Web-Based Cognitive Writing Instruction (WeCWI): A Hybrid e-Framework for Instructional Design
Web-based Cognitive Writing Instruction (WeCWI) is
a hybrid e-framework for the development of a web-based instruction
(WBI), which contributes towards instructional design and language
development. WeCWI divides its contribution in instructional design
into macro and micro perspectives. In macro perspective, being a 21st
century educator by disseminating knowledge and sharing ideas with
the in-class and global learners is initiated. By leveraging the virtue
of technology, WeCWI aims to transform an educator into an
aggregator, curator, publisher, social networker and ultimately, a
web-based instructor. Since the most notable contribution of
integrating technology is being a tool of teaching as well as a
stimulus for learning, WeCWI focuses on the use of contemporary
web tools based on the multiple roles played by the 21st century
educator. The micro perspective in instructional design draws
attention to the pedagogical approaches focusing on three main
aspects: reading, discussion, and writing. With the effective use of
pedagogical approaches through free reading and enterprises,
technology adds new dimensions and expands the boundaries of
learning capacity. Lastly, WeCWI also imparts the fundamental
theories and models for web-based instructors’ awareness such as
interactionist theory, cognitive information processing (CIP) theory,
computer-mediated communication (CMC), e-learning interactionalbased
model, inquiry models, sensory mind model, and leaning styles
 M. Kharbach, “What teachers need to know about infowhelm,”
Educational Technology and Mobile Learning, 2013. (Online).
to-know-about.html. (Accessed: 04-Apr-2013).
 H. Arsham, “Impact of the Internet on learning and teaching,” USDLA
J., vol. 16, no. 3, 2002.
 Y. C. J. Chao and C. K. Huang, “The effectiveness of computermediated
communication on enhancing writing process and writing
outcomes: The implementation of blog and wiki in the EFL writing class
in Taiwan,” in World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2007, 2007, pp. 3463–3468.
 L. Wu and D. Ben-Canaan, “The impact of globalization and the Internet
on English language teaching and learning,” Aust. J. Educ., pp. 1–15,
 M. Warschauer, “Researching technology in TESOL: Determinist,
instrumental, and critical approaches,” TESOL Q., vol. 32, no. 4, pp.
 M. Kharbach, “The 33 digital skills every 21st century teacher should
have,” Educational Technology and Mobile Learning, 2012. (Online).
every-21st-century.html. (Accessed: 04-Apr-2013).
 Mohamed Amin Embi, 40 Must-know web 2.0 edutools: A quick
guidance. Selangor: Centre for Academic Advancement, Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia, 2013, pp. 106–119.
 C. Arena, C. T. Jefferson, and B. Center, “Blogging in the language
classroom: It doesn’t ‘simply happen,’” Teach. English as a Second
Lang. Electron. J., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1–7, 2008.
 M. Hamzah, “A theoretical rationale in the application of computermediated
communication (CMC) in an English for specific purposes
(ESP) setting,” in AARE 2001 Conference, 2001.
 J. P. Merisotis and R. A. Phipps, “What’s the difference? A review of
contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in
higher education,” Washington, 1999.
 A. H. Schulman and R. L. Sims, “Learning in an online format versus an
in class format: An experimental study,” Journal, vol. 26, no. 11, 1999.
 Mohamed Amin Embi, Computer-mediated communication:
Pedagogical implications of Malaysian research findings. Selangor:
Karisma Publications Sdn. Bhd., 2009.
 B. Martin, “Is online education right for your learning style?,” 2013.
(Online). Available: http://elearnmag.acm.org/blog/?p=516. (Accessed:
 M. Hardiman, “The brain-targeted teaching model: A comprehensive
model for classroom instruction and school reform,” New Horizons
Learn., vol. 8, no. 1, Apr. 2010.
 D. Willingham, “Learning Styles FAQ.” (Online). Available:
 S. B. Kaufman, “In defense of working memory training,” Scientific
American, 2013. (Online). Available:
of-working-memory-training/. (Accessed: 24-Jul-2013).
 S. I. S. Ekra, “Language is in our biology,” Gemini, Trondheim, Apr-
 S. Krashen, Fundamentals of language education. New Jersey: Laredo
 C. C. M. Goh and R. E. Silver, Language acquisition and development:
A teacher guide. Singapore: Pearson Education South Asia, 2004, p.
 B. Y. Mah, Irfan Naufal Umar, and V. F. Thomas Chow, “L2 writing
challenges for the undergraduates: A performance analysis and a
literature review on SIL domains,” in The Asian Conference on
Language Learning Conference Proceedings 2013, 2013, pp. 302–316.
 G. Yan, “A process genre model for teaching writing,” English Teach.
Forum, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 18–27, 2005.
 R. Badger and G. White, “A process genre approach to teaching
writing,” ELT J., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 153–160, 2000.
 D. Maya, “The educational media of the web: Levels of cognitive
involvement,” in Proceedings of SOLON–Sofia Lectures of Ontology,
 M. Prensky, “Q&A: Marc Prensky Talks About Learning in the 21st
Century,” 2012. (Online). Available: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/