Effects of Learning Environment Differences (On and Offline vs. Offline) on Intermediate Level Learners’ Writing Development
2
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In the field of teaching English as a second or foreign language research, researchers have paid attention to learner errors and sought for the effects of written corrective feedback on learners’ writing development. In line with this line of inquiry, this study was conducted to see the differential effects of learning environment on the acquisition of writing competency. Seventy-one intermediate level English major students participated in this study, and qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze the data. The results of this study indicate that online students outperformed the offline and control groups both in the short and long-term in their writing performance which was indicated by statistical significance. As to the acquisition path, online vs offline students show unique differences favoring the order of sentence type > main verb > usage > word choice > redundancy > word order > logic. What this implies is that in teaching intermediate level students, if a teacher’s concern is on global errors, which eventually impede communication, this order provides some insights for them on what should be taught first and next. Logic stands alone in contrast to other global errors indicating that it is the most difficult area of acquisition with its own unique characteristics.
Abstract
In the field of teaching English as a second or foreign language research, researchers have paid attention to learner errors and sought for the effects of written corrective feedback on learners’ writing development. In line with this line of inquiry, this study was conducted to see the differential effects of learning environment on the acquisition of writing competency. Seventy-one intermediate level English major students participated in this study, and qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze the data. The results of this study indicate that online students outperformed the offline and control groups both in the short and long-term in their writing performance which was indicated by statistical significance. As to the acquisition path, online vs offline students show unique differences favoring the order of sentence type > main verb > usage > word choice > redundancy > word order > logic. What this implies is that in teaching intermediate level students, if a teacher’s concern is on global errors, which eventually impede communication, this order provides some insights for them on what should be taught first and next. Logic stands alone in contrast to other global errors indicating that it is the most difficult area of acquisition with its own unique characteristics.
참고문헌 (51)
- AbuSeileek, A., "Using peer computer-mediated corrective feedback to support EFL learners’ writing", Language Learning & Technology, 18(1), pp.76~95 (2014)
- John Bitchener, "Evidence in support of written corrective feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), pp.102~118 (2008), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- John Bitchener, "The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students", Language Teaching Research, 12(3), pp.409~431 (2008), SAGE Publications[DOI]
- John Bitchener, "The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback", System, 37(2), pp.322~329 (2009), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- Bitchener, J., "The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation", Applied Linguistics, 31(2), pp.193~214 (2010)[DOI]
- John Bitchener, "Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), pp.207~217 (2010), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- John Bitchener, "The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), pp.191~205 (2005), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- Bower, J., "Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in Japanese", English eTandem, 2011, pp.15, 41~71
- Bruton, A., "Designing research into the effect of error correction in L2 writing : Not so straightforward", Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(2), pp.136~140 (2009)
- Chang, C. F., "Peer review via three modes in an EFL writing course", Computers and Composition, 29, pp.63~78 (2012)
- 조영우, "Extensive Focus on Form Through Text-based Online Chat for Korean College Students", 영어교육, 64(4), pp.43~71 (2009), 한국영어교육학회[DOI]
- Clark, S., "Word for word" (2003), Oxford University Press
- Ellis, R., "Analyzing learner language" (2005), Oxford University Press
- 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)
- Norman W. Evans, "Contextualizing corrective feedback in second language writing pedagogy", Language Teaching Research, 14(4), pp.445~463 (2010), SAGE Publications[DOI]
- Norman W. Evans, "The efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback for university-matriculated ESL learners", System, 39(2), pp.229~239 (2011), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- Ferris, D., "Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA : Intersections and practical applications", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, pp.181~201 (2010)
- Frear, D., "The effect of written corrective feedback and revision on intermediate Chinese learners’ acquisition of English", doctoral, pp.2012
- Guardado, M., "ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback", Computers and Composition, 24, pp.443~461 (2007)
- Guenette, D., "Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback in writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), pp.40~53 (2007)
- Guo, O., "The effectiveness of written CF for L2 development: A mixed-method study of written CF types, error categories and proficiency levels", doctoral, pp.2015
- Hartshorn, J., "The effects of dynamic written corrective feedback: A 30-week study", Journal of Response to Writing, 1(2), pp.6~34 (2015)
- Heift, T., "Learner responses to corrective feedback for spelling errors in CALL", System, 36(2), pp.196~213 (2008)
- Kepner, C., "An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills", The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), pp.305~313 (1991)
- Kibby, M. W., "Statistics makes it easy", master’s, pp.1995
- Kyunghye Kim, "Effects of negative input on communicative grammar instruction in computer mediated communication in comparison to face-to-face communication", 멀티미디어 언어교육, 10(3), pp.51~81 (2007), 한국멀티미디어언어교육학회[DOI]
- Kurzer, K., "Dynamic written corrective feedback in developmental multilingual writing classes", TESOL Quarterly, 52(1), pp.1~29 (2018)
- Lee, S. Y., "The efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback on intermediatehigh ESL learners’ writing accuracy", master’s, pp.2009
- Liang, M. Y., "Using Synchronous online peer response groups in EFL writing : Revision-related discourse", Language Learning & Technology, 14(1), pp.45~64 (2010)
- Liu, J., "Online peer assessment : Effects of cognitive and affective feedback", Instr Sci, 40, pp.257~275 (2012)
- Liu, J., "The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing", Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, pp.193~227 (2003)
- Maxwell, J. A., "Qualitative research design: An interactive approach" (2013), Sage
- Monteiro, K., "An experimental study of corrective feedback during videoconferencing", Language Learning & Technology, 18(3), pp.56~79 (2014)
- Morris, F., "Child-to-child interaction and corrective feedback in a computer mediated L2 class", Language Learning & Technology, 9(1), pp.29~45 (2005)
- 박종원, "Revisiting error analysis in English composition.", 영어교육연구, 19(1), pp.57~83 (2007), 팬코리아영어교육학회[DOI]
- 박종원, "Effects of Blended Design on Students' Revision and Writing Development", 현대영어교육, 13(1), pp.1~17 (2012), 현대영어교육학회
- 박수정, "The Effects of Written Corrective Feedback on Korean EFL Learners’ Article Accuracy", 영어어문교육, 21(2), pp.65~82 (2015), 한국영어어문교육학회
- Pickett, J. P., "The American heritage dictionary of the English language" (2000), Houghton Mifflin
- Rummel, S., "Student and teacher beliefs about written of and the effect these beliefs have on uptake: A multiple case study of Laos and Kuwait", doctoral, pp.2014
- Sauro, S., "Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2grammar", Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), pp.96~120 (2009)
- Semke, H. D., "Effects of the red pen", Foreign Language Annals, 17(3), pp.195~202 (1984)
- 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)
- Younghee Sheen, "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), Elsevier BV[DOI]
- Sheppard, K., "Two feedback types: Do they make a difference?", RELC Journal, 23(1), pp.103~110 (1992)
- Natsuko Shintani, "Effects of Written Feedback and Revision on Learners’ Accuracy in Using Two English Grammatical Structures", Language Learning, 64(1), pp.103~131 (2014), Wiley[DOI]
- Stefanou, C., "L2 article use for generic and specific plural reference: The role of written CF, learner factors and awareness", doctoral, pp.2014
- Tafazoli, D. G. N., "Technology-enhanced language learning tools in Iranian EFL context : Frequencies, attitudes and challenges", Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, pp.114~118 (2014)
- Truscott, J., "Some thoughts on Anthony Bruton’s critique of the correction debate", System, 38(2), pp.329~335 (2010)
- Wolsey, T. D., "Efficacy of instructor feedback on written work in an online program", Wolsey, Thomas DeVere International Journal on ELearning, 7(2), pp.311~329 (2008)
- Xu, C., "Overgeneralization from a narrow focus: A response to Ellis et al. (2008) and Bitchener (2008)", Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, pp.270~275 (2009)
- Yeh, S. W., "Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback", Computers & Education, 52, pp.882~892 (2009)