二语学习者对书面纠正反馈的认知和行为参与

Q4 Social Sciences
Ji-Hyun Park, Soojin Ahn
{"title":"二语学习者对书面纠正反馈的认知和行为参与","authors":"Ji-Hyun Park, Soojin Ahn","doi":"10.15858/engtea.77.3.202209.133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between students’ cognitive engagement with written corrective feedback (WCF) and their revision behavior. Based on the assumption that different levels of cognitive involvement are linked to learners’ use of the feedback, we investigated how different post-feedback activities (i.e., reading, copying, and explaining the feedback) would affect second language writers’ behavioral engagement with WCF during the revision phase. Ninety-eight students were divided into three experimental groups and one control group. Experimental groups performed one of the three post-feedback activities before revising their original writing. The participants’ revision behavior was examined by their uptake of WCF. Additionally, the change in writing quality between the first and the revised drafts was investigated. Results showed that activities that promote deeper cognitive processing generally led to higher uptake of WCF in revision. The effects of post-feedback activities, however, varied for error types. All the post-feedback activities were effective in improving the quality of writing.","PeriodicalId":36188,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching(South Korea)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"L2 Learners’ Cognitive and Behavioral Engagement with Written Corrective Feedback\",\"authors\":\"Ji-Hyun Park, Soojin Ahn\",\"doi\":\"10.15858/engtea.77.3.202209.133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between students’ cognitive engagement with written corrective feedback (WCF) and their revision behavior. Based on the assumption that different levels of cognitive involvement are linked to learners’ use of the feedback, we investigated how different post-feedback activities (i.e., reading, copying, and explaining the feedback) would affect second language writers’ behavioral engagement with WCF during the revision phase. Ninety-eight students were divided into three experimental groups and one control group. Experimental groups performed one of the three post-feedback activities before revising their original writing. The participants’ revision behavior was examined by their uptake of WCF. Additionally, the change in writing quality between the first and the revised drafts was investigated. Results showed that activities that promote deeper cognitive processing generally led to higher uptake of WCF in revision. The effects of post-feedback activities, however, varied for error types. All the post-feedback activities were effective in improving the quality of writing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36188,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"English Teaching(South Korea)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"English Teaching(South Korea)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.77.3.202209.133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching(South Korea)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.77.3.202209.133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是探讨学生对书面纠正反馈的认知投入与他们的复习行为之间的关系。基于不同程度的认知参与与学习者对反馈的使用有关的假设,我们研究了不同的反馈后活动(即阅读、复制和解释反馈)如何影响第二语言作者在复习阶段对WCF的行为参与。98名学生被分为三个实验组和一个对照组。实验组在修改他们的原稿之前进行了三种后反馈活动中的一种。通过对WCF的摄取来检测参与者的复习行为。此外,还调查了初稿和修订稿之间写作质量的变化。结果表明,促进更深层次认知加工的活动通常会导致复习中更高的WCF摄取。然而,后反馈活动的效果因错误类型而异。所有的后反馈活动对提高写作质量都是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
L2 Learners’ Cognitive and Behavioral Engagement with Written Corrective Feedback
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between students’ cognitive engagement with written corrective feedback (WCF) and their revision behavior. Based on the assumption that different levels of cognitive involvement are linked to learners’ use of the feedback, we investigated how different post-feedback activities (i.e., reading, copying, and explaining the feedback) would affect second language writers’ behavioral engagement with WCF during the revision phase. Ninety-eight students were divided into three experimental groups and one control group. Experimental groups performed one of the three post-feedback activities before revising their original writing. The participants’ revision behavior was examined by their uptake of WCF. Additionally, the change in writing quality between the first and the revised drafts was investigated. Results showed that activities that promote deeper cognitive processing generally led to higher uptake of WCF in revision. The effects of post-feedback activities, however, varied for error types. All the post-feedback activities were effective in improving the quality of writing.
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
English Teaching(South Korea)
English Teaching(South Korea) Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
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