School of Languages and Linguistics - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Multiple perspectives on group work in a multilingual context
    Storch, N ; Zhao, H ; Morton, J (John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2022)
    Abstract: Group assignments are widely used in higher education for a range of educational reasons. Although there is a large body of research on the merits of group work and factors that may contribute to successful group work, less is known about students’ and teachers’ perspectives, particularly when groups are composed of students from diverse linguistic backgrounds. The current qualitative study investigated students’ and teachers’ perspectives on group assignments in a Master of Applied Linguistics program offered by a leading research university in Australia. The program has predominantly English as an additional language (EAL) students. Teachers and students in four graduate subjects that involved group assignments were interviewed for their views and reflections. Analysis of the interview data revealed similarities and differences in perspectives in five main areas – group work benefits and challenges, group formation and assessment, and the need for pre-implementation training. The findings highlight the need for teachers to promote open discussion about the purposes and merits of group work, both pedagogical and social.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Claire Kramsch: Language as Symbolic Power
    Davidson, L ; Elder, C ; Fan, J ; Frost, K ; Kelly, B ; McNamara, T ; Morton, J ; Price, S ; Storch, N ; Thompson, C ; Yao, X ; Diskin-Holdaway, C (Oxford University Press (OUP), 2022-06)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Context matters: Learner beliefs and interactional behaviors in an EFL vs. ESL context
    Sato, M ; Storch, N (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.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The Effect of Sustained Teacher Feedback on CAF, Content and Organization in EFL Writing
    Rastgou, A ; Storch, N ; Knoch, U (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.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Less is more? The impact of written corrective feedback on corpus-assisted L2 error resolution
    Crosthwaite, P ; Storch, N ; Schweinberger, M (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.