School of Languages and Linguistics - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemContext matters: Learner beliefs and interactional behaviors in an EFL vs. ESL context(SAGE Publications, 2020-05-27)Researchers and teachers often invoke context to explain their particular research/teaching issues. However, definitions of context vary widely and the direct impact of the context is often unexplained. Based on research showing contextual differences in second language (L2) learner beliefs and interactional behaviors, the current project compared those factors in two distinct contexts: Chilean English as a foreign language (EFL) (n = 19) and Australian English as a second language (ESL) (n = 27) contexts. In this project, the learners completed a set of group discussion activities as part of their regular class work. They then completed a questionnaire pertaining to L2 motivation, perceptions of group work, and first language (L1) use. The group interaction data were analysed for: (1) the frequency of language-related episodes (LREs); (2) the initiator of LREs (self or other); and (3) L1 use for resolving LREs. The results showed that the EFL learners produced significantly more LREs. The EFL learners also used more L1 to resolve LREs. Factor analyses of the questionnaire data, conducted within- and across-contexts, showed notable differences in the two contexts as well. However, the findings of learner beliefs did not necessarily account for the differential classroom behaviors. We discuss our findings by reference to the socio-linguistic and socio-educational statuses of English in the two contexts as well as approaches to instruction which together shaped the learners’ differential needs and purposes for learning the L2.
-
ItemIntroduction: Languaging in Language Learning and Teaching(John Benjamins Publishing, 2020)
-
ItemLanguaging when providing and processing peer feedback(John Benjamins, 2020-01-01)Two commonly used activities in second language (L2) writing classes are collaborative writing and peer response. Our study compared the quantity and quality of languaging generated by these two activities. In this study, conducted in Saudi Arabia, 34 college English language learners worked in the same self-selected small groups (predominantly pairs) on three successive activities. They completed a collaborative writing task, provided written feedback on a text written by another group, and revised their text in response to the peer feedback received. Analysis of recorded talk during these three activities found that the collaborative writing activity generated more languaging episodes than the other activities. We discuss the implications of these findings for L2 writing pedagogy and propose research directions.
-
ItemThe Effect of Sustained Teacher Feedback on CAF, Content and Organization in EFL Writing(Urmia University, 2020-06-01)Despite teachers' mainstream practices in L2 writing classrooms addressing different dimensions of writing over time, much of the research on feedback in recent years has been of relative short duration and has mainly focused on accuracy. The current longitudinal study investigated the influence of sustained teacher written feedback on accuracy, syntactic complexity, fluency, content, and organization in an EFL context. Ninety-two learners were divided into four groups, receiving written corrective feedback, feedback on content and organization, multilateral feedback (i.e., on grammatical accuracy, content, and organization), and no feedback over a 3½-month period. They completed a pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test and wrote and revised eight interim expository compositions on a weekly basis. Results showed that the three treatment groups significantly improved in the dimensions on which they received feedback. However, only the groups who received feedback on content and organization improved in fluency. Importantly, the multilateral group improved in accuracy as well as fluency, content and organization. Theoretically, the findings endorse the language learning potentials of sustained writing as long as it is guided by teacher feedback. The findings provide empirical support for the influence of sustained feedback on expanding and consolidating learners’ explicit knowledge of L2 writing.
-
ItemLess is more? The impact of written corrective feedback on corpus-assisted L2 error resolution(Elsevier, 2020-09-01)The past decade has seen a sharp increase in research into L2 learners’ direct use of language corpora (typically known as ‘data-driven learning’, DDL) for error resolution in L2 writing. However, a crucial yet underexplored variable in this process is whether and how the form of written corrective feedback (WCF) provided on L2 writing facilitates effective corpus consultation for L2 error resolution. Focusing on L2 writers at the post-graduate level and using a short private online course for DDL training, we determine the impact of four WCF conditions (varying in their degree of directness) on students’ use of corpora for lexical and grammatical error resolution, and the appropriacy of error revisions made with/without corpora for these error types. The results suggest that ‘less (WCF) is more’ if learners are to make successful error revisions via corpus consultation, with more direct WCF conditions often resulting in students revising errors without consulting a corpus. However, less direct WCF conditions sometimes resulted in inappropriate revisions, as learners required additional information as to the nature and location of the specific error. Differences were also found in the effectiveness of corpus consultation for grammatical and lexical error types, with WCF a confounding factor. These results suggest that if corpora are to be used for L2 error resolution, teachers need to carefully consider whether their WCF allows for meaningful engagement with corpora to occur, and whether corpus consultation is suitable or desirable for resolving all error types.