Improving Grammatical Accuracy in Thai Learners' Writing: Comparing Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Written corrective feedback (WCF) is widely used to point students to the grammatical errors in their written work and help reduce them. This paper reports a quasi-experimental study that compared the effectiveness of direct and indirect teacher WCF in a Thai context. One hundred and twenty Thai students at two public universities in southern Thailand were assigned to write argumentative essays within a treatment period; each treatment had 60 students. The feedback was given by four ESL/EFL lecturers at the two universities. Grammatical aspects focused on were tenses, subject-verb agreement, articles, singular/plural nouns, prepositions and adjectives/adverbs. Means for the number of errors were obtained at three points, namely, pretest, immediate posttest and delayed posttest. The findings revealed that time and WCF type as main effects showed differentiated results on all six grammatical aspects. Interaction effects between time and WCF were found for tenses and subject-verb agreement. For between-subjects effects, indirect WCF was more effective than direct WCF. For within-subjects effects, generally the differences in the mean values were significant between pretest and delayed posttest, but not between pretest and immediate posttest. These findings have implications for writing instruction and research in an ESL/EFL tertiary context.
Abstract
Written corrective feedback (WCF) is widely used to point students to the grammatical errors in their written work and help reduce them. This paper reports a quasi-experimental study that compared the effectiveness of direct and indirect teacher WCF in a Thai context. One hundred and twenty Thai students at two public universities in southern Thailand were assigned to write argumentative essays within a treatment period; each treatment had 60 students. The feedback was given by four ESL/EFL lecturers at the two universities. Grammatical aspects focused on were tenses, subject-verb agreement, articles, singular/plural nouns, prepositions and adjectives/adverbs. Means for the number of errors were obtained at three points, namely, pretest, immediate posttest and delayed posttest. The findings revealed that time and WCF type as main effects showed differentiated results on all six grammatical aspects. Interaction effects between time and WCF were found for tenses and subject-verb agreement. For between-subjects effects, indirect WCF was more effective than direct WCF. For within-subjects effects, generally the differences in the mean values were significant between pretest and delayed posttest, but not between pretest and immediate posttest. These findings have implications for writing instruction and research in an ESL/EFL tertiary context.
참고문헌 (48)
- Batstone, R., "Principled grammar teaching", System, 37, pp.194~204 (2009)
- Bennui, P., "A study of L1 interference in the writing of Thai EFL students", Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 4, pp.72~102 (2008)
- Bitchener, J., "Evidence in support of written corrective feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, pp.102~118 (2008)
- Bitchener, J., "The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students", Language Teaching Research Journal, 12(3), pp.409~431 (2008)
- Bitchener, J., "The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback", System, 37, pp.322~329 (2009)
- Bitchener, J., "The value of a focused approach to written corrective feedback", Language Teaching Research, 12, pp.409~431 (2009)
- Bitchener, J., "Written corrective feedback studies: Approximate replication of Bitchener & Knoch (2010a) and van Beuningen, De Jong & Kuiken (2012)", Language Teaching, 48(3), pp.405~414 (2015)
- Bitchener, J., "The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), pp.227~258 (2005)
- Brown, H. D., "Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy" (2007), Pearson Education
- 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)
- Cole, P. G., "Teaching principles and practice" (1987), Prentice Hall
- Ellis, R., "Principles of instructed language learning", System, 33(2), pp.209~224 (2005)
- Ellis, R., "The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context", System, 36, pp.353~371 (2008)
- Erel, S., "Error treatment in L2 writing : A comparative study of direct and indirect coded feedback in Turkish EFL context", Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, 23, pp.397~415 (2007)
- Ferris, D. R., "Teaching ESL composition students to become independent self-editors", TESOL Journal, 4, pp.18~22 (1995)
- Ferris, D., "The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes : A response to Truscott", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, pp.1~11 (1999)
- Ferris, D. R., "Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2writing classes", Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference (2000)
- 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)
- Han, Y., "The intra- and inter-task effectiveness of direct and indirect written corrective feedback", The Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(2), pp.71~96 (2012)
- Ji, Xiaoling., "Error correction in college EFL writing instruction : Students’ expectations and correction effects", The Journal of Asia TEFL, 12(1), pp.117~140 (2015)
- Kubota, M., "Error correction strategies used by learners of Japanese when revising a writing task", System, 29, pp.467~480 (2001)
- Khanlarzadeh, M., "The effect of written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy of EFL students : An improvement over previous unfocused designs", Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 4(2), pp.55~68 (2016)
- Lalande, J. F., "Reducing composition errors : An experiment", The Modern Language Journal, 66(2), pp.140~149 (1982)
- Lee, I., "Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms : The case of Hong Kong", Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), pp.285~312 (2004)
- Lightbown, P. M., "How languages are learned" (2006), Oxford University Press
- Liu, Y., "The effects of error feedback in second language writing", Arizona Working Papers in SLA &Teaching, 15, pp.65~79 (2008)
- Liu, Q., "Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing", Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, pp.66~81 (2015)
- Lu, Y., "The value of direct and indirect written corrective feedback for intermediate ESL students", Master, pp.2010
- Maleki, A., "The effects of written corrective feedback techniques on EFL students'control over grammatical construction of their written English", Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(7), pp.1250~1257 (2013)
- Moser, M., "Using peer feedback with high school students to improve the use of analogies and symbolism within creative writing", doctor, pp.2010
- Nonkukhetkhong, K., "Grammatical error analysis of the first year English major students, Udon Thani Rajabhat University", The Asian Conference on Language Learning Official Conference Proceedings 2013, pp.117~126 (2013)
- Parreño, A., "Written corrective feedback impact on grammatical accuracy in L2 writing: A quantitative and qualitative look", Writing & Pedagogy, 7(2, pp.3) (2015), 279~303
- Phuket, P. R. A., "Understanding EFL students' errors in writing", Journal of Education and Practice, 6(32), pp.99~106 (2015)
- Richards, J. C., "A non-contrastive approach to error analysis", ELT Journal, 25(3), pp.204~219 (1971)
- Sampson, A., "Coded and uncoded error feedback: Effects on error frequencies in adult Colombian EFL learners' writing", System, 40, pp.494~504 (2012)
- Sattayatham, A., "Analysis of errors in paragraph writing in English by first year medical students from the four medical schools at Mahidol University", Silpakorn University International Journal, 8, pp.17~38 (2008)
- 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)
- 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)
- Storch, N., "Learners’ processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), pp.303~334 (2010)
- Suwangard, N., "Grammatical error correction and retention in EFL students : A case study of EFL students in Thailand", IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 19(12), pp.51~58 (2014)
- Thep-Ackrapong, T., "Teaching English in Thailand: An uphill battle. Manutsart Paritat: Journal of Humanities", Srinakarinwirote University, 27(1), pp.51~62 (2005)
- Truscott, J., "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes", Language Learning, 46, pp.327~369 (1996)
- Truscott, J., "Error correction, revision and learning", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), pp.293~305 (2008)
- van Beuningen, C., "Corrective feedback in L2 writing : Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions", International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), pp.1~27 (2010)
- van Beuningen, C. G., "The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy", ITL-Review of Applied Linguistics, 156, pp.279~296 (2008)
- van Beuningen, C. G., "Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing", Language Learning, 62(1), pp.1~41 (2012)
- Wang, T., "Studies on written corrective feedback : Theoretical perspectives, empirical evidence, and future directions", English Language Teaching, 8(1), pp.110~120 (2015)
- Watcharapunyawong, S., "Thai EFL students' writing errors in different text types : The interference of the first language", English Language Teaching, 6(1), pp.67~78 (2013)