) Corresponding Author

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v5i4.19701


This paper presents a phenomenological diagnosis of the implementation of ProDuct-based Instruction (PDI) in EFL’s writing class in Thailand contexts. PDI is a new instructional method for teaching business English writing. Its key is in the products that are tangible and appeal to human senses; the product’s tangibility serves as a scaffold to help students generate ideas and stimulate analysis and interrogations. The study focused on the first phase of PDI, in which students were required to learn inductively, and was conducted to explore barriers that both the learners and the instructors encounter while learning inductively in the researcher’s PDI approach, and to discover possible solutions to tackle with those barriers. Participants were 3 Thai lecturers of English writing and 60 Thai students from three government universities in Thailand. Data was collected through vignettes, participant observations, and   students’ written texts. Results indicate three major barriers of implementing inductive phase of PDI in Thailand contexts, which include: students’ English reading and grammar skills; students’ inference skill; and teachers’ inductive teaching expertise. The study suggests solutions to tackle these barriers, which include creating a guided graphic organizer, providing formative assessment and feedback for the students, and organizing a PDI training for the teachers who want to adopt PDI in their profession.


EFL, inductive, instruction, tangible, writing

Full Text:



Ahmadzai, S., Katawazai, R., & Sandaran, S.C. (2019). The use of deductive and inductive

approaches in teaching grammar for Afghan University students of English and Literature Studies. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 8(5), 1230-1235.

Bachmann, L. M. et al. (2008). Vignette studies of medical choice and judgement to study

caregivers' medical decision behaviour: systematic review. BMC medical research methodology, 8(1), p. 50.

Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: The challenges of lifelong learning. London:


Dekker, K. (2018). Effective learning methods: The importance of formative feedback.

Retrieved from https://www.studiosity.com/blog/effective-learning-methods-the-importance-of-formative-feedback

Finlay, L. (2013). Unfolding the phenomenological research process: Iterative stages of

"seeing afresh”. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 53(2), 172-201.

Frey, B.B. (2018). Participant observation. Retrieved from

https://methods.sagepub.com/reference/the-sage- encyclopedia-of-educational-research-measurement-and-evaluation/i15505.xml

Harriman, D. (2008). Errors in inductive reasoning. Retrieved from


Jeffries, C., & Maeder, D. W. (2004-2005). Using vignettes to build and assess teacher

understanding of instructional strategies. The Professional Educator, 27(1-2), 17-28. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ728478.pdf

Johnson, R. M. & Orme, B. K. (1996). How many questions should I ask in choice-based

conjoint studies. Sawtooth Software Research Papers.

Godwin, K. E., & Fisher, A. V. (2015). Inductive generalization with familiar categories:

Developmental changes in children's reliance on perceptual similarity and kind information. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 897.

Hofstadter, D. R. (2001). Epilogue: Analogy as the core of cognition. In D. Gentner, K. J.

Holyoak, & B.N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 499–538). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Klauer, K., Willmes, K. & Phye, G. (2002). Inducing inductive reasoning: does it transfer to

fluid intelligence? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 1-25.

Lester, S. (1999). An introduction to phenomenological research. Stan Lester Developments,


Mallia, J.G. (2014). Inductive and deductive approaches to teaching English grammar. Arab

World English Journal, 5(2), 221-235.

Murphy, G. L., & Ross, B. H. (2010). Uncertainty in category-based induction: When do

people integrate across categories? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(2), 263–276.

Neale, B. (1999). Post Divorce Childhoods. Retrieved from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/family

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises.

Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.

Perret, P. (2015). Children’s inductive reasoning: Developmental and educational

perspectives. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 14(3), 389 - 408.

Rungwaraphong, P. (2020a). The implementation of inductive teaching approaches in

business English writing in an EFL context: Paper-based and product-based instructions. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Rungwaraphong, P. (2020b). Using glosses for vocabulary assistance in Thai EFL reading

classes: An investigation of preferences, effective types, and elements. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 17(1), 301-317.

Skilling, K. & Stylianides, G.J. (2019). Using vignettes in educational research: a framework

for vignette construction. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 1-16.

Sutherland, C.M. (2017). Formative feedback for teaching and learning effectiveness.

Retrieved from https://explorance.com/blog/formative-feedback-for-teaching-and-learning-effectiveness/

Tomic, W. (1995). Training in inductive reasoning and problem solving. Contemporary

Educational Psychology. The Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands. 20(1), 483-

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 538 times | PDF view : 84 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

License URL: https://creativecommons.org/




Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.