Different Feedback and Different Reactions in L2 Writing: A Case Study of Different Levels of University Students
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This research is taken from a classroom-based study on how the indirect approach inwritten corrective feedback (CF) differs from the direct approach in facilitating thelearning of grammatical features in L2 writing. Eleven university students from awriting class were divided into three groups based on TOEIC scores. After writingnarrative assignments, they were given three different types of feedback: direct,indirect, and metalinguistic. The participants were asked to revise their writings afterreceiving indirect CF and metalinguistic CF. Immediately after revising, they werealso asked to answer an open-ended questionnaire on the feedback type. Theirrevisions and corrections were analyzed according to use of indefinite articles, anddifferent feedback types showed slightly different reactions and attitudes. The highlevelstudents were not influenced much by the feedback type, while the mid- andlow-level students favored the indirect approach for their thinking processes, andbenefited from metalinguistic CF in the revision sessions. The indirect approachappeared to be more effective, if implemented appropriately, increasing workingmemory for self-regulated L2 writing processes.
Abstract
This research is taken from a classroom-based study on how the indirect approach inwritten corrective feedback (CF) differs from the direct approach in facilitating thelearning of grammatical features in L2 writing. Eleven university students from awriting class were divided into three groups based on TOEIC scores. After writingnarrative assignments, they were given three different types of feedback: direct,indirect, and metalinguistic. The participants were asked to revise their writings afterreceiving indirect CF and metalinguistic CF. Immediately after revising, they werealso asked to answer an open-ended questionnaire on the feedback type. Theirrevisions and corrections were analyzed according to use of indefinite articles, anddifferent feedback types showed slightly different reactions and attitudes. The highlevelstudents were not influenced much by the feedback type, while the mid- andlow-level students favored the indirect approach for their thinking processes, andbenefited from metalinguistic CF in the revision sessions. The indirect approachappeared to be more effective, if implemented appropriately, increasing workingmemory for self-regulated L2 writing processes.
참고문헌 (40)
- Aljaafreh, A., "Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development", Modern Language Journal, 78, pp.465~483 (1994)
- Baddeley, A., "The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), pp.417~423 (2000)
- Berninger, V. W., "Instruction and assessment for struggling writers: Evidence-based practices", pp.15~50 (2009), Guilford Press
- Berninger, V. W., "Handbook of writing research", pp.28~40 (2006), Guilford Press
- Bitchener, J., "Evidence in support of written corrective feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, pp.102~118 (2008)
- Bitchener, J., "The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development : A ten month investigation", Applied Linguistics, 31(2), pp.193~214 (2009)
- Bitchener, J., "The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, pp.191~205 (2005)
- Brookhart, S. M., "How to give effective feedback to your students" (2008), Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
- Carroll, S., "Explicit and implicit negative feedback : An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, pp.357~386 (1993)
- Chandler, J., "The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), pp.267~296 (2003)
- Connor, U., "Landmark essays on ESL writing", pp.75~90 (2001), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Ellis, N., "Cognition and second language instruction", pp.33~68 (2001), Cambridge University Press
- Ellis, N., "Implicit and explicit language learning", pp.35~47 (2011), Georgetown University Press
- Ellis, R., "A typology of written corrective feedback types", ELT Journal, 63(2), pp.97~107 (2009)
- Ellis, R., "Language teaching research and language pedagogy" (2012), John Wiley & Sons Inc
- Ferris, D. R., "Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues", pp.81~104 (2006), Cambridge University Press
- Ferris, D. R., "Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, pp.181~201 (2010)
- Ferris, D. R., "Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?", Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, pp.161~184 (2001)
- Frodesen, J., "Exploring the dynamics of second language writing", pp.141~161 (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Hartshorn, K. J., "Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy", TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), pp.84~109 (2010)
- Hayes, J. R., "Perspectives on writing: Research, theory, & practice", pp.6~44 (2000), International Reading Association
- Hayes, J. R., "Handbook of writing research", pp.28~40 (2006), Guilford Press
- Hofmann, W., "Working memory capacity and self-regulatory behavior : Towards an individual differences perspective on behavior determination by automatic versus controlled processes", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, pp.962~977 (2008)
- Hyland, K., "Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues", pp.1~19 (2006), Cambridge University Press
- 장성수, "Types of Information in Written Corrective Feedback and Its Efficacy on L2 Acquisition", 영어교육, 67(3), pp.3~25 (2012), 한국영어교육학회
- 김지현, "Learner Understanding of Written Corrective Feedback and Its Relationship with Immediate Uptake and Retention in EFL Classrooms", 영어교육, 68(3), pp.109~130 (2013), 한국영어교육학회
- Kormos, J., "The role of individual differences in L2 writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, pp.390~403 (2012)
- Lalande, J. F., "Reducing composition errors : An experiment", Modern Language Journal, 66, pp.140~149 (1982)
- McCutchen, D., "Handbook of writing research", pp.115~130 (2006), Guilford Press
- Morrison, A., "Does working memory training work? The promise and challenges of enhancing cognition by training working memory", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, pp.46~60 (2011)
- Nassaji, H., "A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2 : The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles", Language Awareness, 9(1), pp.34~51 (2000)
- Schmidt, R., "Cognition and second language Instruction", pp.3~32 (2001), Cambridge University Press
- Scott, V. M., "Rethinking foreign language writing" (1996), Heinle & Heinle
- Sheen, Y., "The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles", TESOL Quarterly, 41, pp.255~283 (2007)
- Shintani, N., "The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article", Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, pp.286~306 (2013)
- Storch, N., "Learners’ processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), pp.303~334 (2010)
- Truscott, J., "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes", Language Learning, 46(2), pp.327~369 (1996)
- Van Beuningen, C. G., "Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing", Language Learning, 62(1), pp.1~41 (2012)
- Wallace, H. M., "The effects of success versus failure feedback on further self-control", Self and Identity, 1, pp.35~41 (2002)
- Wiggleworth, G., "What role for collaboration in writing and writing feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, pp.364~374 (2012)
