오류수정 피드백 유형이 한국 중학교 학습자들의 개작 활동에 미치는 영향
The effects of different types of error feedback on writing revision of Korean middle school students
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of different types of error-correction feedback on Korean middle school students’ writing. Twenty-four advanced level of first grade middle school students were chosen. The subjects were randomly divided into three groups and performed three consecutive composition tasks. All of three different types of feedback, electronic feedback, conference and written feedback, were provided for each group in a different order. The effects of different types of feedback were measured by comparing the rate of errors produced and corrected between the first and revised draft. In pre and post writing test, students showed great improvement in the number of words produced, but the number of errors in two tests did not differ, implying no improvement of their writing accuracy. Further, the teacher’s feedback on errors had positive effects on students’ revision activity. Students made correct revisions about 60% to 70% of their first errors in their revised writing. Yet, the type of feedback provided and the tasks assigned did not have any relationship with the correction activities. Further classroom implications are suggested based on the study results.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of different types of error-correction feedback on Korean middle school students’ writing. Twenty-four advanced level of first grade middle school students were chosen. The subjects were randomly divided into three groups and performed three consecutive composition tasks. All of three different types of feedback, electronic feedback, conference and written feedback, were provided for each group in a different order. The effects of different types of feedback were measured by comparing the rate of errors produced and corrected between the first and revised draft. In pre and post writing test, students showed great improvement in the number of words produced, but the number of errors in two tests did not differ, implying no improvement of their writing accuracy. Further, the teacher’s feedback on errors had positive effects on students’ revision activity. Students made correct revisions about 60% to 70% of their first errors in their revised writing. Yet, the type of feedback provided and the tasks assigned did not have any relationship with the correction activities. Further classroom implications are suggested based on the study results.
참고문헌 (40)
- 김나연, "대학에서의 영어 말하기 오류수정 피드백과 학습자 반응: 교사와 학습자의 태도를 중심으로", 영어어문교육, 15(4), pp.237~264 (2009), 한국영어어문교육학회
- 초3부터 서술형 평가 확대, 학생부에 창의적 교과활동 기재: 서울 창의성 계발을 위한 평가 개선 기본 계획발표, "서울특별시교육청", 서울특별시 교육청, ~ (2010)
- 이정원, "과정중심 피드백이 영어 쓰기능력 향상에 미치는 영향", 영어교육, 56(2), pp.265~285 (2001)
- 전은경, "영어 저널쓰기에서 교사의 피드백 유형이 학습자의 쓰기능력 신장에 미치는 영향", 영어교육연구, 21(4), pp.293~313 (2009), 팬코리아영어교육학회
- Bates, L, "Writing clearly: Responding to ESL compositions" (1993), Heinle & Heinle
- Bitchener, J, "The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, pp.191~205 (2005)
- Brown, H. D, "Teaching by principle an interactive approach to language pedagogy" (2001), Pearson Education
- Brunton, A, "Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were", System, 37, pp.600~613 (2009)
- 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, A, "Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports, In Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom", pp.155~177 (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Cohen, A, "Toward assessing interlanguage performance: The relationship between selected errors, learning characteristics, and learners’ expectations", Language Learning, 26, pp.45~66 (1976)
- Conrad, S, "ESL student and revision after teacher written comments: Texts, contexts and individuals", Journal of Second Language Learning, 8, pp.147~180 (1999)
- Cook, V. J, "Second language learning and language teaching" (1991), Edward Arnold
- Corder, S. P, "Error analysis and interlanguage" (1981), Oxford University Press
- Ferris, D. R, "Teaching ESL composition students to become independent self‐editors", TESOL Journal, 4(4), pp.18~22 (1995)
- Ferris, D. R, "Student reactions to teacher response in multiple‐draft compositionclassrooms", TESOL Quarterly, 29, pp.33~53 (1995)
- Ferris, D. R, "How does teacher feedback affect student revision? A pilot comparison between ESL and NES writing teachers and their students", Paper presented at the 32nd Annual TESOL convention (1998)
- Ferris, D. R, "The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), pp.1~11 (1996)
- Ferris, D. R, "The ‘‘rammar correction’’debate in L2 Writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime?)", Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, pp.49~62 (2004)
- 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)
- 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)
- Hedgecock, J, "Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, pp.141~163 (1994)
- Hendrickson, J. M, "Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice", Modern Language Journal, 62, pp.387~398 (1978)
- Higgs, T, "The push toward communication. In T. Higgs(Ed. ), Curriculum, competence, and the foreign language teacher(pp. 57-79). Skokie, In The push toward communication, In Curriculum, competence, and the foreign language teacher", pp.57~79 (1982), National Textbook Company
- Hyland, F, "ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students", Language Teaching Research, 4, pp.33~54 (2000)
- Hyland, F, "Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), pp.185~212 (2001)
- Krashen, S. D, "Writing: Research, theory, and application" (1984), Pergamon Press
- Lalande, J. F. II, "Reducing composition errors: An experiment", The Modern Language Journal, 66, pp.140~149 (1982)
- Leki, I, "Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response, In Second language writing", pp.57~68 (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Leki, I, "The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college‐level writing classes", Foreign Language Annals, 45, pp.605~655 (1991)
- Olshtain, E, "Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide for language teachers" (2007), Cambridge University Express
- Segalowitz, S. J, "Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition", Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, pp.53~67 (1998)
- Selinker, L, "Rediscovering interlanguage" (1992), Longman
- Semke, H, "The effects of the red pen", Foreign Language Annals, 17, pp.195~202 (1984)
- Sheppard, K, "Two feedback types: Do they make a difference?", RELC Journal, 23, pp.103~110 (1992)
- Soh, Y. H, "Writing communicatively", English Teaching, 50, pp.97~116 (1995)
- Truscott, J, "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes", Language Learning, 46, pp.327~369 (1996)
- Warschauer, M, "Computer learning networks and student empowerment", System, 24(1), pp.1~14 (1996)
- Williams, J, "Undergraduate second language writers in the writing center", Journal of Basic Writing, 21, pp.73~91 (2002)
- Zamel, V, "Responding to student writing", TESOL Quarterly, 18, pp.79~102 (1985)