跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.235.185.78) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/27 17:35
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

: 
twitterline
研究生:唐家傑
研究生(外文):Tang, Chiachieh Jojo
論文名稱:不同矯正性回歸的種類和來源是否對英語為外國語言學生的寫作表現有影響
論文名稱(外文):Effects of Types and Sources of Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Writing Performance
指導教授:劉宇挺劉宇挺引用關係
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:英語學系
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文出版年:2020
畢業學年度:109
語文別:英文
論文頁數:102
中文關鍵詞:矯正性回饋寫作表現間接提示矯正性回饋
外文關鍵詞:written corrective feedbackwriting performanceindirect coded corrective feedback
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:24
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:4
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
學習新語言不可或缺的部分是從錯誤中學習。因此,如今已發現寫作矯正性回饋(WCF)在改善寫作方面相當重要。然而,過去的研究卻指出,寫作矯正性回饋對寫作表現的影響,端視諸多因素而定,包括寫作矯正性回饋來源與類型。所以,本研究檢視兩種不同來源的寫作矯正性回饋 - 來自教師或同儕的間接矯正性回饋(CF)與間接提示矯正性回饋(ICCF),對英語學習者造成何種影響。全體參與者(N-94)進行初級寫作作業,由兩位評量者負責評分。參與者依得分而分成四組,分別為:同儕ICCF、教師ICCF、同儕間接CF與教師間接CF。參與者分別接收到寫作矯正性回饋類型與來源後,在為期21週的時間內,完成四項不同的寫作與修改作業。結果顯示,這四組的寫作表現都有顯著改善,而且接收ICCF的參與者改善程度,不同於接收間接CF的參與者。在從同儕與教師接收寫作矯正性回饋的參與者之間,同樣有觀察到這些差異。因此,這項研究的結果對英語教學實務深具意義。具體而言,研究結果突顯出同儕與教師給予的間接CF和ICCF,在影響英語學習者寫作方面的教學意義。
An indispensable part of learning new languages is learning from errors; therefore, written corrective feedback (WCF) has been found to be important in improving writing. However, previous studies have shown that the impact of WCF on writing performance depends on a myriad of factors, including the source and the type of WCF. Therefore, the present study investigated the effect of two types of WCF on EFL learners, indirect corrective feedback (CF) and indirect coded corrective feedback (ICCF) coming from two different sources, either a teacher or peers. All participants (N-94) worked on an initial writing task, which was scored by two raters. Based on the scores, the participants were divided into four groups, ICCF from peers, ICCF from teacher, indirect CF from peers, and indirect CF from teacher. After receiving the respective type and source of WCF, the participants worked on four different writing and revision tasks within a 21-week period. Results showed a significant improvement in writing performance among all four groups. Additionally, results showed that participants who received ICCF improved differently from their counterparts who received indirect corrective feedback. These differences were also observed between those receiving WCF from their peers and teachers. Hence, the results of this study have implications for English instructional practices. Specifically, pedagogical implications for how indirect CF and ICCF from peers and teachers can impact ELF learners’ writing are highlighted.
Acknowledgements i
Chinese Abstract ii
English Abstract iii
Table of Contents iv
List of Tables v
List of Figures vi

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

Chapter 2: Literature Review 9
Written Corrective Feedback 11
Direct Corrective Feedback from Teachers 14
Indirect Corrective Feedback from Teachers 16
Indirect Coded Corrective Feedback from Teachers 18
Indirect Corrective Feedback v.s. Indirect Coded Corrective Feedback from Teachers 21
Gaps in Teacher Corrective Feedback Research 24
Peer Feedback 26
Gaps in Peer Feedback Research 31
Research Questions 34

Chapter 3: Methodology 35
Participants 35
Instruments and Design 36
Procedure 42

Chapter 4: Results 44
Overview 44
Research Question 1 44
Research Question 2 47
Research Question 3 47
Research Question 4 51
Qualitative Data 53

Chapter 5: Discussion 62
Research Question 1 62
Research Question 2 65
Research Question 3 67
Research Question 4 71
Implications 75
Limitations and Directions for Future Research 79
Conclusion 85

References 87

Appendices 96
Appendix A: Rubrics Used for the Scoring of all Writing Tasks 96
Appendix B: List of ICCF Codes Grouped into Error Types 97
Appendix C: Writing Tasks Used in the Present Study 99
Appendix D: Sample Questionnaire Used in the Present Study 100
Appendix E: Sample Lesson Plan 101
Ahmadi-Azad, S. (2014). The effect of coded and uncoded written corrective feedback types on Iranian EFL learners’ writing accuracy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(5), 1001-1008.

Aliakbari, M., & Toni, A. (2014). On the effects of error correction strategies on the
grammatical accuracy of Iranian English learners. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 99-112.

Amrhein, H., & Nassadi, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers think is right and why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 95-126.

Berg, E. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215-241.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten-month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2),
193-214.

Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191-205.

Brown, A. L. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 4-12.

Chandler, J. (2003). 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), 267-296.

Cho, K., Schunn, C., & Lesgold, A. (Eds.) (2002). Comprehension monitoring and repairing in distance collaboration. In: 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, New Jersey.

College Entrance Examination Center. (2019, January 20). 108 課網命題精進.
https://www.ceec.edu.tw/xmdoc?xsmsid=0J177009711460336585

Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(3), 257-276.

Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371.

Ellis, R. (2010). EPILOGUE: A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335-349.

Erel, S., & Bulut, D. (2007). Error treatment in writing: A comparative study of direct and indirect coded corrective feedback in the Turkish context. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say, 2007(1), 397-415.

Falchikov, N. (2005). Learning together. London: Routledge Falmer.

Ferris, D. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL
Quarterly, 31(2), 315-339.

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.

Ferris, D. (2004). The “Grammar 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(1), 49-62.

Ferris, D. (2010a). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181-201.

Ferris, D. (2010b). In: K. Hyland and F. Hyland, ed., Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues, 1st ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 81-104.

Ferris, D. (2019). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In: K. Hyland and F. Hyland, ed., Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 81-104.

Ferris, D., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307-329.

Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161-184.

Frear, D., & Chiu, Y. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ accuracy in new pieces of writing. System, 53, 24-34.

Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2017). Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.

Gökçe, K., & Derin, A. (2007). The effects of peer feedback on the writing anxiety of prospective Turkish teachers of EFL. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 3(1), 12-23.

Guénette, D., & Lyster, R. (2013). Written corrective feedback and its challenges for pre-service ESL teachers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 69(2), 129-153.

Guilford, W. (2001). Teaching peer review and the process of scientific writing. Advances in Physiology Education, 25(3), 167-175.

Hartono, D. (Eds.) (2014). The debate on written corrective feedback: Implications for academic instruction in EFL settings. In: The 61st TEFLIN International Conference. Jakarta.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching (39)2, 83-101.

Ishida, M. (2004). Effects of recasts on the acquisition of the aspectual form -te i-(ru) by learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Language Learning, 54, 311–394.

Jahin, J. (2012). The effect of peer reviewing on writing apprehension and essay writing ability of prospective EFL teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(11).

Jeffery, J. (2007, September 21). Cognition and Brain Development in Students of Traditional College-Going Age. Medium.
https://www.colorado.edu/ftep/.../jeffrey_-_cognition_and_brain_development.pdf

Jodaie, M., Farrokhi, F., & Zoghi, M. (2011). A comparative study of EFL teachers’ and intermediate high school students’ perceptions of written corrective feedback on grammatical errors. English Language Teaching, 4(4), 36-48.

Kamimura, T. (2006). Effects of peer feedback on EFL student writers at different levels of English proficiency: A Japanese context. TESL Canada Journal, 23(2), 12-39.

Kang, E., & Han, Z. (2015). The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1-18.

Kepner, C. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 305-313.

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Lalande, J. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal, 66(2), 140-149.

Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285-312.

Leeser, M. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55-81.

Liu, N., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290.

Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In: K. de Bot, D. Coste, R. Ginsberg and C. Kramsch, ed., Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 39- 52.

Long, M. (2009). Methodological principles for language teaching. The handbook of language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell.

Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30-43.

Maleki, A., & Eslami, E. (2013). 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), 1250-1257.

Mendonca C., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), 745-769.

Mujtaba, S.; Parkash, R., & Nawaz, M. (2020). Do indirect coded corrective feedback and teacher short affective comments improve writing performance and learner uptake? Reading & Writing Quarterly, 36(1), 34-47.

Nicol, D., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.

Pelaez, N. (2002). Problem-based writing with peer review improves academic performance. Advances in Physiology Education, 26(3), 174-184.

Park, E., Song, S., & Shin, Y. (2015). To what extent do learners benefit from indirect written corrective feedback? A study targeting learners of different proficiency and heritage language status. Language Teaching Research, 20(6), 678-699.

Paulus, T. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265-289.

Polio, C. (2012). The relevance of second language acquisition theory to the written error correction debate. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 375-389.

Rahmawati, S. (2018). Direct and indirect corrective feedback on EFL students writing skill: A case study in a junior high school in Bandung. Journal of English and Education, 5(1), 64-71.

Rieber, L. (2006). Using peer review to improve student writing in business courses. Journal of Education for Business, 81(6), 322-326.

Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 83-95.

Rollinson, P. (1998). Peer response and revision in an ESL writing group: A case study. [Unpublished PhD thesis]. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23-30.

Salteh, M., & Sadeghi, K. (2012). Teachers’ corrective feedback in L2 writing revisited: Concerns against and suggestions for its employment. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(3), 375-383.

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255-283.

Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29-46.

Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners’ processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2),
303-334.

Suh, B. (2010). Written feedback in second language acquisition: Exploring the roles of type of feedback, linguistic targets, awareness, and concurrent verbalization. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Georgetown University, Washington, DC.

Tai, H., Lin, W., & Yang, S. (2015). Exploring the effects of peer review and teachers' corrective feedback on EFL students' online writing performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(2), 284-309.

Tang, C., & Liu, Y. T. (2018). Effects of indirect coded corrective feedback with short affective teacher comments on L2 writing performance, learner uptake and motivation. Assessing Writing, 35, 26-40.

Tang, C., & Wang, C. (2016). The washback effect of English-speaking tests as an instructional component in the classroom. Studies in English Language and Literature, 37, 111-139.

Tian, W. (2019 January 20). 【106年學測】各科分數統計 數學科滿分人數最少 數學科85人零分 較105年大增7成. Superking.Tw. https://www.superking.tw/TopNews/NewsContent.aspx?type=5&no=11074 [Accessed 20 Jan. 2019].

Tomlin, R., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language
acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183-203.

Topping, K. (2017). Peer assessment: Learning by judging and discussing the work of other learners. Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, (1)1. 1-17.

Tootkaboni, A., & Khatib, M. (2014). The efficacy of various kinds of error
feedback for improvement in the writing accuracy of Iranian EFL learners. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 7(3), 30.

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255-272.

Tsao, J., Tseng, W., & Wang, C. (2017). The effects of writing anxiety and motivation on EFL college students’ self-evaluative judgments of corrective feedback. Psychological Reports, 120(2), 219-241.

Tsui, A., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170.

Tzu, Y. (2016). A corpus-based analysis of discourse markers in curriculum-based English textbooks and the English entrance exam in Taiwan. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 13(4), 262-279.

Van Beuningen, C. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1-27.

Van Beuningen, C., de Jong, N., & Kuiken, F. (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 279-296.

Wacha, R., & Liu, Y. (2017). Testing the efficacy of two new variants of recasts
with standard recasts in communicative conversational settings: An exploratory
longitudinal study. Language Teaching Research, 21(2), 189-216.

Wu, M. (2012). Comparing PETS and GEPT in China and Taiwan. English Language
Teaching, 5(6), 48-53.

Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179- 200.

Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(1), 79-101.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關論文
 
無相關期刊
 
無相關點閱論文