Reinforced Teacher Corrective Feedback and Learners’ Use of Subordination Clauses

سال انتشار: 1401
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 231

فایل این مقاله در 22 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_AREUIT-11-3_005

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 21 مرداد 1401

چکیده مقاله:

With numerous variables mediating the way learners interact with teacher corrective feedback (TCF), one may not comment on its efficacy before such intervening variables are adequately addressed and learners’ attendance to TCF is ensured. Among those variables, motivation is one of the most prominent ones largely affecting the degree to which students benefit from TCF. Draft-Specific Scoring (DSS), a scoring system giving learners’ a reason to notice TCF by rewarding them for the revisions they make through a flexible system of scoring, was implemented to investigate if TCF could help learners improve their use of subordinate clauses. To do so, two groups of students studying English Language Literature at the University of Tehran, consisting of ۵۵ participants who were randomly assigned as treatment and control groups, were studied. The results of the gain analysis indicated an improvement for both groups over time in the total number and accuracy of the subordination clauses used; however, the treatment group significantly outperformed the control group. While the two groups did not differ in their use of noun clauses, the DSS group was found to outperform the non-DSS group regarding the adverb and adjective clauses. This indicates that motivation to attend to teacher feedback is of great importance if TCF is to be effective.

نویسندگان

Masoud Azizi

Assistant Professor, Department of Foreign Languages, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

Majid Nemati

Associate Professor, Department of English, Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literatures, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

مراجع و منابع این مقاله:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :
  • Azizi, M., & Nemati, M. (۲۰۱۸a). Draft specific scoring and ...
  • Azizi, M., & Nemati, M. (۲۰۱۸b). Motivating the unmotivated: Making ...
  • Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (۲۰۱۲). Written corrective feedback ...
  • Bruton, A. (۲۰۰۹). Improving accuracy is not the only reason ...
  • Bruton, A. (۲۰۱۰). Another reply to Truscott on error correction: ...
  • Chandler, J. (۲۰۰۳). The efficacy of various kinds of error ...
  • Connors, R. J., & Lunsford, A. A. (۱۹۹۳). Teachers’ rhetoric ...
  • Diab, N. M. (۲۰۱۵). Effectiveness of written corrective feedback: Does ...
  • Diab, R. L. (۲۰۰۵). EFL university students’ preferences for error ...
  • Ferris, D. R. (۱۹۹۹). The case for grammar correction in ...
  • Ferris, D. R. (۲۰۰۴). The “grammar correction” debate in L۲ ...
  • Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. ...
  • Guenette, D. (۲۰۰۷). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues ...
  • Hamp-Lyons, L. (۲۰۰۷). Editorial. Assessing Writing, ۱۲(۱), ۱–۹ ...
  • Han, Y. (۲۰۱۷). Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and ...
  • Han, Y. (۲۰۱۹). Written corrective feedback from an ecological perspective: ...
  • Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (۲۰۱۵). Exploring learner engagement with ...
  • Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (۲۰۱۹). Academic emotions in written ...
  • Klein, J., & Taub, D. (۲۰۰۵). The effect of variation ...
  • Lange, R. T. (۲۰۱۱). Inter-rater reliability. In J.S. Kreutzer, J. ...
  • Lee, I. (۲۰۰۸). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two ...
  • Lee, I. (۲۰۰۹). Ten mismatches between teachers’ beliefs and written ...
  • Lee, I. (۲۰۱۴). Feedback in writing: Issues and challenges. Assessing ...
  • Leki, I. (۱۹۹۰). Coaching from the margins: issues in written ...
  • Li, J., & Barnard, R. (۲۰۱۱). Academic tutors’ beliefs about ...
  • Long, M. H. (۱۹۹۶). The role of the linguistic environment ...
  • Long, M. H. (۲۰۰۶). Recasts in SLA: The story so ...
  • Mackey, A. (۲۰۰۶). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. ...
  • Mackey, A., & Oliver, R. (۲۰۰۲). Interactional feedback and children’s ...
  • McDonough, K. (۲۰۰۵). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and ...
  • Moradkhani, S., & Goodarzi, A. (۲۰۲۰). A case study of ...
  • Muncie, J. (۲۰۰۰). Using written teacher feedback in EFL composition ...
  • Grading, no longer an obstacle to learners’ attendance to teacher feedback [مقاله ژورنالی]
  • Radacki, P. M., & Swales, J. M. (۱۹۹۸). ESL student ...
  • Salkind, N. J. (۲۰۱۰). Encyclopedia of research design. Thousand Oaks, ...
  • Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (۲۰۱۰). Learners' processing, uptake, and ...
  • Swain, M. (۲۰۰۵). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In ...
  • Truscott, J. (۱۹۹۶). The case against grammar correction in L۲ ...
  • Truscott, J. (۲۰۰۷). The effect of error correction on learners’ ...
  • Truscott, J. (۲۰۱۰). Further thoughts on Anthony Bruton’s critique of ...
  • Zhang, Z., & Hyland, K. (۲۰۱۸). Student engagement with teacher ...
  • Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (۲۰۱۸). Student engagement with teacher ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع