自动反馈对英语作为外语学习者写作成绩的影响:来自准实验的证据

IF 3.6 2区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Giang Thi Linh Hoang
{"title":"自动反馈对英语作为外语学习者写作成绩的影响:来自准实验的证据","authors":"Giang Thi Linh Hoang","doi":"10.1177/00336882241268359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Automated writing evaluation (AWE) is increasingly used to provide formative feedback on second language (L2) students’ writing. A key factor influencing the effectiveness of AWE feedback on L2 writing performance is the learners’ revision behaviors as they process the feedback. Adopting a quasi-experiment, this study aims to evaluate the impacts of Criterion automated corrective feedback (ACF) on English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ writing performance based on two measures of accuracy: overall writing accuracy and accuracy of English article usage. Learners’ textual operations in response to Criterion ACF were examined for possible explanations for recorded gains (if any) in their writing accuracy. The main findings indicate a lack of intervention and retention effects on learners’ accuracy over the semester during which Criterion ACF was incorporated to supplement the writing instructor's feedback on organization and content. In addition, across four writing entries conducted on Criterion, learners’ revisions to their essays following Criterion ACF were primarily at the local level, dominated by addition, deletion, or substitution of individual words or short phrases rather than substantive revisions to their scripts. About one third of all Criterion feedback points did not result in textual changes to the first drafts, indicating a moderate uptake rate of the feedback. Implications related to formative feedback practices in the EFL writing classroom and the adaptation of Criterion's technical capacities are accordingly presented.","PeriodicalId":46946,"journal":{"name":"Relc Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of Automated Feedback on English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Writing Performance: Evidence from a Quasi-experiment\",\"authors\":\"Giang Thi Linh Hoang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00336882241268359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Automated writing evaluation (AWE) is increasingly used to provide formative feedback on second language (L2) students’ writing. A key factor influencing the effectiveness of AWE feedback on L2 writing performance is the learners’ revision behaviors as they process the feedback. Adopting a quasi-experiment, this study aims to evaluate the impacts of Criterion automated corrective feedback (ACF) on English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ writing performance based on two measures of accuracy: overall writing accuracy and accuracy of English article usage. Learners’ textual operations in response to Criterion ACF were examined for possible explanations for recorded gains (if any) in their writing accuracy. The main findings indicate a lack of intervention and retention effects on learners’ accuracy over the semester during which Criterion ACF was incorporated to supplement the writing instructor's feedback on organization and content. In addition, across four writing entries conducted on Criterion, learners’ revisions to their essays following Criterion ACF were primarily at the local level, dominated by addition, deletion, or substitution of individual words or short phrases rather than substantive revisions to their scripts. About one third of all Criterion feedback points did not result in textual changes to the first drafts, indicating a moderate uptake rate of the feedback. Implications related to formative feedback practices in the EFL writing classroom and the adaptation of Criterion's technical capacities are accordingly presented.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Relc Journal\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Relc Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882241268359\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Relc Journal","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882241268359","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自动写作评价(AWE)越来越多地用于为第二语言(L2)学生的写作提供形成性反馈。影响 AWE 反馈对 L2 写作表现的有效性的一个关键因素是学习者在处理反馈时的修改行为。本研究采用准实验的方法,从整体写作准确性和英语文章使用准确性这两个准确性指标出发,评估标准自动纠正反馈(ACF)对英语作为外语(EFL)学生写作成绩的影响。研究还考察了学习者在回应标准自动纠正反馈时的文本操作,以了解其写作准确性提高(如有)的可能原因。主要研究结果表明,在写作指导老师对写作组织和内容的反馈意见中加入 "标准参考框架 "作为补充的这一学期中,对学习者写作准确性的干预和保持效果并不明显。此外,在四次关于《标准》的写作练习中,学习者在《标准》ACF 后对文章的修改主要是局部性的,主要是添加、删除或替换单个单词或短语,而不是对稿件进行实质性修改。在所有标准反馈点中,约有三分之一没有对初稿进行文字上的修改,这表明反馈的吸收率适中。因此,我们提出了与 EFL 写作课堂中形成性反馈实践和 Criterion 技术能力调整相关的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of Automated Feedback on English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Writing Performance: Evidence from a Quasi-experiment
Automated writing evaluation (AWE) is increasingly used to provide formative feedback on second language (L2) students’ writing. A key factor influencing the effectiveness of AWE feedback on L2 writing performance is the learners’ revision behaviors as they process the feedback. Adopting a quasi-experiment, this study aims to evaluate the impacts of Criterion automated corrective feedback (ACF) on English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ writing performance based on two measures of accuracy: overall writing accuracy and accuracy of English article usage. Learners’ textual operations in response to Criterion ACF were examined for possible explanations for recorded gains (if any) in their writing accuracy. The main findings indicate a lack of intervention and retention effects on learners’ accuracy over the semester during which Criterion ACF was incorporated to supplement the writing instructor's feedback on organization and content. In addition, across four writing entries conducted on Criterion, learners’ revisions to their essays following Criterion ACF were primarily at the local level, dominated by addition, deletion, or substitution of individual words or short phrases rather than substantive revisions to their scripts. About one third of all Criterion feedback points did not result in textual changes to the first drafts, indicating a moderate uptake rate of the feedback. Implications related to formative feedback practices in the EFL writing classroom and the adaptation of Criterion's technical capacities are accordingly presented.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Relc Journal
Relc Journal LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: The RELC Journal is a fully peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles on language education. The aim of this Journal is to present information and ideas on theories, research, methods and materials related to language learning and teaching. Within this framework the Journal welcomes contributions in such areas of current enquiry as first and second language learning and teaching, language and culture, discourse analysis, language planning, language testing, multilingual education, stylistics, translation and information technology. The RELC Journal, therefore, is concerned with linguistics applied to education and contributions that have in mind the common professional concerns of both the practitioner and the researcher.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信