Olumlu Akran Geribildiriminin İkinci Dilde Yazma Doğruluğu Üzerindeki Etkisi

Bu çalışmada, doğrudan odaklı akran geribildiriminin doğrudan odaklanmış öğretmen geribildirim türlerinin Türk EFL öğrencilerinin yazma doğruluğu üzerindeki etkilerini gergin kavrama açısından karşılaştırması amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla, 16-21 yaş aralığındaki 58 öğrenci, mevcut araştırmaya katılmak üzere 2019 yılında Ağrı'daki yabancı diller Yüksekokulundan seçilmiştir. Katılımcıları Nelson İngilizce dil testi ile homojenize ettikten sonra, sınıflar rastgele deney grupları olarak belirlendi. Doğrudan odaklı akran geribildirim grupları ve doğrudan odaklı öğretmen geribildirim gruplarında işlem başlamadan önce, katılımcıların çalışmanın başındaki performansları ile sondaki performanslarını karşılaştırmak için tüm grup katılımcılarına yazma ön testi uygulandı. Doğrudan odaklanmış öğretmen geribildirim grubunda, öğrencilerden denemelerini sınıf dışındaki bir kağıt parçasına yazmaları ve bunları her oturumda sınıftaki öğretmene vermeleri istenmiştir. Yazıları toplandıktan sonra, fiil zamanlarına ilişkin gramer hatalarına doğrudan odaklanmış geri bildirim sağlandı ve öğrencilere geri verildi, diğer grupta nasıl geri bildirim verileceği modellendi ve öğrenciler 6 kişilik alt gruplara ayırıldı. Her alt grupta, öğrencilerin denemelerini sınıf dışında bir kağıda yazmaları gerekiyordu. Daha sonra, öğrencilerden okumaları, doğrudan odaklanmış geribildirim vermeleri ve bir sonraki oturumu sahiplerine geri vermeleri beklendi. Katılımcılara son test verildikten sonra veriler analiz edildi. Test öncesi ve sonrası sonuçların karşılaştırılması, doğrudan odaklı akran düzeltici geri bildiriminin öğrencilerin yazma doğruluğu üzerinde önemli bir etkisi olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca, araştırmanın bulguları, doğrudan odaklı öğretmen düzeltici geri bildiriminin de tedavi süresince öğrencilerin yazma doğruluğunu artırmada önemli bir etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. Sonuçların daha fazla araştırılması, doğrudan odaklı akran düzeltici geri bildiriminin, doğrudan odaklı öğretmen düzeltici geri bildirimine kıyasla EFL öğrenenlerinin yazma doğruluğu üzerinde daha büyük bir iyileştirme etkisi olduğunu açıklığa kavuşturmaktadır

The Impact of Positive Peer Feedback on Second Language Writing Accuracy

The current study aimed to compare the effects of direct focused peer feedback vs. direct focused teacher feedback types on writing accuracy of Turkish EFL students with regard to tense uptake. For this purpose, 58 students within the age range of 18 to 21 were selected from foreign language school in Agri, Turkey to take part in the current study on 2019. After homogenizing the participants using the Nelson English language test, the classes were randomly set as experimental groups. Before starting the treatment in direct focused peer feedback groups and direct focused teacher feedback groups, in order to compare the performance of the participants at the beginning of the study with their performance at the end, participants of all groups took a writing pretest. In direct focused teacher feedback group, the learners were asked to write their essays on a piece of paper out of class and hand them to the teacher in the class every session. The teacher collected the writings, provided direct focused feedback on grammatical errors with regard to verb tenses, and gave them back to the learners while in the other group the teacher modeled how to give feedback and divided the students into subgroups of 6 students. In each subgroup, the students were supposed to write their essays on a piece of paper out of class. Then, students were expected to read, provide direct focused feedback, and give them back to the owners the following session. After giving the post-test to the participants, the data were analyzed. The comparison of pre and post-test results indicated that direct focused peer corrective feedback had a significant effect on learners’ writing accuracy. Furthermore, the findings of the study showed that the direct focused teacher corrective feedback also had a significant effect on improving learners’ writing accuracy during the treatment period. Further investigation of the results clarified that direct focused peer corrective feedback had a greater improving effect on EFL learners’ writing accuracy in comparison to direct focused teacher corrective feedback.

PDF

___

Alias, N., & Hussin, S. (2002). E-learning in a writing course at Tenaga National University. TEFL Web Journal, 1 (3), 44-67. http://www.teflweb-j.org/v1n3/Alias_Hussin.htm
Anderson, C. (2000). How's it going? A practical guide to conferring with student writers. Heinemann.
Arndt, V. (1992). Response to writing: Using feedback to inform the writing process. In M. N. Brock& L. Walters (Eds.), Teaching composition around the Pacific Rim: Politics and pedagogy (pp. 90-116). Multingual Matters.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L., & Razavieh, A. (1996). Introduction to research in education (5th ed.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
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(3), 227-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8
Birjandi, p. & Hadidi, Tamjid, N. (2011). The role of self, teacher and peer assessment in promoting Iranian EFL learners’ writing performance. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(5), 513-533. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.549204
Brannon, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in writing. Qualitative Research in Writing, 3(2), 77- 101.
Brown, H. D. (2001) Teaching by Principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed). Longman.
Cardelle, M., & Corno, L. (1981). Effects on second language learning of variations in written feedback on homework assignments. TESOL Quarterly, 15(3), 251–261. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586751
Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219-233. 10.1080/03075070600572132
Chastain, K. (1988). Developing second language skills: theory and practice. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Chaudron, C. (1984). The effects of feedback on students' composition revisions. RELC J., 15(2), 77-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368828401500201
Dempsey, J. V., Driscoll, M. P., & Swindell, L. K. (1993). Text-based feedback. In J. V. Dempsey & G. C. Sales (Eds.), Interactive instruction and feedback (pp. 21-54). Educational Technology Publications.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S. & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060141
Eslami, E. (2014). The effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback techniques on EFL students' writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 445 -452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.438
Evans, N. W., Hartshorn, K. J., McCollum, R. M., & Wolfersberger, M. (2010). Contextualizing corrective feedback in second language writing pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 445–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375367
Ferris, D. R. (2004). The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime?). Journal of Second Language Writing 13(1), 49-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005
Fowler, W.S, & Coe, N. (1976). Nelson English language tests. Butler& Tanner LTD.
Freeman, D. (1996). The “unstudied problem”: Research on teacher learning. In D. Freeman & J.
Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching (pp. 351–78). Cambridge University Press.
Gitsaki, C, & Althobaiti, N. (2010). ESL teachers’ use of corrective feedback and its effect on learners’ uptake. The journal of Asia TEFL, 7 (1), 197-219.
Guénette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16 (1), 40-53. 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001
Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1996). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(2), 141-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4
Hyland, K., & Hyland., F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching, 39 (2), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Keh, C. (2003). Feedback in the Writing Process: A Model and Methods for Implementation. English Language Teaching Journal, 44(4), 14-26. 10.1093/elt/44.4.294
Kelly, G. (2000). How to Teach Pronunciation. Pearson Education. Kulhavy, R. W. (1977). Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 211-232. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543047002211
Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66 (2), 140-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x
Lamberg, W. (1980). Self-provided and peer-provided feedback. College Composition and Communication, 3(1), 63-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/356635
Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001
Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. The University of Michigan Press.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Nunan, D. (2001). Second language teaching and learning. Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
Olshtain, E. (2001). Functional tasks for mastering the mechanics of writing and going just beyond. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 207-217).
Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Pincas, A. (1982a). Teaching English Writing. Macmillan.
Rahimi, M., & Asadi, E. (2014). Effect of different types of written corrective feedback on accuracy and overall quality of L2 learners’ writing. European Journal of Academic Essays 1(6), 1-7. 10.1558/lst.v2i2.25956
Rahimi, M. (2010). Iranian EFL students’ perceptions and preferences for teachers’ written feedback: do students’ ideas reflect teachers’ practice? The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 2 (2), 75-98. 10.22099/jtls.2012.409
Richards, U., & Cheek, E. (1999), Designing rubrics for K-6 classroom assessment. Christopher- Gordon.
Rouhi, J. & Samiei, M. 2010). The Effects of Focused and Unfocused Indirect Feedback on Accuracy in EFL Writing. The Social Sciences, 5(6), 481-485. 10.3923/sscience.2010.481.485
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R, Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1-63). University of Hawaii Press.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 41(2), 255-283. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x
Swain, M. (1985). Three functions of language learning. Oxford university press. Vahdani Sanav, R., & Nemati, M. (2014). The effect of six different corrective feedback strategies on Iranian English language learners’ IELTS writing task. SAGE. 4 (2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014538271
Villamil, O., & Guerrero De, M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies and aspects of social behavior. Second language writing, 5 (1), 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90015-6
Vickers, H. C. (2001). Indirect negative evidence as corrective feedback in second language writing: Comparing output to input. Arizona Working Papers in SLAT, 8, 27-44.
Weigle, S. C. (2008). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.
Wooley, S. R. (2007). The effects of web-based peer review on student writing. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation) Kent State University. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1196711715