The Effect of Unfocused Written Feedback on L2 Development and Its Relationship with Language Analytic Ability
2
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Recent research has demonstrated that written corrective feedback (WCF) has a facilitative role in second language (L2) grammar accuracy improvement. However, most of the studies explored focused WCF which targeted a couple of predetermined errors using a one-time feedback session and they disregarded learner individual variations. The present study aimed to fill the gaps in the previous WCF research by investigating the role of unfocused WCF (i.e., targeting a range of errors) offered via multiple feedback sessions on grammar accuracy improvement, and learners’ individual differences in benefiting from WCF according to their language analytic ability (LAA). The study collected the data from four intact intermediate EFL classrooms at a university. Three classes were feedback groups, and each class received different types of WCF over six weeks: direct correction (DC), coded indirect correction (CIC), and underline indirect correction (UIC). The fourth group engaged in self-editing without WCF and served as a control group. Results showed that DC and CIC led to more improved accuracy than what was obtained from UIC and self-correction. In addition, the process whereby DC and CIC led to accuracy gains differed. Learners’ LAA was found to be strongly related to both DC and CIC while no relationship was found with UIC.
Abstract
Recent research has demonstrated that written corrective feedback (WCF) has a facilitative role in second language (L2) grammar accuracy improvement. However, most of the studies explored focused WCF which targeted a couple of predetermined errors using a one-time feedback session and they disregarded learner individual variations. The present study aimed to fill the gaps in the previous WCF research by investigating the role of unfocused WCF (i.e., targeting a range of errors) offered via multiple feedback sessions on grammar accuracy improvement, and learners’ individual differences in benefiting from WCF according to their language analytic ability (LAA). The study collected the data from four intact intermediate EFL classrooms at a university. Three classes were feedback groups, and each class received different types of WCF over six weeks: direct correction (DC), coded indirect correction (CIC), and underline indirect correction (UIC). The fourth group engaged in self-editing without WCF and served as a control group. Results showed that DC and CIC led to more improved accuracy than what was obtained from UIC and self-correction. In addition, the process whereby DC and CIC led to accuracy gains differed. Learners’ LAA was found to be strongly related to both DC and CIC while no relationship was found with UIC.
참고문헌 (50)
- Ashwell, T., "Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method?", Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), pp.227~257 (2000)
- Benson, S., "Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy", Language Teaching Research (2018)[DOI]
- Bitchener, J., "A reflection on ‘the language learning potential’ of written CF", Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, pp.348~363 (2012)
- Bitchener, J., "Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing" (2012), Routledge
- Bitchener, J., "The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students", Language Teaching Research, 12(3), pp.409~431 (2008)
- Bitchener, J., "The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development : A ten month investigation", Applied Linguistics, 31, pp.193~214 (2010)
- Bitchener, J., "The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, pp.191~205 (2005)
- Bonilla López, M., "The differential effects of comprehensive feedback forms in the second language writing class", Language Learning, 68(3), pp.813~850 (2018)
- 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, pp.267~296 (2003)
- Cohen, J., "Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science" (1988), Academic Press
- DeKeyser, R., "Theories in second language acquisition", pp.97~113 (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum
- Diab, N., "Effectiveness of written corrective feedback:Does type of error and type of correction matter?", Assessing Writing, 24, pp.16~34 (2015)
- Dörnyei, Z., "The handbook of second language acquisition", pp.589~630 (2003), Blackwell
- Ellis, R., "The definition and measurement of L2explicit knowledge", Language Learning, 54, pp.227~275 (2004)
- 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)
- Ferris, D. R., "The influence of teacher commentary on student revision", TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), pp.315~339 (1997)
- Ferris, D. R., "Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues", pp.81~104 (2006), Cambridge University Press
- Ferris, D. R., "Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing studies", Language Teaching, 45(4), pp.446~459 (2012)
- Ferris, D., "Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?", Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), pp.161~184 (2001)
- Granena, G., "Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment", pp.179~204 (2013), John Benjamins
- Hartshorn, K. J., "Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy", TEOSL Quarterly, 44(1), pp.84~109 (2010)
- Kang, E., "The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy : A metaanalysis", Modern Language Journal, 99(1), pp.1~18 (2015)
- Khaled Karim, "The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing", Language Teaching Research, pp.136216881880246~ (2018), SAGE Publications[DOI]
- Kim, J. H., "Written corrective feedback : Effects, types of errors, and types of strategies", Foreign Language Education, 17(1), pp.1~30 (2010)
- Kormos, J., "The role of individual differences in L2writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, pp.390~403 (2012)
- Lalande, J., "Reducing composition errors : An experiment", Modern Language Journal, 66, pp.140~149 (1982)
- Li, S., "The interactions between the effects of implicit and explicit feedback and individual differences in language analytic ability and working memory", Modern Language Journal, 97(3), pp.634~654 (2013)
- Li, S., "The associations between language aptitude and second language grammar acquisition : A meta-analytic review of five decades of research", Applied Linguistics, 36(3), pp.385~408 (2015)
- Li, S., "Individual differences, L2 development, and language program administration: From theory to application", pp.32~52 (2015), Cengage
- Park, E. S., "To what extent do learners benefit from indirect written corrective feedback? A study targeting learners of different proficiency and heritage language status", Language Teaching Research, 20(6), pp.678~699 (2016)
- Robb, T., "Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality", TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), pp.83~96 (1986)
- 류영숙, "The Effects of Indirect and Direct Error Feedback on Korean College Students’ Accuracy Improvement in Writing", Foreign Languages Education, 13(3), pp.241~262 (2006), 한국외국어교육학회
- Schmidt, R. W., "The role of consciousness in second language learning", Applied linguistics, 11(2), pp.129~158 (1990)
- Schmidt, R., "Cognition and second language acquisition", pp.3~32 (2001), Cambridge University Press
- Schmitt, N., "The acquisition, processing, and the use of formulaic sequences", pp.55~86 (2003), John Benjamins
- 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)
- Sheen, Y., "Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners", System, 37(4), pp.556~569 (2009)
- 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)
- Shintani, N., "Does language analytic ability mediate the effect of written feedback on grammatical accuracy in second language writing?", System, 49, pp.110~119 (2015)
- Skehan, P., "A cognitive approach to language learning" (1998), Oxford University Press
- Skehan, P., "Cognitive individual differences in second language processing and acquisition", pp.17~40 (2016), John Benjamins
- Stefanou, C., "Direct written corrective feedback, learner differences, and the acquisition of second language article use for generic and specific plural reference", Modern Language Journal, 99(2), pp.263~282 (2015)
- Storch, N., "Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research", International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), pp.29~46 (2010)
- Truscott, J., "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes", Language Learning, 46, pp.327~369 (1996)
- 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)
- Truscott, J., "Error correction, revision, and learning", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), pp.292~305 (2008)
- Van Beuningen, C. G., "The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy", ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, pp.279~296 (2008)
- Van Beunungen, G., "Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing", Language Learning, 62, pp.1~41 (2012)
- Wen, Z., "Foreign language aptitude theory : Yesterday, today, and tomorrow", Language Teaching, 50(1), pp.1~31 (2017)
- Yalcin, S., "Language aptitude and grammatical difficulty", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, pp.239~263 (2016)
