SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Akdeniz İnsani Bilimler Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2

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

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

Javad GHOLAMİ
Maryam ZEİNOLABEDİNİ
Pages
373–382
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall, these results suggest thatunelaborated feedback is of limited pedagogical value, whereas elaborated feedback can contribute tolinguistic accuracy in L2 writing.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis: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.
📊
Key Findings & Data: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.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, these results suggest thatunelaborated feedback is of limited pedagogical value, whereas elaborated feedback can contribute tolinguistic accuracy in L2 writing.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

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.

Özet

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.

🔖

Cite This Article

GHOLAMİ, J., ZEİNOLABEDİNİ, M. (2022). Dönüt Karmaşası ve Yazma Becerisi: Dönüt Yokluğu, Teşhis Edici Dönüt ve Cevaba Bağlı Dönüt ün Karşılaştırmalı Geçerliliği. Akdeniz İnsani Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2, 373–382. https://ajindex.com/articles/434085

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. 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.
  2. Bitchener, J. (2008). “Evidence in Support of Written Corrective Feedback”. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17/2, 69-124.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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, 245–252. New York: ACM Press.
  7. 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.
  8. Fisher, S. L., & Ford, J. K. (1998). “Differential Effects of Learner Effort and Goal Orientation on Two Learning Outcomes”. Personnel Psychology, 51, 397-420.
  9. 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.
  10. 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).
  11. 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.
  12. Gulcat, Z., &