본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

The Effects of Languaging in Response to Automated Written Correction for Grammar Accuracy Improvement

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류영어와문학

초록

This study explored the role of written languaging (WL) in response to automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) in L2 accuracy improvement in English classrooms at a university in China. A total of 254 freshmen enrolled in intermediate composition classes participated, and they wrote 4 essays and received AWCF. A half of them engaged in WL after receiving correction, while the other half did not. To measure whether WL could contribute to L2 accuracy improvement, error correction tests were conducted three times. AWCF targeted all types of errors, but the study focused on investigating six language features (nouns, conjunctions, subject-verb agreement, sentence constituents, articles, and prepositions) known as the most frequent errors intermediate students make. The results proved that WL had a positive effect on accuracy improvement overall. However, when individual language features were considered separately, the effects were not the same. The inherent complexity of the features along with L1 influence appeared to affect the effects of WL for accuracy improvement.

Abstract

This study explored the role of written languaging (WL) in response to automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) in L2 accuracy improvement in English classrooms at a university in China. A total of 254 freshmen enrolled in intermediate composition classes participated, and they wrote 4 essays and received AWCF. A half of them engaged in WL after receiving correction, while the other half did not. To measure whether WL could contribute to L2 accuracy improvement, error correction tests were conducted three times. AWCF targeted all types of errors, but the study focused on investigating six language features (nouns, conjunctions, subject-verb agreement, sentence constituents, articles, and prepositions) known as the most frequent errors intermediate students make. The results proved that WL had a positive effect on accuracy improvement overall. However, when individual language features were considered separately, the effects were not the same. The inherent complexity of the features along with L1 influence appeared to affect the effects of WL for accuracy improvement.

참고문헌 (53)

  1. Attali, Y., "Exploring the feedback and revision features of Criterion", Paper presented at the 2004 National Council on Measurement in Education Conference (2004)
  2. Bitchener, J., "Evidence in support of written corrective feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), pp.102~118 (2008)
  3. Bitchener, J., "The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), pp.191~205 (2005)
  4. Chapelle, C. A., "Validity arguments for diagnostic assessment using automated writing evaluation", Language Testing, 32(3), pp.385~405 (2015)
  5. Chen, C., "The influence of Chinese prominence construction on English acquisition", master, pp.2011
  6. Chen, C., "Beyond the design of automated writing evaluation : Pedagogical practices and perceived learning effectiveness in EFL writing classes", Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), pp.94~112 (2008)
  7. Cohen, J., "Set correlation and contingency tables", Applied Psychological Measurement, 12(4), pp.425~434 (1988)
  8. Craik, F. I. M., "Levels of processing : A framework for memory research", Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), pp.671~684 (1972)
  9. Ellis, R., "Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language : A psychometric study", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), pp.141~172 (2005)
  10. Ellis, R., "The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context", System, 36(3), pp.353~371 (2008)
  11. Fukuta, J., "Written languaging with indirect feedback in writing revision: Is feedback always effective?", Language Awareness, 28(1), pp.1~14 (2019)
  12. Grimes, D., "Utility in a fallible tool: A multi-site case study of automated writing evaluation", The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 8(6), pp.1~43 (2010)
  13. Guénette, D., "Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), pp.40~53 (2007)
  14. Huebner, T., "Linguistic systems and l inguistic change i n an interl anguage", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6(1), pp.33~53 (1983)
  15. Ishikawa, M., "Written languaging, learners’ proficiency levels and L2 grammar learning", System, 74, pp.50~61 (2018)
  16. Ishikawa, M., "Languaging in language learning and teaching: A collection of empirical studies", pp.219~240 (2020), John Benjamins Publishing Company
  17. Ishikawa, M., "The effect of written languaging on learning the hypothetical conditional in English", System, 58, pp.97~111 (2016)
  18. Jarvie, G., "Bloomsbury grammar guide" (1993), Bloomsbury Publishing Ltd
  19. Jeon, E. H., "Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching", pp.165~211 (2006), John Benjamins
  20. Kellogg, R. T., "Does automated feedback help students learn to write?", Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(2), pp.173~196 (2010)
  21. 주수언, "플립러닝을 활용한 가정교과교육학 전공 수업의 온라인 활동 개발 및 적용", 교과교육학연구, 25(1), pp.1~14 (2021), 교과교육연구소[DOI]
  22. Lai, Y., "Which do students prefer to evaluate their essays : Peers or computer program", British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), pp.432~454 (2010)
  23. Lantolf, J. P., "Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development" (2006), Oxford University Press
  24. Lee, I., "Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts" (2017), Springer
  25. Li, D. C., "Learning English for academis purposes : Why Chinese learners find EAP do difficult to master", Revista Canadian de Estudio Ingleses, 59, pp.35~48 (2009)
  26. Li, J., "Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation(AWE)feedback in ESL writing instruction", Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, pp.1~18 (2015)
  27. Luria, A. R., "Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments (Vol. 2)", pp.84~122 (1999), Taylor & Francis
  28. Mohamed, A., "English errors and Chinses learners", Sunway College Journal, 1, pp.83~97 (2004)
  29. Moradian, M. R., "Languaging in language learning and teaching: A collection of empirical studies", pp.267~286 (2020), John Benjamins Publishing Company
  30. Moradian, M. R., "Contribution of written languaging to enhancing the efficiency of written corrective feedback", International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(2), pp.406~426 (2017)
  31. Niu, R., "Effects of indirect corrective feedback with and without written languaging on L2 written accuracy : A multitask intervention study", Asia-Pacific Edu Res, 29(4), pp.343~351 (2020)
  32. Ohta, A. S., "Second language acquisition processes in the classroom learning Japanese" (2001), Lawrence Erlbaum
  33. Ranalli, J., "Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it?", Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(7), pp.653~674 (2018)
  34. Richards, J. C., "Error analysis" (1974), Longman
  35. Schmidt, R., "Cognition and second language instruction", pp.3~32 (2001), Cambridge University Presss
  36. Sheen, Y., "The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles", TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), pp.255~283 (2007)
  37. Slamecka, N. J., "The generation effect : Delineation of a phenomenon", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), pp.592~604 (1978)
  38. Storch, N., "Metatalk in a pair work activity : Level of engagement and implications for language development", Language Awareness, 17(2), pp.95~114 (2008)
  39. Suzuki, W., "Improving Japanese university students’ second language writing accuracy : Effects of languaging", ARELE : Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 20, pp.81~90 (2009)
  40. Suzuki, W., "Written languaging, direct correction, and second language writing revision", Language Learning, 62(4), pp.1110~1133 (2012)
  41. Suzuki, W., "The effect of quality of written languaging on second language learning", Writing & Pedagogy, 8(3), pp.461~482 (2017)
  42. Swain, M., "Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition", pp.64~81 (1998), Cambridge University Press
  43. Swain, M., "Sociocultural theory and second language learning", pp.97~114 (2000), Oxford University Press
  44. Swain, M., "Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky", pp.95~108 (2006), Continuum
  45. Swain, M., "Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate : A step towards second language learning", Applied Linguistics, 16(3), pp.371~391 (1995)
  46. Swain, M., "Interaction and second language learning : Two adolescent French immersion students working together", The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), pp.320~337 (1998)
  47. Swain, M., "Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’response to reformulation", International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3-4), pp.285~304 (2002)
  48. Truscott, J., "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes", Language Learning, 46(2), pp.327~369 (1996)
  49. Truscott, J., "The case for “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”:A response to Ferris", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), pp.111~122 (1999)
  50. Truscott, J., "Error correction, revision, and learning", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), pp.292~305 (2008)
  51. Tseng, Y. C., "The effects of online conjunction materials on college EFL students’ writing", System, 34(2), pp.270~283 (2006)
  52. Vygotsky, L. S., "Thought and language" (1986), The MIT Press
  53. Woodworth, J., "Perspectives on using automated writing evaluation systems to provide written corrective feedback in the ESL Classroom", TESL Canada Journal, 37(2), pp.234~247 (2020)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)