KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching / 2014 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1

Written feedback in Japanese EFL classrooms: A focus on content and organization

Neil HEFFERNAN
Junko OTOSHİ
Yoshitaka KANEKO
Sayfa
55–68
Yayın Tarihi
2016-07-14
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The findings suggest a need for EFL teachers in Japan to specifically focus on teaching how learners can attend to the content and organization of an essay, all the while providing a rubric or checklist that allows for a transparent and easy to understand method of decoding the feedback process for our learners.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The exact nature of written feedback to L2 learners of English is often vague to both the teachers who provide it and the learners who receive it.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:This paper describes a study carried out with 16 Japanese and 14 native English speaker EFL teachers in Japan who provided feedback on one L2 learners’ academic essay.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The findings suggest a need for EFL teachers in Japan to specifically focus on teaching how learners can attend to the content and organization of an essay, all the while providing a rubric or checklist that allows for a transparent and easy to understand method of decoding the feedback process for our learners.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Feedback · Japanese EFL writers · content

Abstract

The exact nature of written feedback to L2 learners of English is often vague to both the teachers who provide it and the learners who receive it. However, this does not have to be the case. This paper describes a study carried out with 16 Japanese and 14 native English speaker EFL teachers in Japan who provided feedback on one L2 learners’ academic essay. After analyzing and coding the feedback, the researchers found that the most common form of feedback given on the essay was in relation to the content and organization of the essay. Five of these teachers were subsequently interviewed in order to elicit their beliefs about the nature of feedback they gave on the learners’ essay. The findings suggest a need for EFL teachers in Japan to specifically focus on teaching how learners can attend to the content and organization of an essay, all the while providing a rubric or checklist that allows for a transparent and easy to understand method of decoding the feedback process for our learners.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

HEFFERNAN, N., OTOSHİ, J., KANEKO, Y. (2016). Written feedback in Japanese EFL classrooms: A focus on content and organization. The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1, 55–68. https://ajindex.com/articles/137700

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (17)

  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(3), 227–257.
  2. Berlin, J. A. (1987). Rhetoric and reality: Writing instruction in American colleges, 1900-1985. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
  3. Brumfit, C. (1977). Correcting written work. Modern English Teacher 5, 22-23.
  4. Cohen, A.D., & Cavalcanti, MC. (1990). Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In. B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 155–177).
  5. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  6. Connor, U., & Farmer, F. (1989). The teaching of topical structure analysis as a revision strategy for ESL writers. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 126-139).
  7. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Conrad, S.M., & Goldstein, L. M. (1999). ESL student revision after teacher-written comments: text, contexts, and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 147–179.
  9. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fathman, A., & Whalley. E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178-190).
  10. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Ferris, D. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 315–339.
  12. Ferris, D., Pezone, S., Tade, C., & Tinti, S. (1997). Teacher commentary on student writing: descriptions and implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6, 155–182.
  13. Goldstein, L. (2004). Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: Teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing 13(1), 63–80.
  14. Goldstein, L. (2001). For Kyla: what does the research say about responding to EFL writers. In T. Sylva & P. K. Matsuda (Ed.), On Second Language Writing (pp. 73–89).
  15. New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Inc., Publishers.
  16. Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R.B. (1996). Theory and practice of writing. London and New York: Longman Halliday, M.A.K., & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  17. Hedgcock, J. S., &