본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

The Effectiveness of Learners’ Preferred and Unpreferred Written Corrective Feedback: A Think-Aloud Study

Moussa Ahmadian|Hooshang Yazdani|Ehsan Mehri
아시아테플 (AsiaTEFL (The Asian Association of Teachers of English As a Foreign Language))|2019.06|Journal of Asia TEFL|제16권 제2호|pp. 448-467

1

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

writingwritten corrective feedbackthink-aloud protocolspreferred feedbackunpreferred feedback

초록

In early written corrective feedback studies, there were a lot of attempts to test if the feedback types are effective. This study was based on the assumption prevailing in the new era of studies of written corrective feedback, that feedback is effective. Firstly, it aims to compare the think-aloud protocols of the preferred and unpreferred feedback types which were chosen by 20 English learners (10 in preferred, and 10 in unpreferred feedback). To this aim, learners were asked to write diaries for six weeks. In each session, concurrent think-aloud protocols were employed and learners' verbal reports were extracted, and their mental processes were coded through developing a table of mental operations. In the second part of the study, the relative effectiveness of the preferred and unpreferred feedback was measured. Using the Chi-square goodness-of-fit test, the findings of the first part showed a significant difference between the mental operations for each feedback type. The results for the second part suggested that there is a significant difference between the effectiveness of the preferred and unpreferred feedback types. This latter finding indicates that the preferred feedback can facilitate the development of the accuracy in L2 learners' writing more than the unpreferred feedback.

Abstract

In early written corrective feedback studies, there were a lot of attempts to test if the feedback types are effective. This study was based on the assumption prevailing in the new era of studies of written corrective feedback, that feedback is effective. Firstly, it aims to compare the think-aloud protocols of the preferred and unpreferred feedback types which were chosen by 20 English learners (10 in preferred, and 10 in unpreferred feedback). To this aim, learners were asked to write diaries for six weeks. In each session, concurrent think-aloud protocols were employed and learners' verbal reports were extracted, and their mental processes were coded through developing a table of mental operations. In the second part of the study, the relative effectiveness of the preferred and unpreferred feedback was measured. Using the Chi-square goodness-of-fit test, the findings of the first part showed a significant difference between the mental operations for each feedback type. The results for the second part suggested that there is a significant difference between the effectiveness of the preferred and unpreferred feedback types. This latter finding indicates that the preferred feedback can facilitate the development of the accuracy in L2 learners' writing more than the unpreferred feedback.

참고문헌 (58)

  1. Adams, R., "L2 output, reformulation and noticing : Implication for IL development", Language Teaching Research, 7(3), pp.347~376 (2003)
  2. Ahmadian, M., "A sociocultural perspective on corrective feedback in L2 : The effect of negotiated versus nonnegotiated feedback on the accuracy improvement in writing", Iranian EFL Journal, 11(4), pp.6~36 (2015)
  3. Ahmadian, M., "Patterns of interaction in young EFL learners’ pair work : The relationship between pair dynamics and vocabulary acquisition", 3L : The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 22(3), pp.98~114 (2017)
  4. Anderson, J., "The architecture of cognition" (1983), Harvard University Press
  5. 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)
  6. Bitchener, J., "Evidence in support of written corrective feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), pp.102~118 (2008)
  7. Bitchener, J., "Measuring the effectiveness of written corrective feedback : A response to"overgeneralization from a narrow focus : A response to Bitchener(2008)"", Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(4), pp.276~279 (2009)
  8. Bitchener, J., "The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students", Language Teaching Research, 12(3), pp.109~431 (2008)
  9. Bitchener, J., "The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development : A ten month investigation", Applied Linguistics, 31(2), pp.193~214 (2010)
  10. Bitchener, J., "Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), pp.207~217 (2010)
  11. Bowles, M. A., "The think-aloud controversy in second language research" (2010), Routledge
  12. Brooks, N., "Language and language learning" (1960), Harcourt
  13. 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)
  14. Dragga, S., "Praiseworthy grading: A teacher’s alternative to editing error", Paper presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication (1986)
  15. 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)
  16. Kok Eng Tan, "Improving Grammatical Accuracy in Thai Learners' Writing: Comparing Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback", Journal of Asia TEFL, 14(3), pp.430~442 (2017), 아시아테플[DOI]
  17. Ericsson, K. A., "Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data" (1993), MIT Press
  18. Ferris, D. R., "The case of grammar correction in L2 writing classes : A response to Truscott 1996", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), pp.1~11 (1999)
  19. Ferris, D. R., "Treatment of error in second language student writing" (2002), University of Michigan Press
  20. Ferris, D. R., "The"grammar correction"debate in L2 writing : Where we are, and where do we go from here?(and what do we do in the meantime…?)", Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), pp.49~62 (2004)
  21. Ferris, D. R., "Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA : Intersections and practical applications", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), pp.181~201 (2010)
  22. Ferris, D. R., "Perspective, problems, and practices in treating written error", Colloquium presented at International TESOL Convention (2000)
  23. Ferris, D. R., "Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice" (1998), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  24. Ferris, D. R., "Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2 writing classes", Paper presented at Proceedings of the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference (2000)
  25. Ferris, D. R., "Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers", Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), pp.307~329 (2013)
  26. Ferris, D. R., "Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?", Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), pp.101~184 (2001)
  27. Gass, S., "Theories of second language acquisition: An introduction", pp.175~200 (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  28. Goldstein, L., "Feedback in second language writing", pp.185~205 (2006), Cambridge University Press
  29. Havranek, G., "When is corrective feedback most likely to succeed", International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3-4), pp.225~270 (2002)
  30. Hyland, F., "Focusing on form : Student engagement with teacher feedback", System, 31(2), pp.217~230 (2003)
  31. James, C., "Contrastive analysis" (1980), Longman Group Ltd
  32. Krashen, S. D., "Second language acquisition and second language learning" (1981), Pergamon
  33. Krashen, S. D., "Principles and practices in second language acquisition" (1982), Pergamon
  34. Long, M. H., "Handbook of second language acquisition", pp.413~478 (1996), Academic Press
  35. Mackey, A., "Feedback, noticing and second language development: An empirical study of L2 classroom interaction", Paper presented at the British Association for Applied Linguistics (2000)
  36. Mackey, A., "Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning" (2012), Oxford University Press
  37. Nassaji, H., "Correcting students’ written grammatical errors : The effect of negotiated versus non-negotiated feedback", Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), pp.315~334 (2011)
  38. 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.36~51 (2000)
  39. Noroozizadeh, S., "Indirect feedback : A plausible suggestion for overcoming error occurence in L2 writing", The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(4), pp.245~262 (2009)
  40. Oxford, R. L., "Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know", pp.1990, New bury House
  41. Parr, J. M., "Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress", Assessing Writing, 15(2), pp.68~85 (2010)
  42. Parreno, A., "Written corrective feedback impact on grammatical accuracy in L2 writing : A quantitatve and qualitative look", Writing and Pedagogy WAP, 7(2), pp.279~303 (2015)
  43. Pienemann, M., "Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing", Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, pp.83~113 (1987)
  44. Pienemann, M., "Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses", Applied Linguistic, 10(1), pp.52~79 (1989)
  45. Rosa, E., "Explicitness, intake, and the issues of awareness", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), pp.511~556 (1999)
  46. Ryoo, M. L., "The effects of teacher feedback on EFL students’ writing in a Korean University class", The Journal of Asia TEFL, 1(1), pp.115~130 (2004)
  47. Schmidt, R., "Cognition and second language instruction", pp.3~32 (2001), Cambridge University Press
  48. 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)
  49. 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)
  50. Storch, N., "Learners’ processing uptake, and retention of corrective feedback in writing", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), pp.303~334 (2010)
  51. Swain, M., "Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson", pp.125~144 (1995), Oxford University Press
  52. Swain, M., "Talking it through : Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation", International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), pp.285~304 (2002)
  53. Tocalli-Beller, A., "Reformulation : The cognitive conflict and L2 learning it generates", International Journal and Applied Linguistics, 15(1), pp.5~28 (2005)
  54. Truscott, J., "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing class", Language Learning, 46(2), pp.327~369 (1996)
  55. Truscott, J., "The case for"the case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes" : A response to Ferris", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), pp.111~122 (1999)
  56. 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.179~296 (2008)
  57. Van Beuningen, C. G., "Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing", Language Learning, 62(1), pp.1~41 (2012)
  58. Wigglesworth, G., "What role for collaborative in writing and writing feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), pp.364~374 (2012)

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (26건)

L2 Learners’ and Professionals’ Perceptions of Cognitive Task Complexity: Towards Developing an Index of Task DifficultyAnas Awwadpp. 468-484The Relative Efficacy of Recasts and Prompts on Past Tense Use of ESL LearnersSiti Zaidah Zainuddin, Stefanie Pillai, Choo Siow Chinpp. 485-498Differential Effects of FonF and FonFS on Learning English Lax Vowels in an EFL ContextAhmad Moinzadeh, Hossein Barati, Farhad Tabandehpp. 499-515Syntactic Complexity of Recurrent Multiword Sequences in the Writings of Published Authors and L1 and L2 English Apprentice Writers윤준수, 김동환, 신유경, Yoo Isaiah Wonho, 최희성, 고서정, 유혜민, 유현중pp. 516-530Online Collaborative Writing Technique Using Wiki: How Effective is It to Enhance Learners’ Essay Writing?Lidwina Sri Ardiasih, Yumna Rasyid, Emzirpp. 531-546
원문 보기