본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Effects of Blended Design on Students' Revision and Writing Development

박종원
현대영어교육학회 (The Modern English Education Society)|2012.02|현대영어교육 (Modern English Education)|제13권 제1호|pp. 1-17

2

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

평가교정assessmentrevision융합디자인blended design

초록

In the field of teaching second language writing, it has been questioned whether written corrective feedback is effective or not. In responding to this contentious and ongoing question, this study was conducted to introduce a newly designed instructional strategy in writing and test its efficacy over both short and long periods of time. Intermediate level university students (N=85) received three different types of feedback, namely, blended, conventional, and control, and 425 writing samples were analyzed from the pretest, posttest 1, and posttest 2, respectively. The results indicate that there was no difference between the blended design and conventional feedback group in reducing the error rates over a short-term period. However, striking differences found between two groups over a long term period imply that the newly designed instructional strategy is much more effective than its counterparts (in the conventional and control groups) in reducing error rates and multiplying the effect of revision on the subsequent and new pieces of writing. Before jumping to any harsh conclusion, the researcher postulates that further research validating the findings of the result is highly desirable, and will deepen the understanding toward the nature of complex and context-sensitive second language writing.

Abstract

In the field of teaching second language writing, it has been questioned whether written corrective feedback is effective or not. In responding to this contentious and ongoing question, this study was conducted to introduce a newly designed instructional strategy in writing and test its efficacy over both short and long periods of time. Intermediate level university students (N=85) received three different types of feedback, namely, blended, conventional, and control, and 425 writing samples were analyzed from the pretest, posttest 1, and posttest 2, respectively. The results indicate that there was no difference between the blended design and conventional feedback group in reducing the error rates over a short-term period. However, striking differences found between two groups over a long term period imply that the newly designed instructional strategy is much more effective than its counterparts (in the conventional and control groups) in reducing error rates and multiplying the effect of revision on the subsequent and new pieces of writing. Before jumping to any harsh conclusion, the researcher postulates that further research validating the findings of the result is highly desirable, and will deepen the understanding toward the nature of complex and context-sensitive second language writing.

참고문헌 (40)

  1. 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)
  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 value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students", Language Teaching Research, 12(3), pp.409~431 (2008)
  4. 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)
  5. Bruton, A, "Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were", System, 37(4), pp.600~613 (2009)
  6. 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)
  7. Ellis, R, "Principles of instructed language learning", System, 33(2), pp.209~224 (2005)
  8. 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)
  9. Fathman, A, "Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content, In Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom", pp.178~190 (1990), Cambridge University Press
  10. Ferris, D. R, "Response to student writing: Implications for second language students" (2003), Lawrence Erlbaum
  11. Ferris, D. R, "Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, pp.181~201 (2010)
  12. Ferris, D. R, "Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2 writing classes", Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference (2000)
  13. 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)
  14. Folse, K. S, "Great paragraphs" (2004), Houghton Mifflin Company
  15. 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)
  16. Han, Z. H, "A study of the impact of recasts on tense consistency in L2 output", TESOL Quarterly, 36, pp.543~572 (2002)
  17. Kim, Jin-Wan, "A balanced approach to second language writing: Focus on product and process variables", English Teaching, 52(4), pp.51~90 (1997)
  18. Kumaravadivelu, B, "The post-methodology condition: (E)merging strategies for second", foreign language teaching, 1994, pp.28, 27~48
  19. Kumaravadivelu, B, "Understanding language teaching: From methodology to postmethodology" (2006), Lawrence Erlbaum
  20. Lalande, F., II, "Reducing composition errors: An experiment", Modern Language Journal, 66, pp.140~149 (1982)
  21. Diane Lemonnier Schallert, "Meeting in the margins: Effects of the teacher-student relationship on revision processes of EFL college students taking a composition course", JOURNAL OF SECOND LANGUAGE WRITING, 17(3), pp.165~182, PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
  22. Lu, Y, "Direct or indirect written corrective feedback" (2011), Lambert Academic Publishing
  23. Mehnert, U, "The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(1), pp.83~108 (1998)
  24. Nicholas, H, "Recasts as feedback to language learners", Language Learning, 51, pp.719~758 (2001)
  25. Norman, W. E, "Contextualizing corrective feedback in second language writing pedagogy", Language Teaching Research, 14(4), pp.445~463 (2010)
  26. Norman, W. E, "The efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback for university-matriculated ESL learners", System, 39(2), pp.229~239 (2011)
  27. Park, Chongwon, "Revisiting error analysis in English composition.", 영어교육연구, 19(1), pp.57~3 (2007), 팬코리아영어교육학회
  28. Robb, T, "Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality", TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), pp.83~95 (1986)
  29. Roberts, M, "Awareness and the efficacy of error correction, In Attention and awareness in foreign language learning", pp.163~182 (1995), Language Teaching and Curriculum Centre
  30. Sachs, R, "Learners' uses of two types of written feedback on a L2 writing revision task", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(1), pp.67~100 (2007)
  31. Semke, H, "The effects of the red pen", Foreign Language Annals, 17, pp.195~202 (1984)
  32. Sheen, Younghee, "The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles", TESOL Quarterly, 41, pp.255~283 (2007)
  33. Sheen, Younghee, "Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, pp.203~234 (2010)
  34. Sheen, Younghee, "Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning (1st ed.)" (2011), Springer
  35. Sheen, Younghee, "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)
  36. Song, Mi-Jeong, "Relationship between types of written feedback and development of English writing skills", English Teaching, 53(2), pp.135~156 (1998)
  37. 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)
  38. Truscott, J, "Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler", Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), pp.337~343 (2004)
  39. Truscott, J, "The effect of error correction on learners' ability to write accurately", Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), pp.255~272 (2007)
  40. Truscott, J, "Error correction, revision, and learning", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), pp.292~305 (2008)

관련 논문AI추천

Peer Feedback Using Blended Learning in L2 Writing at the University Level소리, 이충현한국영어교육학회 · 영어교육2012 · 제67권 제3호Effects of Revision Training on L2 Writing최연희한국영어교육학회 · 영어교육2010 · 제65권 제1호The Long-Term Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback in an EFL Writing Class김선영외국학연구소 · 외국학연구2012 · 제21호Effects of Corrective Feedback on College Students’ English Writing Accuracy이정원팬코리아영어교육학회 · 영어교육연구2013 · 제25권 제2호Students’ Reflection on Feedback in L2 Writing in Blended Learning윤서영한국멀티미디어언어교육학회 · 멀티미디어 언어교육2011 · 제14권 제2호Exploring the Effects of Error Correction versus Reformulation on Students’ Revision in a Collaborative Writing Context황정희팬코리아영어교육학회 · 영어교육연구2014 · 제26권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)

The Effectiveness of Instructing L1 and L2 Rhetorical Difference in the NEAT Writing Section정성희pp. 19-41Genre-Based Instruction and Korean College Students' Development of Expository Writing in English박혜숙pp. 43-67Application of Dynamic Assessment in a College Writing Class표경현pp. 69-91Cooperative Learning:An Effective Way to Enhance Korean EFL Learners' English Proficiency and Self-Efficacy윤지환, 박용효pp. 93-111What do Primary Teachers Think about English Vocabulary Taught in Primary Schools?맹은경pp. 113-132
원문 보기