Journal of Language and Education最新文献

{"title":"A Research Synthesis of Unfocused Feedback Studies in the L2 Writing Classroom: Implications for Future Research","authors":"B. Reynolds, Chian-wen Kao","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.16516","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.16516","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The issue of whether or not teachers should correct second language learners’ grammatical errors has been hotly contested in the literature. Researchers who studied corrective feedback were particularly interested in determining what kinds of feedback may help students commit fewer errors in subsequent writing. One of the primary points of contention in this discussion is whether language teachers should provide focused (i.e., only one or a few types of grammar errors are targeted for correction) or unfocused written corrective feedback (i.e., all error types are corrected). Although focused feedback has been found to be more effective than unfocused feedback (Kao & Wible, 2014), focused feedback has been questioned to ecologically invalid in authentic classrooms (Xu, 2009). Because little attention has been paid to unfocused feedback effects, the present study looked into not only the short-term but also the long-term learning effects of unfocused feedback. \u0000Methods. The present study adopted the meta-analysis software Comprehensive Meta-analysis (Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2005) to calculate an effect size across previous studies. Several keywords were used to search for relevant studies in online databases and selection criteria were set to determine whether these studies were appropriate to be synthesized. 40 studies which met the criteria were included for analyses. \u0000Results and Discussion. This meta-analysis revealed that unfocused grammatical feedback was effective, as assessed by immediate posttests, and that the benefits of unfocused feedback increased over time, as revealed by delayed posttests, potentially contradicting Truscott’s (1996; 2007) conclusions on grammar correction. This finding needs to be carefully interpreted because only 10 out of 40 studies provided statistical data in delayed posttests. Furthermore, publication bias seemed to be minimal, and both immediate and delayed posttest effect sizes were heterogeneous. \u0000Conclusion. It is strongly suggested that more future studies should investigate the long-term learning effects of unfocused feedback. In addition, because the effect sizes obtained for unfocused feedback practices were heterogeneous, other moderating variables need to be considered such as instructional settings (Mackey & Goo, 2007; Truscott, 2004a), type of feedback (Lee, 2013), focus of feedback (Ellis, 2009), learners’ revisions (Ferris, 2010), intervention length (Li, 2010; Lyster & Saito, 2010) and so on. It is essential to conduct more meta-analyses to look into the potential effects of such moderating variables.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48571322","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reconciling Translingualism and Second Language Writing: Book Review","authors":"Chunhong Liu, Taiji Huang","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.13383","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13383","url":null,"abstract":"Translingualism, which concerns the freedom to use different languages and use them for different purposes (Horner & Alvarez, 2019), has recently become a trendy topic in language education. Despite the fresh perspectives brought by translingualism, some disputes have emerged regarding how this concept could coexist alongside scholarship in second language writing (SLW). A group of L2 writing studies scholars even expressed their concern over the misunderstanding that translingual writing would replace SLW (Atkinson et al., 2015). Given this, the book is a timely volume that revisits and reconciles the tension between scholars of translingualism and SLW. The purpose of this book, as stated by the authors, is to achieve a constructive and productive interaction between the two entities, thereby improving the L2 writing instruction practice in multilingual classrooms.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47080535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Effectiveness of Direct and Metalinguistic Written Corrective Feedback to Deal With Errors in the Use of Information-Structuring Connectors","authors":"Steffanie Kloss, Angie Quintanilla","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.15906","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.15906","url":null,"abstract":"Background. Writing is a complex skill, even more so, if the student does not handle the generic structure of the institutionalized practices imposed on Higher Education. \u0000Purpose. The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of direct and metalinguistic focused written corrective feedback (WCF) on information structuring connectors. \u0000Methods. This quantitative study compares focused WCF effectiveness in 39 subjects who are divided into three groups: the first one is the control group, which did not receive feedback, the second is the experimental group 1 that was corrected through direct WCF and the third one corresponds to experimental group 2 that received feedback through metalinguistic cues. \u0000Results. The findings indicate that WCF is effective for the experimental groups. There is a significant decrease in the number of errors of information-structuring connectors in experimental group 2, while experimental group 1 shows a reduction, but without statistical significance.  As for the control group, it did not present improvements. In addition, the development of writing tasks corrected through metalinguistic WCF strategies led to textual cohesion improvement with the accurate use of connective devices. \u0000Conclusions. It is important to reflect on the use of focused feedback as part of the writing process, firstly, because writing cannot be taught without reviewing a student's writing, and secondly, considering that focused feedback supports the noticing of errors and decreases teacher correction time.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48784099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Accuracy Gains from Unfocused Feedback: Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback as Meaningful Pedagogy","authors":"Kendon Kurzer","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.13380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13380","url":null,"abstract":"Background. A primary question among L2 writing instructors is how to best deliver written corrective feedback (WCF) to support student learning. One promising WCF method is Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback, in which instructors provide unfocused/comprehensive feedback using a coding system coupled with regular rounds of editing on short, in-class student-written paragraphs. \u0000Purpose. In this study, I explored the impact on student accuracy of unfocused DWCF on brief student-produced texts in intermediate and advanced developmental ESL writing classes. This study was motivated by the desire to evaluate this pedagogical intervention and determine if it should continue to be implemented in our developmental writing program. \u0000Methods. Utilizing a quasi-experimental research design using t-test analyses, I coded, tallied, and contrasted the errors in term-final paragraphs of 130 students who participated in classes that used DWCF with 79 students in control sections that did not include DWCF. \u0000Results. I found statistically significant improvements in the treatment sections at both levels for nearly all error types (including but not limited to verb form/tense, sentence structure, work order, work choice, determiner, noun form, and punctuation errors; the only error type that did not return significance differences was prepositions at the intermediate level). These results suggest that unfocused written corrective feedback may be effectively used in multilingual writing classrooms, at least given certain parameters to help ensure that feedback is manageable and specific, per the DWCF process. \u0000Conclusion. This study complicates the so-called best practices stemming from WCF research in which many researchers have advocated for WCF that addresses only a small number of error types. Rather, providing that feedback practices are kept manageable and accessible for the students, multilingual students may effectively process and apply unfocused feedback to their own writing.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48471484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"EFL University Students’ Self-Regulated Writing Strategies: The Role of Individual Differences","authors":"Atik Umamah, Niamika El Khoiri, Utami Widiati, Anik Nunuk Wulyani","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.13339","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13339","url":null,"abstract":"Background. Self-regulated learning strategies play an essential role in the success of students’ learning of writing. The use of these strategies might be influenced by the student’s individual differences. \u0000Purpose. This study was conducted to describe EFL university students’ preferences for self-regulated writing strategies. It also examined the different use of self-regulated writing strategies by considering gender, interest in English writing, and writing achievement. Further, it measured the predictive effects of self-regulated writing strategies on the students’ writing achievement. \u0000Methods. This research applied a quantitative approach and involved 58 English students. The students were required to respond to a self-report survey using the Self-Regulated Learning Strategy Questionnaire. The students’ writing achievement was measured based on their scores in writing an argumentative essay. The data were then analyzed using descriptive statistics, an independent sample t-test, One Way Anova, and multiple regression. \u0000Results. The results uncovered that the overall use of self-regulated writing strategies was at a high level with the social environment strategy dimension on the top rank and motive on the bottom. Further analysis showed that there is no significant difference in the use of self-regulated writing strategies based on gender, interest in English writing, and writing achievement. Meanwhile, multiple regression analysis indicated the predictive effect of self-regulated writing strategies on writing achievement. To this end, teachers need to encourage students to use self-regulated writing strategies more optimally to enhance their writing quality. \u0000Conclusion. EFL students have invested high awareness of using self-regulated writing strategies. Along with this high awareness, students’ individual differences such as gender, interest in English writing, and proficiency level might not strongly influence the use of SRW strategies. Though not strong, the use of self-regulated writing strategies contributes to the students’ writing quality improvement.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48923104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Experienced and Novice L2 Raters’ Cognitive Processes while Rating Integrated and Independent Writing Tasks","authors":"Kobra Tavassoli, Leila Bashiri, Natasha Pourdana","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.13466","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13466","url":null,"abstract":"Background. Recently, there has been a growing interest in the personal attributes of raters which determine the quality of cognitive processes involved in their rating writing practice. \u0000Purpose. Accordingly, this research attempted to explore how the rating experience of L2 raters might affect their rating of integrated and independent writing tasks. \u0000Methods. To pursue this aim, 13 experienced and 14 novice Iranian raters were selected through criterion sampling. After attending a training course on rating writing tasks, both groups produced introspective verbal protocols while they were rating integrated and independent writing tasks which were produced by an Iranian EFL learner. The verbal protocols were recorded and transcribed, and their content was analyzed by the researchers. \u0000Results. The six extracted major themes from the content analysis included content, formal requirement, general linguistic range, language use, mechanics of writing, and organization. The results indicated that the type of writing task (integrated vs. independent) is a determining factor for the number of references experienced and novice raters made to the TOEFL-iBT rating rubric. Further, the raters’ rating experience determined the proportions of references they made. Yet, the proportional differences observed between experienced and novice raters in their references were statistically significant only in terms of language use, mechanics of writing, organization, and the total. \u0000Conclusion. The variations in L2 raters’ rating performance on integrated and independent writing tasks emphasize the urgency of professional training to use and interpret the components of various rating writing scales by both experienced and novice raters. \u0000nced and novice raters. ","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49081318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Learning Outcomes Generated through the Collaborative Processing of Expert Peer Feedback","authors":"Nicholas Carr, Paul Wicking","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.13425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13425","url":null,"abstract":"Background. Studies have shown that the collaborative processing of feedback on a jointly produced text facilitates language learning in a traditional classroom. However, it is still unknown whether there are similar learning benefits when the feedback is provided through an online modality from an expert peer during an international virtual exchange (IVE). \u0000Purpose. The present study fills this gap in the literature by investigating Japanese learners engaged in processing written corrective feedback from expert language users in the United States. \u0000Methods. Qualitative data concerning students’ perceptions of learning outcomes were collected via retrospective interviews and narrative frames, then triangulated with their first and final drafts of written texts and analyzed using activity theory (AT). \u0000Results. Findings indicate that learning benefits accrued in areas of language skills such as vocabulary, spelling, and grammar, as well as deepening learners’ reflexive awareness of themselves as language users. \u0000Conclusion. A discussion of these findings, informed by sociocultural theory and shaped by the categories of AT, brings to light some of the interactional dynamics that contributed to the creation of these outcomes. These interactional dynamics show that the learning benefits of the activity primarily resided in the peer-to-peer interactions rather than interactions with the expert-peer.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46222695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback and L2 Learners’ Writing Accuracy: Relationship Between Feedback Type and Learner Belief","authors":"S. M. Mujtaba, M. K. A. Singh, Tiefu Zhang, Nisar Ahmed, Rakesh Parkash","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.15919","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.15919","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Feedback provided to learners' writing is a construct of identifying a learner's performance, and it can be identified and trifurcated as grammatical form, location in the text, and pragmatic functions. Second language researchers worldwide consider written corrective feedback (WCF) as a vital and valuable teaching tool that enables learners to improve accuracy in L2 writing.  \u0000Purpose: In this context, there exists a plethora of studies that examine the efficacy of WCF on L2 learners’ writing accuracy.  However, literature is replete with research that looks into the effectiveness of unfocused WCF on L2 learners’ writing accuracy especially concerning learners’ belief of the feedback type. Not much research is available demonstrating unfocused WCF's efficacy on L2 learners’ writing accuracy.  \u0000Methods: Using a quasi-experimental design, three intact classes were recruited and were randomly placed into two experimental groups: indirect corrective feedback, direct corrective feedback, and one control group. The participants completed three narrative writings, one each at pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test. \u0000Results: The results of the study unveiled that the WCF enabled the treatment group learners to produce text with fewer errors than the control group participants. The study also reported no relationship between the learners’ beliefs and the efficacy of WCF, meaning that the preference of learners for a particular type of feedback did not influence the efficacy of WCF. \u0000Conclusion: Based on the results of the case study, important pedagogical implications for ESL/EFL instructors are provided","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47208688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Effects of Implicit Written Corrective Feedback on ESL Learners’ Writing Skills","authors":"Frankie Subon, Nurul Amira Ali","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.12304","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.12304","url":null,"abstract":"Background. Providing written corrective feedback (WCF) to learners for their writing tasks is pivotal in ESL learning process. \u0000Purpose. This research aimed to examine the effects of a lecturer’s indication of errors as implicit WCF on ESL learners’ writing skills as well as to identify the learners’ perceptions towards its utilisation in their essay writing tasks. \u0000Methods. This is a mixed methods research which involved the gathering of data both quantitatively and qualitatively. By employing a purposive sampling method, 50 ESL learners from a private university in Selangor, Malaysia were selected for this study. They underwent a two-week treatment period whereby they were trained to self-correct their essays based on the indication of errors as implicit WCF by their lecturer, and a pre-test and a post-test were administered in between. Finally, 10 respondents were interviewed to generate their perceptions on the utilisation of this technique as implicit WCF in their writing tasks. \u0000Results. The results showed that the students had achieved a slightly significant improvement in their essay writing skills after the treatment. They also perceived positively the utilisation of the lecturer’s indication of errors as implicit WCF in their essay writing tasks. \u0000Conclusion and Implications: In sum, the lecturer’s error indication as implicit WCF is quite effective for enhancing writing skills, and the ESL learners perceived it positively. This present study contributes fundamental pedagogical implications and recommendations for future research. ESL instructors are encouraged to adopt and apply this technique in their composition writing lessons.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49589501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Writing Feedback from a Research Perspective","authors":"Lilia K. Raitskaya, E. Tikhonova","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.16377","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.16377","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Being an essential part of teaching and learning, feedback in close connection with evaluation is the focus of many researchers. Their interest lies mainly in automated systems, learners’ and teachers’ perceptions of writing feedback and feedback on feedback, new forms of feedback and their efficacy for motivation and writing performance. The review aims to identify the prevailing directions of research in the field. \u0000Methods. The review is based on 194 documents extracted from the Scopus database. The ultimate results of the search for “writing feedback” were limited to a field filter (social sciences, arts & humanities), a language filter (English), a document type (article, review, book chapter, conference paper) as well to manual screening in accordance with the inclusion criteria and relevance to the theme. \u0000Results and Discussion. Seven directions of research were identified: automated and non-automated evaluation; feedback on writing: general issues; automated feedback; peer review and teacher feedback on writing; perceptions and emotions relating to writing feedback; feedback on scholarly writing; evaluation and improvement in Chinese calligraphy. The reviewed documents proved the prominence of the topic and greater interest in new computer-mediated forms of feedback on writing. \u0000Conclusion. The results of the review may serve as a guidance for researchers at large and potential JLE authors focused on teaching and learning writing. The limitations of the review are linked to the scope and methods applied.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43781068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}