(3.238.186.43) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/02 10:39
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:盧慧玲
研究生(外文):Hui-Ling Lu
論文名稱:回饋對大學生英語口說表現、自我效能及焦慮之影響
論文名稱(外文):The Impacts of Corrective Feedback on EFL College Students’ English Speaking Performance, Self-Efficacy, and Anxiety
指導教授:陳淑珠陳淑珠引用關係
指導教授(外文):Shu-Chu Chen
口試委員:魏式琦王清煌
口試委員(外文):Shyh-Chyi WeyChing-Huang Wang
口試日期:2020-07-03
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立雲林科技大學
系所名稱:應用外語系
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2020
畢業學年度:108
語文別:英文
論文頁數:104
中文關鍵詞:重述口說表現口說自我效能口說焦慮
外文關鍵詞:recastsspeaking performancespeaking self-efficacyspeaking anxiety
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:47
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
重述是外語教師常用以矯正學生錯誤發音之教學策略。然而,過往研究多著重於探討重述對學習者第二外語之吸收與自我修正,少有研究探討重述對學生的整體英語口說表現、口說自我效能、口說焦慮影響及學生對矯正性回饋之偏好。有鑑於此,本研究旨在探究重述對學生整體英語口說表現、口說自我效能、口說焦慮之影響及學生對矯正性回饋之偏好。
本研究採用Lee (2017) 之矯正性回饋迴圈模式進行十四週之教學,參與對象為四十名英語程度初級,修習職場英文之大三學生。本研究蒐集之資料包含: 一、學生之博思英語測驗分數。二、口說自我效能及焦慮之問卷前、後測。三、四份課堂口說作業之前、後測分數。四、學生對矯正性回饋之偏好問卷。參與者須實踐博思英語能力測驗、四份職場英語口說作業、口說自我效能、口說焦慮之前、後測及對矯正性回饋之偏好問卷。於十四週學習期間,助教以錄音形式給予學生重述性回饋。研究分析採用SPSS軟體,並以描述性統計資料及成對樣本檢定來評估重述對學生口說表現、自我效能及焦慮之影響。
研究結果顯示,雖然重述對學生整體英語口說表現及口說自我效能有明顯助益,但學生口說焦慮程度有明顯增加。在矯正性回饋之偏好方面,初級英語程度學生普遍喜好立即及隱性回饋。文末亦提供相關教學啟示及對未來研究之建議。
Recast is a common teaching strategy that foreign language teachers employ to correct students’ erroneous utterances. While most previous studies centered on whether recasts contributed to learners’ responses (i.e. uptake and repair) in second language (L2), very little attention has been paid to its impacts on learners’ overall speaking performance, speaking self-efficacy, anxiety, and students’ preferences for corrective feedback (CF). Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the impacts of recasts on EFL college students’ speaking performance, speaking self-efficacy, speaking anxiety, and preferences for CF.
Based on Lee’s (2017) Corrective Feedback Loop (CFL) model, forty non-English major college juniors at the beginning level recruited from a Workplace English course participated in the current study. Data collected included (1) students’ BULATS scores, (2) pretest and posttest of speaking self-efficacy and anxiety, (3) students’ pretest and posttest scores of four speaking tasks, and (4) a questionnaire of students’ preferences for corrective feedback. Throughout 14 weeks, students were required to complete four speaking tasks related to workplace as assignments and filled in the pretest and posttest questionnaires of speaking self-efficacy, speaking anxiety, and preferences for CF. Recasts were provided by teaching assistants via voice-recordings after each task. Paired sample t-tests and descriptive statistics were conducted to evaluate the impacts of recasts on students’ speaking self-efficacy, anxiety, and preferences for CF.
The findings revealed that after the provision of recasts, students’ overall speaking performance and speaking self-efficacy had significantly progressed. However, students’ speaking anxiety level also raised after receiving recasts. With regard to students’ preferences for CF, students at the beginning level preferred immediate and implicit CF. Pedagogical implications and suggestions for future research are also provided.
摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF TABLES ix
LIST OF FIGURES xi
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background 1
1.2 Statement of Problems 5
1.3 Purpose of Study and Research Questions 6
1.4 Significance of the Study 7
1.5 Definition of Terms 8
1.6 Organization of This Study 9
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 11
2.1 Oral Corrective Feedback 11
2.1.1 Definitions of Oral Corrective Feedback 11
2.1.2 Historical Perspectives on Oral Corrective Feedback 12
2.1.3 Theoretical Perspectives on Oral Corrective Feedback 12
2.1.4 Controversies Over Oral Corrective Feedback 14
2.1.5 The Pedagogical Perspective of Oral Corrective Feedback 14
2.1.6 Taxonomies of Oral Corrective Feedback 15
2.1.7 Studies Related to Oral Corrective Feedback 18
2.2 Recasts 22
2.2.1 Definitions of Recasts 22
2.2.2 Characteristics of Recasts 23
2.2.3 Theoretical Perspectives on Recasts 24
2.3 Efficacy of Recasts on Learners’ Affective Factors in SLA 26
2.3.1 Self-Efficacy 27
2.3.2 Studies Related to Recasts and Speaking Self-Efficacy 30
2.3.3 Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety 31
2.3.4 Studies Related to Recasts and Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety 32
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 35
3.1 Participants 35
3.2 Course Design 36
3.3 Instruction 37
3.4 Instruments 39
3.4.1 BULATS Online Speaking Test 39
3.4.2 Speaking Rubric 40
3.4.3 Questionnaire of English Self-Efficacy (QESE) 42
3.4.4 Anxiety Questionnaire 44
3.4.5 Students’ Preferences for Corrective Feedback (CF) 46
3.4.6 Four Speaking Tasks Related to Workplace 47
3.5 Scoring Procedure 49
3.6 Data Collection Procedure 49
3.7 Data Analysis 51
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS 53
4.1 Results for Research Question 1 53
4.2 Results for Research Question 2 55
4.3 Results for Research Question 3 57
4.4 Results for Research Question 4 59
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 62
5.1 Discussion of the Results 62
5.2 Pedagogical Implications 65
5.3 Limitations of the Study 65
5.4 Suggestions for Future Research 66
REFERENCES 67
APPENDICES 77
Appendix A The Example Test Format of BULATS Speaking Test 77
Appendix B BULATS Online Speaking Assessment Criteria: Parts 1, 3, 4 & 5 79
Appendix C The Rubric of BULATS Listening and Reading Tests 82
Appendix D The Modified Speaking Rubric for the Current Study 83
Appendix E Questionnaire of English Self-Efficacy (QESE) 86
Appendix F Anxiety Questionnaire 88
Appendix G Students’ Preferences for Corrective Feedback Questionnaire 90


Al Hosni, S. (2014). Speaking difficulties encountered by young EFL learners. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature (IJSELL), 2(6), 22-30.
Alpert, R., & Haber, R. N. (1960). Anxiety in academic achievement situations. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61(2), 207-215.
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all?: Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 543-574.
Asakereh, A., & Dehghannezhad, M. (2015). Student satisfaction with EFL speaking classes: Relating speaking self-efficacy and skills achievement. Issues in Educational Research, 25(4), 345-363.
Baker, N. D., & Nelson, K. E. (1984). Recasting and related conversational techniques for triggering syntactic advances by young children. First Language, 5(13), 3-22.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American psychologist, 37(2), 122-147.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Bandura, A., Freeman, W., & Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Journal of Cognitive psychotherapy, 13(2), 158-166
Borrás, I., & Lafayette, R. C. (1994). Effects of multimedia courseware subtitling on the speaking performance of college students of French. The Modern Language Journal, 78(1), 61-75.
Braidi, S. M. (2002). Reexamining the role of recasts in native‐speaker/nonnative‐speaker interactions. Language Learning, 52(1), 1-42.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Pearson Longman.
BULATS – Language skills for success in business and industry | Cambridge English. Retrieved from https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/exams-and-tests/bulats/
DeKeyser, R. M. (1993). The effect of error correction on L2 grammar knowledge and oral proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 77(4), 501-514.
Egi, T. (2010). Uptake, modified output, and learner perceptions of recasts: Learner responses as language awareness. The Modern Language Journal, 94(1), 1-21.
Ellis, N. C. (1995). Consciousness in second language acquisition: A review of field studies and laboratory experiments. Language Awareness, 4(3), 123-146.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3-18.
Ellis, R. (2010). A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335-349.
Ellis, R. (2013). Corrective feedback in teacher guides and SLA. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 1-18.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in second language acquisition, 28(2), 339-368.
Ellis, R., & Mifka-Profozic, N. (2013). Recasts, uptake, and noticing. In Noticing and second language acquisition: Studies in honor of Richard Schmidt, (pp. 61-79). National Foreign Language Resource Center University of Hawaii.
Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Reexamining the role of recasts in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 575-600.
Erdoğan, V. (2005). Contribution of error analysis to foreign language teaching. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 1(2), 261-270.
Erlam, R., & Loewen, S. (2010). Implicit and explicit recasts in L2 oral French interaction. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(6), 877-905.
Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11.
Fu, T., & Nassaji, H. (2016). Corrective feedback, learner uptake, and feedback perception in a Chinese as a Foreign Language Classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 159-181.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: the role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Gass, S. M. (2003). Input and interaction. The handbook of second language acquisition, (pp. 224-256).
Han, J., & Jung, J. K. (2007). Patterns and preferences of corrective feedback and learner repair. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 243-260.
Han, Z. H., & Kim, J. H. (2008). Corrective recasts: What teachers might want to know. Language Learning Journal, 36(1), 35-44.
Hsieh, P. H. P., & Schallert, D. L. (2008). Implications from self-efficacy and attribution theories for an understanding of undergraduates’ motivation in a foreign language course. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 513-532.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125-132.
Idrus, H., & Salleh, R. (2017). Perceived self-efficacy of Malaysian ESL engineering and technology students on their speaking ability and its pedagogical implications. The English Teacher, 37(15), 61-75.
Krashen, S. (1977). Some issues relating to the monitor model. In Brown, H; Yorio, Carlos; Crymes, Ruth (eds.). Teaching and learning English as a Second Language: Trends in Research and Practice: On TESOL '77. Washington: TESOL, 144-158.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. (1998). Comprehensible output? System, 26(2), 175-182.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.
Kim, J. H. (2004). Issues of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition. Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL, 4(2), 1-24.
Lee, E. J. (2013). The relationships between corrective feedback, affect, and oral English improvement (Doctoral dissertation). Available from The Ohio State University
Lee, E. J. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41(2), 217-230.
Lee, E. J. E. (2016). Reducing international graduate students’ language anxiety through oral pronunciation corrections. System, 56, 78-95.
Lee, E. J. E. (2017). An integrated loop model of corrective feedback and oral English learning: A case of international students in the United States. Journal of International Students, 7(3), 581-600.
Leong, L. M., & Ahmadi, S. M. (2017). An analysis of factors influencing learners’ English speaking skill. International Journal of Research in English Education, 2(1), 34-41.
Li, S. (2009). The differential effects of implicit and explicit feedback on second language (L2) learners at different proficiency levels. Applied Language Learning, 19(1), 53-79.
Li, S., & Vuono, A. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 84, 93-109.
Llinares, A., & Lyster, R. (2014). The influence of context on patterns of corrective feedback and learner uptake: A comparison of CLIL and immersion classrooms. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 181-194.
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 536-556.
Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation in the second language classroom. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in English as a Second Language, 2(1), 94-120.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
Lyster, R. (2001). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 51, 265-301.
Lyster, R., & Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59(2), 453-498.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44(2), 283-305.
Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338-356.
Mahyuddin, R., Elias, H., Cheong, L. S., Muhamad, M. F., Noordin, N., & Abdullah, M. C. (2006). The relationship between students' self-efficacy and their English language achievement. Malaysian Journal of Educators and Education, 21, 61-71.
Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2006). A reevaluation of the role of anxiety: Self‐efficacy, anxiety, and their relation to reading and listening proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 39(2), 276-295.
Naderi, S. (2014). The Effect of explicit and recast feedback on the intermediate EFL learners' listening self-efficacy. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 2(1), 30-43.
Nassaji, H. (2017). The effectiveness of extensive versus intensive recasts for learning L2 grammar. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 353-368.
Nation, I. S., & Newton, J. (2008). Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking. New York and London: Routledge.
Nelson, K. E., Carskaddon, G., & Bonvillian, J. D. (1973). Syntax acquisition: Impact of experimental variation in adult verbal interaction with the child. Child development, 497-504.
Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51(4), 719-758.
Oliver, R. (1995). Negative feedback in child NS-NNS conversation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(4), 459-481.
Oxford, R. L. (1998). Anxiety and the Language Learner: New Insights, In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in Language Learning (pp.58-67). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33.
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595.
Rassaei, E. (2015). Oral corrective feedback, foreign language anxiety and L2 development. System, 49, 98-109.
Révész, A., Sachs, R., Mackey, A., & Robinson, P. (2011). Task complexity, uptake of recasts, and L2 development. Second Language Task Complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of Language Learning and Performance, 2, 203-235.
Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar. Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching, 13, 133-164.
Saxton, M. (1997). The contrast theory of negative input. Journal of Child Language, 24(1), 139-161.
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning1. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
Schmidt, R. (1994). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: Of artificial grammars and SLA. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 165-209). London: Academic Press.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self‐efficacy and classroom learning. Psychology in the Schools, 22(2), 208-223.
Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57(2), 149-174.
Shamiri, H., & Farvardin, M. T. (2016). The effect of implicit versus explicit corrective feedback on intermediate EFL learners' speaking self-efficacy beliefs. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(5), 1066-1075.
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263-300.
Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361-392.
Sheen, Y. (2008). Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58(4), 835-874.
Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York: Springer.
Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, 2, 593-610.
Suzuki, M. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in adult ESL classrooms. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 1-21.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. Canadian Modern Language Review, 50(1), 158-164.
Swain, M., 1995. Three functions of output in second language learning. In: Cook, G., B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.
Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111-122.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Vigil, N. A., & Oller, J. W. (1976). Rule fossilization: A tentative model 1. Language Learning, 26(2), 281-295.
Von Worde, R. (2003). Students' Perspectives on Foreign Language Anxiety. Inquiry, 8(1), 1-15.
Wang, C. (2004). Self-regulated learning strategies and self-efficacy beliefs of children learning English as a second language (Doctoral dissertation). Available from The Ohio State University.
Wang, C., Wang. L., & Li, Y. (2007). Chinese secondary school self-regulated learners of English. In: Paper presented at TESOL (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) Convention, Seattle, WA.
Woodrow, L. (2006). Anxiety and speaking English as a second language. RELC journal, 37(3), 308-328.
Woodrow, L. (2011). College English writing affect: Self-efficacy and anxiety. System, 39(4), 510-522.
Young, D. J. (1990). An investigation of students' perspectives on anxiety and speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), 539-553.
Yilmaz, Y. (2013). The relative effectiveness of mixed, explicit and implicit feedback in the acquisition of English articles. System, 41(3), 691-705.
Zhang, Y. (2009). Reading to speak: Integrating oral communication skills. English Teaching Forum, 47(1) 32-34.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82-91.
電子全文 電子全文(網際網路公開日期:20250708)
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔