名古屋外国語大学論集第3号

2018年7月

ArticleA Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing
Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research
Eric GONDREE
Mohammed ALEM

Abstract:
This pilot study surveyed two groups of university-level English language
students to explore whether writing a research-based essay in L2 would affecttheir self-reported confidence about the essay’s topic. 35 students in a Palestinian
university and 23 students in a Japanese university answered a pre-activity
questionnaire, wrote a research-based compare/contrast essay and answereda post-activity questionnaire. The results were analyzed to determine changes
in self-reported confidence and statistical significance. The Palestinian groupreported improved L1 and L2 writing confidence but the Japanese group only
reported an increase in L2 writing confidence. Although not all of the results
were statistically significant, the authors concluded that L2 writing teachers
should support student confidence in their writing courses and that more researchis required to determine which assignments and activities can best accomplish
this.

Introduction
Learners of English in academic writing classes typically learn a variety of essay
171forms to develop improved writing skills. Ideally, one goal of second language(L2) writing classes is preparation for meaningful communication outside of theclassroom. However, many researchers have noted that writing research papers,
even in a student’s first language (L1), can often be a frustrating, stressful anddemoralizing process (Ballenger & Payne, 2003; Betancourt & Phinney, 1988;
Faigley, Daly, & Witte, 1981; Sommers, 1982). Indeed, students may often
experience a “distress associated with writing” and develop “a profound distaste
for the process” of writing research papers (Madigan, Linton & Johnson, 1996,
p. 295).
In a writing course, students may not only judge their own performance from thegrades and feedback that they receive but also according to how confident they
feel about their work (Beach, 1989; Graham & Harris, 2005; Pajares & Valiante,2006). One clear implication is that writing teachers should be aware of how todevelop students’ writing confidence when designing courses, planning lessons
or assigning work (Shaugnessy, 2004). Improved writing confidence can not
only help students to address feelings of apprehension but also “serve students
well when writing an essay because it engenders greater interest in and attention
to writing, stronger effort, and greater perseverance and resiliency in the face ofadversity. Confident students are also likely to feel less apprehensive and havestronger feelings of self-worth about their writing” (Pajares, 2003, p. 140).
As one consideration for an L2 writing course, a teacher should aim to help theirstudents acquire the ability to persevere when encountering difficulties without
diminishing the confidence they need to continue their work. Although it is vitalto impart the linguistic and formal skills of writing to improve students’ competence, they also require confidence to become more successful writers. Having
good experiences with writing can enhance student confidence because “writing
touches the heart of a student’s identity, drawing its voice and strength andmeaning from the way the student understands the world” (Fox, 1994, p. xiii).
In this pilot study, the authors investigated whether L2 students can experience172

A Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research ■improved writing confidence about a subject after they have researched and written on that subject. The authors believed that writing a research paper would help
students gain increased familiarity with the paper’s subject and the process ofwriting would provide them with a more developed and articulate understandingthat they could use in the future. For the purposes of this study, the authors created a research and writing assignment on a topic which is relevant to students’
daily lives, the environment and the global economy: comparing and contrasting
the advantages and disadvantages of two different kinds of energy resources.

Literature Review
Improving academic writing abilities is not only a matter of sharpening alearner’s academic skills. Writing, like much of learning, is an emotional activity
in addition to a cognitive activity (Vygotsky, as cited in Mahn & John-Steiner,
2002; McLeod, 1987). Krashen (1982, 1985) determined that emotional factors
such as anxiety and confidence can influence the affective filter, thus inhibiting
language acquisition. It is also widely accepted that effective classroom instruction should try to minimize negative influences on students’ emotions (Richards& Rodgers, 2001).
According to Bandura (1984, 1986), social cognitive theory is the hypothesisthat knowledge acquisition is significantly affected by external experiences andinteractions with others. Confidence, the beliefs that people hold about their own
abilities (which Bandura calls “self-efficacy”), has a strong mediating influenceon effort and may even be the most influential component of human agency(Bandura, 1984, 1986). Efforts which are interpreted as being successful havethe most significant effect on raising one’s own self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997).
In one review of the relevant literature, Graham & Weiner (1996) concluded
that Bandura’s view predominates in research on human motivation; they also
found that self-efficacy may even be the best predictor of behavioral outcomes,
superseding other forms of self-belief such as anxiety and perception of a task’s
173value.
To explore how self-efficacy is related to L2 writing, Pajares (2003) notedthat studies attempting to measure self-belief reveal that “writing self-efficacy
makes an independent contribution to the prediction of writing outcomes” (p145). Pajares (2003) also found that confidence plays a mediating role between
one’s abilities and one’s work; a learner with low confidence may struggle toachieve results that should be within their capabilities. Pajares & Johnson (1994)
concluded that students’ confidence in their writing skills was a better predictorof their outcomes than their actual writing abilities. Other researchers have also
determined that the way students interpret their own skills can act as a mediating
influence on how they engage with texts and that higher confidence can lead to
improved utilization of language skills (Beach, 1989; Faigley et al., 1985; Hull
& Rose, 1989).
A high level of confidence can increase students’ level of learning autonomy(Brown, 2007) and their capacity for learning throughout life (Mahn & JohnSteiner, 2002). Since making mistakes is an inherent part of learning a foreign
language, Lightbown & Spada (2001) argue that a willingness to engage in risktaking is an important characteristic for successful language learners to possess.
Self-confidence influences students’ willingness to take these types of risks instudying (Oxford, 1990). These findings should nonetheless be tempered by theobservation that students whose confidence is too high may develop a skewed
understanding of their own abilities and ignore guidance (Sekhan, 2001), whichsuggests that teachers should ideally be tactful, constructive and judicious in
their feedback while remaining mindful of student confidence.
Confidence may also be a factor which affects disparities in writing performance
between genders. Higher levels of writing confidence are typically reported
among girls when compared to boys through middle-school (Pajares & Valiante,
1997, 2001). This confidence often changes in later stages of schooling, suggesting that external factors play an important role in developing student confidence
174

A Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research ■(Bruning & Horn, 2000). Similarly, Pajares (2003) argues that the influence of asociety’s beliefs about gender and gender stereotypes have a complex relationship with L2 learners’ confidence.
Evidence suggests that the process of doing research can also be affected byconfidence. McLaughlin (2003, p. 69) points out that supervisors and teachers
play an important role in enabling a researcher to reach states of “intellectual
security” or “clarity” which are vital for a writer to focus on the process of
research, evaluate information and learn to write rationally. Dadds (1995) argues
that emotion also plays a role in research by acting as a motivational force which
stimulates action and commitment to effort. Confidence can therefore impact
the process of researching and analyzing information which contributes to thequality of learning and writing (Henry, 1983).
Effects related to confidence have been noted in studies focusing on otherforms of motivation as well. Pajares, Miller & Johnson (1999) found that selfefficacy has a strong moderating effect on writing apprehension. Activities which
decrease anxiety may improve students’ writing confidence and their willingness
to take risks (Holmes & Moulton, 1995). Conversely, Scheier & Carver (1993)
noted that when students have little confidence in their capabilities, pessimism
can induce negative behaviors including reduced effort or avoidance of work.
A substantial body of literature therefore supports the idea that learner confidence
is a significant but ambiguous variable in L2 acquisition, learner performanceand writing. Furthermore, a teacher and environment can certainly play a keyrole in encouraging the attributes which enable a student to research and write
well. Finding ways to improve learner confidence can therefore be considered aworthwhile goal for L2 language teachers but determining more specific waysof doing so remains an area for further exploration. Accordingly, the authorsof this study wished to explore whether a research-based writing assignment
can help build student writing confidence within the context of an L2 academic
writing course.
175

Methods
Research Questions
Question 1: Does writing a research-based L2 essay increase student L1 writing
confidence?
Question 2: Does writing a research-based L2 essay increase student L2 writing
confidence?

Activity Procedure
This study was performed within the context of academic writing courses which
had the aim of teaching different kinds of essays, conducting research and citing
information. This particular assignment was a compare/contrast essay about thepros and cons of two different kinds of energy resources. This essay required
research and citations for its supporting arguments. Students enrolled in thesecourses also practiced self-editing skills and peer-review activities during theirwork.
This writing assignment was preceded by a brief discussion in small groups
about energy resources. After the discussion, students received a 6-point Likert
survey (Appendix 1) in which they rated their own writing confidence in theirrespective L1s about energy resources and their writing confidence on the same
topic in L2. After the survey was completed and collected, students received
an introduction to the organization of a five-paragraph compare/contrast essay.
Students demonstrated their understanding of the new essay format by choosing
two kinds of energy resources and creating an outline for a 5-page essay which
contrasts their advantages and disadvantages.
Writing these essays required research using libraries or online information
resources. Students were also required to cite their references using appropriate
notation. Depending on the course, the essays were revised in several draftingstages or with in-class peer-review. After a final peer-review activity and giving
the final draft of their paper to their respective teachers, students filled-out a post176

A Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research ■activity 6-point Likert survey (Appendix 2) to ascertain whether their L1 and L2
writing confidence on this topic had changed after completing the assignment.
The Japanese student group composed their essays as homework on computersand had opportunities to revise over several drafts. The Palestinian student groupwrote with pen and paper followed by peer-review as part of their monitored inclass work. The essays were graded according to the same rubrics and standards
that had been applied to their other writing throughout the semester. Some
specific aspects of the assignment were modified to more appropriately matchthem with the overall objectives of their respective academic writing courses.

Participants
The first author’s class was comprised of intermediate Japanese-speaking
freshmen attending a private foreign language university, n = 23; (18 female,
5 male). These students were enrolled in a liberal arts department with a focus
on international studies. The class took place in the second semester of a
two-semester introductory academic writing course which fulfilled part of thestudents’ foreign language and writing requirements. The class had the objectivesof improving academic writing skills by teaching students how to write a rangeof brief research papers with support and notation.
The second author’s class was comprised of intermediate Arabic-speaking
Palestinian freshmen and sophomores attending a large public university, n =35; (31 female, 5 male). These students were enrolled in an English language
and literature department. The class took place in the second semester of the year
and fulfilled requirements for advancement through their program. The class had
the objectives of improving academic writing skills by teaching students how towrite a range of academic essays with support and notation.

Data analysis
The pre-activity and post-activity data used in the analysis were collected with a177

6-point Likert scale; its scores ranged from strongly agree to strongly disagree
and its numerical values ranged from 6 to 1, respectively. Statistical analysis
used a t-test assuming two unequal variances to show significance between thesamples; the pre-activity and post-activity surveys were anonymous and could
not be paired. The data were analyzed with Microsoft Excel (2016) Data Analysis
Toolpack Add-in.

Results by classFirst Author:

Table 1.1 (L1 = Japanese) Research Question 1
Pre-activity (n= 23)

Post-activity (n= 23) Difference

Mean

4

3.69

– 0.31

Median

4

4

0

SD

1.27

1.29

+ 0.02

As noted in Table 1.1, students initially judged their confidence about their L1
ability to write about energy resources with a mean of 4 out of a maximum of
6. However, the data show a decrease in student confidence to a mean of 3.69
after the writing activity. Distribution, as reflected by the SD, increased by .02.
The p-value suggests the results are not statistically significant (t = 0.8019,
df = 68, p = 0.2134).

Table 1.2 (L2 = English) Research Question 2
Pre-activity (n= 23)

Post-activity (n= 23) Difference

Mean

2.82

3.3

+ 0.48Median

3

3

0

SD

0.93

1.32

+ 0.39

As noted in Table 1.2, students initially judged their confidence about their L2
ability to write about energy resources with a mean of 2.82 out of a maximum
178

A Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research ■of 6. The data show an increase in student confidence to a mean of 3.3 after
the writing activity. Distribution, as reflected in SD, increased by .39. The
p-value suggests the results are not statistically significant (t = –1.4105, df = 65,
p = 0.0830).
Second Author:

Table 2.1 (L1 = Arabic) Research Question 1
Pre-activity (n= 35)

Post-activity (n= 35) Difference

Mean

3.62

4.51

+ 0.89Median

3.5

5

+ 1.5

SD

1.66

1.33

– 0.33

As noted in Table 2.1, students initially judged their confidence about their L1
ability to write about energy resources with a mean of 3.62 out of a maximumof 6. The data show an increase in student confidence to a mean of 4.51 after thewriting activity. Distribution, as reflected in SD, decreased by .33. The p-value
suggests the results are statistically significant (t = –2.3649, df = 68, p = 0.0104).

Table 2.2 (L2 = English) Research Question 2
Pre-activity (n= 35)

Post-activity (n= 35) Difference

Mean

2.85

3.65

+ 0.8

Median

3

3

0

SD

1.39

1.43

+ 0.04

As noted in Table 2.2, students initially judged their confidence about their L2
ability to write about energy resources with a mean of 2.85 out of a maximumof 6. The data show an increase in student confidence to a mean of 3.65 after thewriting activity. Distribution, as reflected in SD, increased by .04. The p-value
suggests the results are statistically significant (t = -2.4548, df = 65, p = 0.0083).

179Discussion
A comparison of the means in Table 1.1 shows a decrease in L1 confidence (4to 3.69) after completing the assignment. A comparison of the means in Table
1.2 shows an increase in L2 confidence (2.82 to 3.3) after completing the assignment. Despite the fact that the p-values for Table 1.1 and Table 1.2 show that theresults are not statistically significant, the change in mean in Table 1.1 (-0.31)
suggests that the Japanese participants’ reliance on L1 may have decreased
after starting work on the assignment while their reliance on L2 may haveincreased. Nonetheless, the decrease in student L1 confidence was unexpected
and determining possible reasons for this decrease is beyond the scope of thesurvey instruments.
A comparison of the means in Table 2.1 shows an increase in L1 confidence(3.62 to 4.51) after completing the assignment. A comparison of the means inTable 2.2 shows an increase in L2 confidence (2.85 to 3.65) after completing theassignment. The p-values for Table 2.1 and Table 2.2 show that the results are
statistically significant. This indicates that the majority of Palestinian students
expressed improvement in both L1 and L2 writing confidence after completingthe assignment.
Significant differences exist between the two student groups so it is difficult toapply observations of one group to the other. For instance, the Japanese cohort
wrote their papers over a series of weeks in multiple drafts and were guided byregular teacher feedback; they also began their research earlier in the assignment.
In contrast, the Palestinian students composed their essays in class and did notbenefit from doing multiple revisions over a period of weeks. Additionally, thePalestinian cohort sometimes used less-scholarly resources to conduct theirresearch; the Japanese cohort was encouraged to use more scholarly resources
and their course involved an emphasis on making citations and judging theappropriateness of supporting information. These distinctions in the courses
mean that some dissimilarities in survey results between the two groups could180

A Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research ■be related to the different ways in which the assignment was implemented andthe different resources that students could access for research.
Another possible factor for some of the differences in survey outcomes is thatstudents’ intellectual processing of a writing topic may be related to their levelof L1-based knowledge about that topic. As was observed by both authors during the semester, some participants used L1 information sources to develop an
initial understanding about energy and began to do L2 research after progressing
further into the assignment. This suggests that some students used L1 information sources to bridge the gap between their lack of L2 knowledge and thedemands of the essay, perhaps because it is easier to do research in L1. Teachers
may therefore wish to address a heavy dependence on L1 during research byencouraging students to use more L2 sources. Perhaps teachers can accomplish
this by using grading incentives, requiring a minimum amount of L2 research or
creating activities which assist students in doing more L2 research. For example,
one teacher at the second author’s university explained that she uses activities
which decrease writers’ dependence on Arabic and increase their use of English,
such as in-class discussions of audiovisual materials or group discussion activities with student facilitators (L. Dikeidek, personal interview, March 3, 2018).
This teacher believed that her students are more vocally-oriented so speaking
activities help them engage in L2 more effectively before writing. More researchneeds to be done to understand the impact that particular assignments, activities
and teacher feedback can have on building student confidence in L2 academic
writing courses.

Study limitations
Larger sample sizes are always preferable in quantitative research; larger samples
are more likely to yield more reliable results. The student cohorts involved inthis project were relatively small and it is difficult to find correlations withinthese samples. Survey distribution and collection for the first author involved
181

two instances of lateness due to student absences. More significantly, the second
author’s semester was hampered by student council strikes, university employee
strikes and disruptions to classes from political unrest in late 2017 (Palestinian
University Employees’ Federation of Unions, 2017, December 20). The second
author initially intended to include 5 sections of the academic writing course but
only 3 sections managed to return the surveys as initially planned. This unexpectedly resulted in fewer participants taking part in this study, interruptions in thecompletion of writing assignments and delays in returned surveys. Additionally,
the participating students only received assessment for their L2 writing but nottheir L1 writing. Individuals reporting a higher degree of L1 writing confidence
may have therefore felt more positive about their L1 work. Receiving morecritical feedback about their L2 writing may have led some students to report a
reduced degree of L2 writing confidence.

Conclusion
Even for experienced learners of English, writing can be a frustrating and timeconsuming activity which is made more challenging by the formal aspects ofacademic writing and the demands of doing research. The impact of confidence
upon the development of writing skills means that building student confidence isan important component of an effective L2 writing course. The authors therefore
believe that teachers should invest time to create classes and activities whichdevelop the self-assurance and risk-taking that students need to improve theirwriting skills. The authors also believe that further research is needed to improveunderstanding of what kinds of activities and assignments are most effective
in developing L2 writing confidence. Because students often rely heavily on
L1 sources during research, they may require increased encouragement toundertake the challenges of using more L2 research sources. Perhaps this can beaccomplished with grading incentives, explicit assignment requirements about
research or carrying out topical in-class discussion activities as part of a writing182

A Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research ■assignment. Finally, the authors believe that more research is needed to further
explore the interactions between the research process, the writing process, inclass activities, L1 confidence and L2 writing confidence. A better understandingof these issues can help teachers strengthen their support for students’ writing
skills and more adequately prepare them for writing throughout their lives.

References:
Ballenger, B., & Payne, M. (2003). The Curious Reader: Exploring Personal and Academic Inquiry.
Longman: New York.
Bandura, A. (1984). Recycling misconceptions of perceived self-efficacy. Cognitive Theory andResearch, 8, 231–255.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Beach, R. (1989). Showing students how to assess: Demonstrating techniques for response in the writing conference. In C. M. Anson (Ed.), Writing and response (pp. 127–148). Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Betancourt, F., & Phinney, M. (1988). Sources of writing block in bilingual writers. Written
Communication, 5(4), 461–478.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). New York: Pearson
Education Inc.
Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational Psychologist, 35, 25–38.
Dadds, M. (1995). Passionate enquiry and school development. London: Falmer Press.
Faigley, L., Cherry, R. D., Jolliffe, D. A., & Skinner, A. M. (1985). Assessing writers’ knowledge andprocesses of composing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Faigley, L., Daly, J.A., & Witte, S.P. (1981). The role of writing apprehension in writing performanceand competence. Journal of Educational Research, 75(1), 16–21.
Fox, H. (1994). Listening to the world: Cultural issues in academic writing. Urbana, Il: National
Council of Teachers of English.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2005). Writing better: Effective strategies for teaching students withlearning difficulties. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1996). Theories and principles of motivation. In D. C. Berliner & R. C.
Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 63–84). New York: Simon & Schuster
Macmillan.
Henry, G. (1983). The Emotional Aspects of Learning. In I. Saltzberger-Wittenberg, G. Henry & E.
Osborne (Eds.), The emotional aspects of teaching and learning. London: Routledge and KeganPaul.
Holmes, V. L., & Moulton, M. R. (1995). A Contrarian view of dialogue journals: The case of areluctant participant. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 223–251.

183

Hull, G., & Rose, M. (1989). Rethinking remediation: Toward a social-cognitive understanding of
problematic reading and writing. Written Communication, 6, 139-154.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London: Longman.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Madigan, R., Linton, P., & Johnson, S. (1996). The paradox of writing apprehension. In L. W. Gregg& E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 295–307). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Mahn, H., & John-Steiner, V. (2002). The gift of confidence: A Vygotskian view of emotions. In G.
Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century: Sociocultural perspectives on
the future of education (pp. 46–58). Oxford: Blackwell.
McLaughlin, C. (2003). The feeling of finding out: the role of emotions in research. Educational
Action Research, 11(1), 65–76.
McLeod, S. (1987). Some thoughts about feelings: The affective domain and the writing process.
College Composition and Communication, 38, 426–435.
Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of theliterature. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 139-158.
Pajares, F., & Johnson, M. (1994). Confidence and Competence in Writing: The Role of Self-Efficacy,
Outcome Expectancy, and Apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 28(3), 313–331.
Pajares, F., Miller, M. D., & Johnson, M. J. (1999). Gender differences in writing self-beliefs ofelementary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 50–61.
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1997). Influence of writing self-efficacy beliefs on the writing performanceof upper elementary students. Journal of Educational Research, 90, 353–360.
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle
school students: A function of gender orientation? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26,
366–381.
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. In C.
A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 158–170).
New York: Guilford.
Palestinian University Employees’ Federation of Unions (2017, December 20). Majles itihad naqabat
asatithat wa muwathafi aljamia’t Al-Falastiniyeh yu’len ta’liq adawam ashamel fi jami’ aljama’t
Al-Falastiniyeh [The Federation of Unions of University Faculty Members and Employees
announces full strikes among the Palestinian universities]. [Facebook status update]. Retrieved
from https://www.facebook.com/PalUnivUnion
Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1993). On the power of positive thinking: The benefits of being
optimistic. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 26–39.

184

A Survey of Developing L2 Academic Writing Confidence through Topic-Oriented Research ■Shaugnessy, M. F. (2004). An interview with Anita Woolfolk: The educational psychology of teacher
efficacy. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 153–176.
Skehan, P. (2001). Comprehension and production strategies in language learning. In C. Candlin & N.
Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 75–89). London: Routledge.
Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication,
33(2), 148–156.

185

Appendix 1:
Energy Resources
Fall 2017 #1
Strongly agreeStrongly disagree

I feel confident writing about energy
resources in (Arabic / Japanese).

6   5   4   3   2   1

I feel confident writing about energy
resources in English.

6   5   4   3   2   1

Appendix 2:
Energy Resources
Fall 2017 #2
Strongly agreeStrongly disagree

I feel confident writing about energy
resources in (Arabic / Japanese).

6   5   4   3   2   1

I feel confident writing about energy
resources in English.

6   5   4   3   2   1
AlwaysNeverI read about energy resources using
resources from the library.

6   5   4   3   2   1

I read about energy resources using
resources from online scholarly
journals.

6   5   4   3   2   1

186