(PDF) Research on forming professional written speech competence by using digital technology – ResearchGate

education. Based on a comparative analysis of the means of expression in writing and letter writing in English and Uzbek,

semantic-syntactic and grammatical difficulties in writing and letter writing were identified and scientifically

substantiated, which makes it possible to improve the theory and methods of teaching communicative writing to Uzbek

students in the absence of a linguistic environment. A model of systematic development of writing skills of university

students was developed, using a differentiated approach to writing and letter writing in the context of digitalization of

education. The methodological conditions for the development of writing skills of Uzbek students in the context of

digitalization were determined based on a differentiated approach to writing and letter writing, as well as the organization

of independent work and assessment of student’s knowledge. Such methodological tools were developed to develop

students’ writing competence, taking into account psychological and linguistic factors in the context of the digitalization

of the university’s educational space. Summing up, it can be noted that when training foreign language teachers, it is

advisable to take a different approach to training teachers for foreign language faculties and non-philological faculties,

since these educational units have their own specifics in terms of goals, content, forms, and methods of teaching. At

language faculties, students learn a foreign language from a theoretical and practical point of view. Classes are held in

the form of lectures, seminars, and practical courses. At non-philological faculties, students practically learn a foreign

language. Classes are organized with the aim of developing practical skills in using a foreign language in professional

activities, which requires a special approach to organizing the educational process.

References

1. R. Berman, N. Bracha, The lexicon in writing–speech–differentiation: Developmental perspectives, Written

Language and Literacy. 13(2), 183-205, (2010). https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.13.2.01ber

2. S. Savignon, Beyond communicative language teaching: What’s ahead? Journal of Pragmatics, 39 (1), 207-220,

(2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.09.004

3. J. Zhang, L.J. Zhang, Y. Zhu, Development and validation of a genre-based second language (L2) writing self-

efficacy scale. Front. Psychol. 14, 14:1181196. (2023). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181196

4. H. Kansızoğlu, Investigating Turkish teachers’ views and practices on writing instruction in secondary schools:

A mixed-methods study. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7 (3), 211-247. (2023).

https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202319728

5. L. Salnaya, Developing of Teaching Staff Professional Competence in the Field of Content and Language

Integrated Learning. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, 12 (78), 206-209. (2017).

6. O. Dagbaeva, E. Dmitrieva, Z. Usmanova, The innovative ways of learning a foreign language using

neurolinguistic approach. 10th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Palma,

Spain, July 2-4, 1424-1428, (2018). https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2018.0449

7. A. Dadykin, M. Al-Masoodi, A. Al-Subaih, Electronic system for acquiring foreign language skills: Mechanism

for the formation of speech skills. IV International Scientific and Practical Conference “Modern Management

Trends and Digital Economy: from Regional Development to Global Economic Growth” (MTDE 2022), June

24, SHS Web of Conferences, 141. 03008. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202214103008

8. R. Jesson, S. McNaughton, N. Rosedale, T. Zhu, V. Cockle, A mixed-methods study to identify effective

practices in the teaching of writing in a digital learning environment in low-income schools. Computers and

Education, 119, 14-30. (2018). https://10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.005

9. S. Bax, F. Nakatsuhara, D. Waller, Researching L2 writers’ use of metadiscourse markers at intermediate and

advanced levels. System, 83, 79-95. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.02.010

10. K. Beatty, Teaching & Researching: Computer-Assisted Language Learning (2nd ed.). Routledge. 304. (2010).

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833774

11. C. Lee, A. Yeung, I. Tiffany, University English language learners’ readiness to use computer technology for

self-directed learning. System, 67, 99-110. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.05.001

12. Y. Lai, N. Saab, W. Admiraal, University students’ use of mobile technology in self-directed language learning:

Using the integrative model of behavior prediction. Computers & Education, 179. 104413. (2022).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104413

13. L. Yastrebova, A. Dokhoyan, I. Maslova, Influence of digital competencies of special and inclusive education

teachers on the effectiveness of their professional activities. Perspectives of Science and Education, 66 (6), 278-

298. (2023). https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2023.6.16

14. K. Alimi, A. Ayob, A. Abdullah, F. Sultan, G. Karuppannan, Effectiveness of English Language E-learning

among Tertiary Education Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature,

27(4), 56-71. (2021). https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2021-2704-05

15. M. Zhang, W. Chen, Assessing collaborative writing in the digital age: An exploratory study. Journal of Second

Language Writing, 57, 100868. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2022.100868