The impact of a social networking environment with fully-autonomous and semi-autonomous learning on the English writing abilities of Thai university students


  • Suchada Chaiwiwatrakul School of Foreign Languages, Institute of Social Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
  • School of Foreign Languages, Institute of Social Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand School of Foreign Languages, Institute of Social Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand


social networking environment, rhizomatic planning, writing skills, EFL students, self-regulated learning


Mixed-mode learning is one of the most recent educational trends, reshaping the delivery of learning facilities in higher education.  Through self-regulated learning and technological advances, higher education institutions may be able to offer new learning possibilities incorporating social networking environments.  Adopting social networking environments in university learning is a challenging area of research under an investigation in relation to its effectiveness.  In this study, we draw attention to a pedagogy for self-regulated learning based on rhizomatic planning skills in the context of an online social networking environment designed to develop writing skills in English as a Foreign Language (EFL).  We report interesting and promising results where EFL students working without the support of a teacher outperformed their peers who studied in the same context but with extensive support from an experienced and committed teacher.  The results indicated that teacher intervention was not always beneficial in the learning process and that students were in fact capable of generating self-organizing learning environments.  This unexpected outcome was analyzed and possible explanations were suggested.  On the basis of these findings, it may be necessary to revise some of our preconceptions about what constitutes optimal conditions for learning to write in a foreign language.  The article concludes with recommendations for the construction of writing programs based on social learning platforms.


Arunsirot, S. (2013). An analysis of textual metafunction in Thai EFL students’ writing. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 7(2), 160-174. Retrieved from

Bennui, P. (2008). A study of L1 interference in the writing of Thai EFL students. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 4, 72-102. Retrieved from

Biswas, S. (2013). Schoology-supported classroom management: a curriculum review. Northwest Journal of Teacher Education, 11(2), 187-195. Retrieved from

Blackstone, A. (2012). Principles of sociological inquiry: Qualitative and quantitative methods (V.1.0). Retrieved from

Boonpattanaporn, P. (2008). Comparative study of English essay writing strategies and difficulties as perceived by English major students: a case study of students in the school of humanities, the University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce. The University of The Thai Chamber of Commerce Academic Journal, 28(2), 75-90.

Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia (Translated by Brain Massumi. Minneapolis, USA): The University of Minnesota Press.

Derakhshan, A, & Hasanabbasi, S. (2015). Social networks for language learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(5), 1090-1095. DOI:

Dueraman, B. (2012). Teaching EFL writing: Understanding and rethinking the Thai experience. Journal of Alternative Perspective in the Social Sciences, 4(1), 255-275.

Dueraman, B. (2015). The crucial point in time where Thai students are introduced English language writing. English Language Teaching, 8(9), 96-103. DOI:

EF EPI. (2015). EF English proficiency index 2015. Retrieved from

ETS. (2015). Test and score data summary for TOEFL computer-based tests and paper-based tests, January 2014-December 2014 test data. Retrieved from

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). London, UK: SAGE Publications.

Greenberg, D., & Sadofsky, M. (1992). Legacy of trust life after the Sudbury Valley School experience. Washington, D.C., USA: Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse.

He, B., & Sangarun, P. (2015). Implementing autonomy: a rhizomatic model for pronunciation learning. Rangsit Journal of Arts and Sciences, 5(1), 1-12.

Hengsadeekul, C., Hengsadeekul, T., Koul, R., & Kaewkuekool, S. (2010). English as a medium of instruction in Thai universities: a review of literature, selected topics in education and educational technology, 89-94. [9th WSEAS International Conference on EDUCATION and EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY (EDU '10). Iwate Prefectural University, Japan. October 4-6, 2010.]. Retrieved from

Honsa, S. (2013). Self-assessment in EFL writing: a study of intermediate EFL students at a Thai university. Voices in Asia Journal, 1(1), 34-57.

Kasemsap, B., & Lee, H. Y-H. (2015). L2 reading in Thailand: vocational college students’ application of reading strategies to their reading of English texts. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 15(2), 101-117. Retrieved from

Khamkhien, A. (2010). Teaching English speaking and English speaking tests in the Thai context: a reflection from Thai perspective. English Language Teaching, 3(1). Retrieved from

Kraus, H. (2014). Higher education management in Thailand: insights from directors of Language Institutes. Rangsit Journal of Arts and Sciences, 4(2), 89-103.

Kritsuthikul, N., Hasegawa, S., Nattee, C., & Supnithi, T. (2013). A virtual environment for English language learning platform (veEFL): applied “single idea of concept” to improve writing skill of low English proficiency students. Retrieved from

Lian, A. B. (2012). A dialogic framework for embedding graduate attributes in discipline-based degree curricula. Rangsit Journal of Arts and Sciences, 2(1), 1-14.

Lian, A. B. (2014). New Learning and CALL: a DIY paradigm. AsiaCALL Online Journal, 9, a14-a26. Retrieved from

Lian, A-P. (2001). Imagination in language teaching and learning. Keynote address to the English Language Teaching and Knowledge Transformation Conference, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung, Taiwan. In Proceedings of the Conference. Retrieved from

Lian, A-P. (2002). Seriously practical: implementing technology-enhanced language-learning (TELL) in an increasingly globalised world. Retrieved from

Lian, A-P. (2004). Technology-enhanced language learning environments: a Rhizomatic approach. Retrieved from

Lian, A-P. (2011). Reflections on language-learning in the 21st century: the Rhizome at work. Rangsit. Journal of Arts and Sciences, 1(1), 5-16.

Lian, A-P. (2012). Higher education planning and Thailand’s role in the ASEAN Community. Paper presented at Faculty of Liberal Arts, Rangsit University, Thailand. Retrieved from

Lian, A-P. (2014). On-demand generation of individualized language learning lessons. Journal of Science, Ho Chi Minh Open University, 1(9), 25-38.

Lian, A-P., & Pineda, M. V. (2014). Rhizomatic learning: “As…when…and if” A strategy for the ASEAN community in the 21st century. Beyond Words, 2(1), 1-28.

Mayeku, B., Edelev, S., Prasad, S., Karnal, H., & Hogrefe, D. (2015). “PECALE: an environment for enhancing personalization and learner engagement in an online learning platform", ICALT, 2015, 2015 IEEE 15th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 2015 IEEE 15th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) 2015, pp. 70-71. DOI: 10.1109/ICALT.2015.64

Methitham, P., & Chamcharatsri, P. B. (2011). Critiquing ELT in Thailand: a reflection from history to practice. Retrieved from

Ministry of Education. (2009). Implementation of the 15-year free education with quality policy. Retrieved from

Mitra, S. (2012). The hole in the wall project and the power of self-organized learning. Retrieved from

Mitra, S. (2013). SOLE toolkit: How to bring self-organized learning environments to your community. Retrieved from assets/ toolkit/SOLE_Toolkit_Web_2.6.pdf

Moodle. (2014). Moodle-open source learning platform. Retrieved from:

Na Phuket, P. R., & Othman, N. B. (2015). Understanding EFL students’ errors in writing. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(32), 99-106. Retrieved from

Nimnoi, R. (2011). The errors in Thai writings of the first year Information Science students, Faculty of Informatics, Mahasarakham University. Asia Pacific Journal of Library and Information Science, 1(1), 34-42.

Oh, E., & Lim, D. (2005). Cross relationships between cognitive styles and learner variables in online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 4(1), 53-66. Retrieved from

Oppenheimer, M. (2014). Would you send your kids to a school where students make the rules? Retrieved from

Panumas, A., Raphatphon, A., & Kornwipa, P. (2011). English academic writing problems of a Thai graduate student. The 3rd International Conference on Language and Communication 2011, 21-28. Retrieved from

Phoocharoensil, S. (2011). Collocational errors in EFL learners’ interlanguage. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(3), 103-120. Retrieved from

Phoocharoensil, S. (2012). L2 English compliment responses: An investigation of pragmatic transfer. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 1(6), 276-287. DOI:10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.6p.276

Phoocharoensil, S. (2013). Cross-linguistic influence: its impact on L2 English collocation production. English Language Teaching, 6(1), 1-10. DOI:10.5539/elt.v6n1p1

Promnont, P., & Rattanavich, S. (2015). Concentrated language encounter instruction model III in reading and creative writing abilities. English Language Teaching, 8(5), 1-10. Retrieved from

Puengpipattrakul, W. (2014). A process approach to writing to develop Thai EFL students’ socio-cognitive skills. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 11(2), 270-284. Retrieved from

Rahimi, A., & Bigdeli, R.A. (2013). ICT and EFL Students’ self-regulation mastery: educational meat or poison? AsiaCALL Online Journal 2014, (Special Issue). AsiaCALL2013 Proceedings.

Richards, J. C., & Bohlke, D. (2014). Four corners students’ book level 3. Singapore: Cambridge University Press.

Simasathiansophon, N. (2014). A perspective on blended-Learning approach through course management system: Thailand’s case Study. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(2), 172-175. DOI: 10.7763/IJIET.2014.V4.392

Thailand Regulatory Fact Sheet. (2013). Thailand regulatory fact sheet 2013. Retrieved from

Todd, W. R., & Keyuravong, S. (2004). Process and product of English language learning in the national education act, Ministry of Education standards and recommended textbooks at the secondary level. ThaiTESOL Bulletin, 17(1), 15-45. Retrieved from

Watcharapunyawong, S., & Usaha, S. (2013). Thai EFL student’s writing errors in different text types: the interference of the first language. English Language Teaching, 6(1), 67-78. DOI: 10.5539/elt.v6n1p67

Wattanapanit, N. (2013). The Students’ perceptions toward Ramkhamhaeng University blended distance learning. Retrieved from

Wiriyachitra, A. (2002). English language teaching and learning in Thailand in this decade. Thai TESOL Focus, 15(1), 4-9. Retrieved from

Yumanee, C., & Phoocharoensil, S. (2013). Analysis of collocational errors of Thai EFL students. Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 1(1), 90-100. Retrieved from

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). New York: Academic Press.




How to Cite

Suchada Chaiwiwatrakul, & School of Foreign Languages, Institute of Social Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand. (2023). The impact of a social networking environment with fully-autonomous and semi-autonomous learning on the English writing abilities of Thai university students. Journal of Current Science and Technology, 6(2), 149–164. Retrieved from



Research Article