Feedback Complexity and Writing Skill: The Relative Effectiveness ofNo Feedback, Error-flagging and Response-contingent Feedback Types

Yazılı yapıcı dönüt sunmanın önemi hakkındaki tartışmalara rağmen, araştırmalar beceri edinimindekiperformansı artırmada dönütün inkar edilemeyen önemli bir role sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Bununlabirlikte, karmaşıklık boyutları değişen farklı dönüt türlerinde dar kapsamlı bir araştırma yapılmıştır.Dönüt yokluğu, teşhis edici dönüt, cevaba bağlı dönüt ve kontrol şartları altında yazma doğruluklarınıkarşılaştırmak üzere bu çalışmada otuz katılımcı yer almıştır. ANOVA (Varyans Analizinin) yinelenmişölçülerinin sonuçları ön testten son teste kadar öğrencilerin yazma doğruluğunu geliştirmelerinde önemlibir temel etki ve dönüt türleri için bir etkileşim ortaya çıkarmıştır. Bu sonuçlar genel olarak, ayrıntılıdönüt L2 yazımında sözel doğruluğa katkıda bulunurken, yetersiz dönüt pedagojik açıdan sınırlı değeresahip olduğunu göstermektedir.

Dönüt Karmaşası ve Yazma Becerisi: Dönüt Yokluğu, Teşhis Edici Dönüt ve Cevaba Bağlı Dönüt ün Karşılaştırmalı Geçerliliği

Despite controversies about the value of presenting written corrective feedback, researchsuggests that feedback has an undeniably significant role in improving performance in skill learning.However, little extant research has attended the different types of feedback ranged along a dimension ofcomplexity. Thirty participants participated in this study in order to compare their writing accuracy underthe no feedback, error-flagging, response-contingent and control conditions. The results of repeatedmeasures, ANOVA revealed a significant main effect and interaction effect for feedback types on theaccuracy improvement of learners from pre-test to post-test. Overall, these results suggest thatunelaborated feedback is of limited pedagogical value, whereas elaborated feedback can contribute tolinguistic accuracy in L2 writing.

PDF

___

Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of Teacher Response to Student Writing in a Multiple-Draft Composition Classroom: Is Content Feedback Followed by Form Feedback the Best Method?. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 227-257.
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in Support of Written Corrective Feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17/2, 69-124.
Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The Effect of Different Types of Corrective Feedback on ESL Students . Journal of Second Language Writing, 12/3, 191-205.
Carroll, S., Swain, M., & Roberge, Y. (1992). The Role of Feedback in Adult Second Language Acquisition: Error Correction and Morphological Generalizations. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13/2, 173-198.
Chandler, J. (2003). The Efficacy of Various Kinds of Error Feedback for Improvement in the Accuracy and Fluency of L2 Student Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267-296.
Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Locus of Feedback Control in Computer-Based Tutoring: Impact on Learning Rate, Achievement and Attitudes. In Proceedings of ACM CHI 2001conf erence on human f actors in computing systems, 245252. New York: ACM Press.
Dempsey, J., Driscoll, M., & Swindell, L. (1993). Text-Based Feedback . Eds.: Dempsey & G. Sales. Interactive Instruction and Feedback, 21-54. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications.
Fazio, L. (2001). The Effect pf Corrections and Commentaries on the Journal Writing Accuracy of Minority- and Majority-Language Students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 55-69.
Fisher, S. L., & Ford, J. K. (1998). Differential Effects of Learner Effort and Goal Orientation on Two Learning Outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 51, 397-420.
Ford, J. K., Smith, E. M., Weissbein, D. A., Gully, S. M., & Salas, E. (1998). Relationships of Goal Orientation, Metacognitive Activity, and Practice Strategies with Learning Outcomes and Transfer. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 218-233.
Frantzen, D., & Rissel, D. (1987). Learner Self-Correction of Written Compositions: What Does It Show Us? Eds.: B. VanPatten, T. R. Dvorak, & J. F. Lee. Foreign language learning: A research perspective, 92-107. Cambridge: Newbury House.
Gass, S. (1997). Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gilman, D. A. (1969). Comparison of Several Feedback Methods for Correcting Errors by Computer- Assisted Instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60/6, 503-508.
Gulcat, Z., & Ozagac, O. (2004). Correcting and giving feedback to writing. Retrieved April 12, 2014 from http://www.buowl.boun.edu.tr/teachers/fCORRECTING%20AND%20GIVING%20FEEDBA%20TO %20WRITING.htm
Hendrickson, J. M. (1978). Error Correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory, Research, and Practice. Modern Language Journal, 62, 387-398.
Kepner, C. G. (1991). An Experiment in the Relationship of Types of Written Feedback to the Development of Second-Language Writing Skills. The Modern Language Journal, 75, 305-313.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. (1992). Fundamentals of Language Education. California: Laredo Publishing Co.
Kulhavy, R. W. (1977). Feedback in Written Instruction. Review of Educational Research, 47, 211-232.
Kumar, A. N. (2010). Error-Flagging Support for Testing and Its Effect on Adaptation . Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, LNCS 6094, 359-368.
Lalande, F. J (1982). Reducing Composition Errors: An experiment . The Modern Language Journal, 66, 140-149.
Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the Margins: Issues in Written Response. In B Kroll. Second Language Writing, 57-68. Cambridge UK: CUP.
Mason, B. J., & Bruning, R. (2001). Providing Feedback in Computer-Based Instruction: What the Research Tells Us . Retrieved March, 15, 2014, from http://dwb4.unl.edu/dwb/Research/MB/Mason Bruning.html
Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback Research Review. Ed.: D. Jonassen. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 745-783. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2004). How to Design Informative Tutoring Feedback for Multimedia Learning . Ed.: H. M. Niegemann, D. Leutner, & R. Brunken. Instructional Design f or Multimedia Learning, 181-195. Munster, New York: Waxmann.
Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskian Perspective on Corrective Feedback in L2: The Effect of Random Versus Negotiated Help on the Learning of English Articles . Language Awareness, 9/1, 34- 51.
O'Sullivan, I. (2007). Enhancing a Process-Oriented Approach to Literacy and Language Learning: The Role of Corpus Consultation Literacy. ReCALL, 19/3, 269-286.
Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of Feedback on Error and Its Effect on EFL Writing Quality . TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83-93.
Saslow, J., & Ascher, A. (2012). Summit 1. Pearson Education.
Semke, H. (1984). The Effects of the Red Pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195-202.
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two Feedback Types: Do They Make a Difference?. RELC Journal, 23, 103-110.
Schimmel, B. J. (1983). A Meta-Analysis of Feedback to Learners in Computerized and Programmed Instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montréal, Canada.
Schmidt, R. (1994). Awareness and Second Language Acquisition . Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 12, 206-226.
Sleeman, D. H., Kelly, A. E., Martinak, R., Ward, R. D., & Moore, J. L. (1989). Studies of Diagnosis and Remediation with High School Algebra Students. Cognitive Science, 13, 551-568.
Truscott, T. (1996). The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes. Language Learning, 46, 2, 327-369.
Truscott, T. (2007). The Effect of Error Correction on Learners Ability to Write Accurately. The Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255-272.
Warschauer, M. (2002). A Developmental Perspective on Technology in Language Education. TESOL Quarterly, 36/3, 453-475.
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the Effectiveness of Comprehensive Error Correction in Second Language Writing. Language Learning, 62/1, 41.
Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to Student Writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 79-101.