Browsing by Subject "Grammar"
Results Per Page
Sort Options
-
Item
-
ItemStudent response to written corrective feedback( 2014) Arlan A. ParrenoStudent response, in terms of attention/awareness, actions, and attitudes, to written corrective feedback (WCF) is believed to influence the effectiveness of such feedback. To determine how Thai university students respond to WCF and whether there were differences in their responses to three common types of WCF, a survey was conducted. Three sections of a foundation academic English course were involved, each receiving consistent focused WCF – one section with direct corrective feedback, another with indirect corrective feedback, and the third with coded corrective feedback – in their paragraph compositions throughout one semester. A questionnaire with items on attention/awareness, actions, and attitudes regarding the WCF they received was administered at the end of the semester. Findings indicate that students paid attention to/were aware of the WCF and that they acted in similar ways upon receiving their writings. They also had positive attitudes towards WCF. However, this study revealed that coded corrective feedback entailed a significantly higher level of attention/awareness and significantly more positive attitudes than the direct and indirect types. Although the findings may suggest that using coded corrective feedback is a better approach than direct correction or indirect correction, its efficacy on second language learning/acquisition needs further investigation.
-
ItemWritten corrective feedback impact on grammatical accuracy in L2 writing: a quantitative and qualitative look( 2015) Arlan ParrenoThis quasi-experimental study examined the efficacy of the three types of written corrective feedback (WCF), namely, direct, indirect and coded WCF, and the no-correction approach. A diary study on student responses to WCF was also conducted. The one-semester investigation involved 68 Thai students in an undergraduate English course. Results showed that the three WCF types had significantly better revision effects than the no-correction approach, but only the coded WCF produced significant delayed effect. However, analyses of diary entries suggested no general accuracy improvement in any group. Diary study results indicated that, although all groups reported awareness of similar actions, and positive attitudes towards WCF, the coded WCF group seemed more aware of the WCF than the other groups. Findings suggest that focused coded WCF helps in learning English as an L2, although its role in L2 acquisition remains to be seen.