The objectives of the study were: (1) To study the effect of Combined-Non-combined model on essay writing. (2) To compare the effectiveness of Combined-Non-combined model with reference to the students belonging to different social status. Hypotheses were:  (1) There will be no significant effect on essay writing of the students teaching through Combined-Non-combined model and traditional teaching. (2) There will be no qualitative and quantitative change on essay writing among the male and female students coming from different socio economic status and educational background.

Sample consisted of 60 students of class VII from a private co-education school, named, Abhinav School, Pune and 47 students from a Municiple Corporation School No. 128, Pune.

Creativity was measured with the help the test developed by Kundle. Effectiveness of essay writing was studied with the help of three objective tests.

Data were analyzed with the help of one way and two way ANOVA.

Findings of the study were: (1) Essay writing ability of the students belonging to lower class is less than those of higher class students in reference to traditional teaching. (2) Essay writing ability of the students belonging to lower class is less than those of higher class students in reference to teaching through Combined–Non-combined model. (3) Combined – Non combined model of teaching essay writing was found to effective than traditional teaching among higher class students. (4) There was interaction among social status, traditional teaching and Combined–Non-combined model with reference to linguistic creativity. (5) There was interaction among social status, traditional teaching and Combined –Non-combined model with reference to achievement in essay writing. (6) Linguistic creativity of higher-class students was found to be greater than lower class students teaching through Combined–Non-combined model. (7) Combined–Non-combined model with reference to achievement was found to be superior to traditional method. (8) Editing ability of lower class students was less than higher-class students with reference to achievement. (9) There was an interaction effect of traditional method, Combined –Non combined model and social status on achievement (10) Combined –Non combined model was found to be more effective than traditional method in terms of achievement in lower as well as higher class students. (11) Lower class students affected and benefited more than higher-class students when studying through Combined–Non-combined model. (12) Higher-class students affected more than lower class students in writing contradictory words studying through model (13) Traditional method was more beneficial to higher-class students but Combined –Non-combined model benefited to a large extent to lower class student with reference to writing contradictory words. (14) Combined –Non-combined model was found to be more effective than traditional method in terms of repetition of personal simile in lower class than higher class students (15) Combined–Non-combined model was found to be equally effective in terms of repetition of personal simile in lower class as well as higher class students. (16) There was no significant interaction among social status, traditional teaching and Combined–Non- combined model with reference to repetition of personal simile. (17) Combined–Non- combined model was found to be equally effective in terms of editing in repetition of personal simile in lower class as well as higher class students. (18) Combined–Non- combined model of teaching essay writing was found to effective than traditional teaching in terms of repetition of direct simile. (19) Combined–Non-combined model of teaching essay writing was found to effective than traditional teaching in terms of repetition of direct simile. (20) Combined-Non-combined model found to be effective than traditional teaching in terms of repetition of direct simile in higher class students.