Randomized Group Vs Heterogeneous Group in Developing EFL Argumentative Essay

A theory states that writing is a complicated task and highly complex skill. This theory supports a research finding saying that writing is considered difficult by most of students. Pair work is considered to be able to help EFL students to minimize their problem in EFL writing. This study was intended to compare which group performed the higher score in developing an argumentative essay. There were 23 students (randomized group) and 23 students (heterogeneous group) as the subjects of this study. Before the two groups experienced the treatment, the groups were given a pre-test to see the homogeneity of the groups. The instrument used in this study was a writing test adapted from IELTS test. The result showed that the subjects in subjects in randomized group (M = 68.87, SD = 13.815) performed better significantly than those in heterogeneous group (M = 57.13, SD = 11.190). Based on the result, randomized group technique is recommended to be employed in EFL writing class.     Keywords: Randomized Group, Heterogeneous Groups, EFL Argumentative Essa

The Effect of Different Pair-Work Types on Students' Writing Quality

Although the use of pair work in classrooms is relatively easy to employ, the pair-work technique has been attracting the attention of many researchers because this strategy is believed to be beneficial. This paper aimed to investigate the effect of different pair-work types (homogeneous, heterogeneous and randomized pairs) on students' writing quality. Each pair wrote a single text: an argumentative essay. The average writing scores of the individual performances of the participants from the homogeneous group (n = 18), the heterogeneous group (n = 23), and the randomized group (n = 23) were compared. The results revealed that the participants in the randomized pair had the highest score (mean = 68.87), followed by the participants in the homogeneous group (mean = 64.17), and the lowest mean score was found in the heterogeneous group participants (mean = 57.13). Keywords: effect, pair work, writing qualit

Pine marten density in lowland riparian Woods : a test of the Random Encounter Model based on genetic data

In marginal habitats, populations should reach lower densities, as a consequence of both lower overall abundance and increasing home range size. To test if recently colonized riparian woods crossing intensively cultivated lowlands of NW Italy represent marginal habitats for the forest-specialist pine marten Martes martes, we assessed its population density by a recently developed, camera-trap-based non-invasive method, the Random Encounter Model (REM). As the central assumption of the REM is that animals move randomly with respect to cameras, we suspected that this method may be unsuitable for species with a strong tendency to use linear elements of the territory as usual paths and select habitats, such as woodland, which are likely to be under-represented in fragmented landscapes. To test for the efficacy of the REM, we also applied a faecal DNA-based genetic census to obtain an independent estimate of the minimum number of individuals occurring in the study area. Camera-trapping used 10 camera-traps, deployed for 10 days within a 2 km2 large unit, for a total of 6 units and 12 km2. Pine marten density was estimated at 0.48 (0.36-0.60) ind/km2. All the faecal samples identified by a mDNA-based PCR-RFLP method as pine marten were genotyped at 15 microsatellite loci using a multiplex protocol. We identified 15 different individuals, corresponding to a density ranging between 0.8 and 2.0 ind/km2. Using the most conservative genetic estimate, the REM underestimated population density of about 60% proving to be unreliable for estimating pine marten population size. We suggest that this may be the case for elusive species for which the assessment of average daily movements cannot be achieved without the use of invasive methods