The Effect of Individualized Technology-Mediated Feedback on EFL Learners’ Argumentative Essays

Fatemeh Soltanpour, Mohammadreza Valizadeh

Abstract


This quantitative quasi-experimental study, which followed a pretest-posttest-delayed posttest design, was aimed at investigating the effect of individualized technology-mediated feedback (henceforth, ITMF) on the overall quality of Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative essays. The effect of ITMF, as the experimental treatment, was compared with the common written corrective feedback (henceforth, CWCF) strategies as the control treatment. 57 learners, studying at general EFL courses at upper-intermediate level, formed the participants. They were assigned to two groups: ITMF and CWCF, which, in this study, is meant as the pen-and-paper form of direct and indirect feedback. Each group received six sessions of treatment. The writing tasks and tests were all of argumentative type. First, whether there was any significant difference between the ITMF and CWCF in the overall quality of the essays was investigated. The ITMF group significantly outperformed the CWCF one. Then, whether the difference between the groups varied over time was explored, and it was revealed that the ITMF was still significantly superior over the CWCF. Next, whether there would be any significant change in the ITMF in the long term was examined, and no change was seen. The study supports the advocates of screencasting feedback, revision and teacher-learner negotiation following the feedback.


Keywords


Written corrective feedback, Technology-mediated feedback, Individual differences, Camtasia, argumentative essays, revision, teacher-learner negotiation

Full Text:

PDF

References


AbdRahman, S., Salam, A., & Yusof, M. (2014). Screencast feedback practice on students’ writing. In Asia-Pacific Social Science Conference. Seoul, Korea: APSSC. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289396637_Screencast_Feedback_Practice_on_Students’_Writing

Afrilyasanti, R., Cahyono, B. Y., & Astuti, U. P. (2016). Effect of flipped classroom model on Indonesian EFL students’ writing ability across and individual differences in learning. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 4(5), 65–81. Retrieved from http://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Effect-Of-Flipped-Classroom-Model-on-Indonesian-EFL-Students’-Writing-Ability-Across-and-Individual-Differences-in-Learning.pdf

Ali, A. D. (2016). Effectiveness of using screencast Feedback on EFL students’ writing and perception. English Language Teaching, 9(8), 106–121. https://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n8p106

Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of Proximal development. The Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465–483. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02064.x

Alkhatib, N. I. M. (2015). Written corrective feedback at a saudi university: English language teachers’ beliefs, students’ preferences, and teachers’ practices. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Essex. Retrieved from repository.essex.ac.uk/15382/1/THESIS 6Oct..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(3), 227–258. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8

Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education, 78, 227–236. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.006

Basal, A. (2015). The implementation of a flipped classroom in foreign language teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16(4), 28–37. https://dx.doi.org/10.17718/tojde.72185

Benko, S. L. (2012). Scaffolding: An ongoing process to support adolescent writing development. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(4), 291–300. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.00142

Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102–118. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004

Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York, NY: Routledge.

Bruton, A. (2009). Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were ... System, 37(4), 600–613. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.005

Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395–407. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075071003642449

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(3), 267–296. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9

Chapelle, C. A. (2005). Interactionist SLA theory in CALL research. In J. L. Egbert & G. M. Petrie (Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 53–64). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Chen, S., Nassaji, H., & Liu, Q. (2016). EFL learners’ perceptions and preferences of written corrective feedback: A case study of university students from Mainland China. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(5), 1–17. https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40862-016-0010-y

Cohen, A. D. (2012). Strategies: The interface of styles, strategies, and motivation on tasks. In S. Mercer, R. Stephen, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory and practice (pp. 136–150). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cohen, A. D., & Cavalcanti, M. (1990). Feedback on written compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 155–177). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Conrad, S. M., & Goldstein, L. (1999). Student revision after teacher written comments: Text, contexts and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 147–180. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80126-X

Cranny, D. (2016). Screencasting, a tool to facilitate engagement with formative feedback? All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (AISHE-J), 8(3), 2911–2937. Retrieved from http://ojs.aishe.org/index.php/aishe-j/article/view/291/497

Crews, T. B., & Wilkinson, K. (2010). Students’ perceived preference for visual and auditory assessment with e-handwritten feedback. Business Communication Quarterly, 73(4), 399–412. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1080569910385566

Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., Orsmond, P., Gomez, S., & Park, J. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students? Computers and Education, 58(1), 386–396. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.025

Cumming, A. (1995). Fostering writing expertise in ESL composition instruction: Modeling and evaluation. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Ed.), Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 375–397). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Cumming, A. (2015). Using audio screencast for feedback on short written essays. (Doctoral dissertation). Southern Illinois University Carbondale. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/1734464616/fulltextPDF/88410B9D8DB24C06PQ/2?accountid=39519

Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563–580. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9305-6

Denton, P., Madden, J., Roberts, M., & Rowe, P. (2008). Students’ response to traditional and computer-assisted formative feedback: A comparative case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(3), 486–500. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00745.x

Diab, R. L. (2005a). EFL university students’ preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 38(1), 27–51. Retrieved from https://laur.lau.edu.lb:8443/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10725/2796/EFL.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Diab, R. L. (2005b). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canada, 23(1), 28–43. https://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v23i1.76

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ellis, R. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. English Language Teaching, 63(2), 97–107. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023

Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1, 3–18. Retrieved from http://epi.sc.edu/ar/AS_4_files/Ellis, 2009.pdf

Ellis, R. (2010). EPILOGUE: A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335–349. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990544

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. New York, NY: Routledge.

Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2014). Learner uptake of teacher electronic feedback in ESL composition. System, 46(1), 80–95. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.011

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://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375367

Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft-composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 33–53. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587804

Ferris, D. R. (2001). Teaching writing for academic purposes. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 298–314). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

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 Response to Writing, 13(1), 49–62. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005

Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Ed.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81–104). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181–201. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490

Ferris, D. R. (2014). Responding to student writing: Teachers’ philosophies and practices. Assessing Writing, 19, 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.09.004

Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307–329. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009

Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using SPSS (4th. ed.). London: Sage.

Goldstein, L., & Conrad, S. M. (1990). Student input and negotiation of meaning in ESL writing conferences. TESOL Quarterly, 24(3), 443–460. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587229

Grami, M. (2005). The effect of teachers’ written feedback on ESL students’ perception: A study in a Saudi ESL university-level context. Annual Review of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, 2, 18–41. Retrieved from http://research.ncl.ac.uk/ARECLS/vol2_documents/Grami/grami.htm

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. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001

Guénette, D. (2012). The pedagogy of error correction: Surviving the written corrective feedback challenge. TESL CANADA JOURNAL/REVUE TESL DU CANADA, 30(1), 117–126. https://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i1.1129

Hajian, L., Farahani, A. A. K., & Shirazi, M. A. (2014). A study of students’ and teachers’ preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Iranian EFL context. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(5), 287–297. https://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.5p.287

Hamouda, A. (2011). A study of students and teachers’ preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128–141. https://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p128

Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2015). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 31–44. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002

Hartshorn, K. J., Evans, N. W., Merrill, P. F., Sudweeks, R. R., Strong-Krause, D., & Anderson, N. J. (2010). Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 84–109. https://dx.doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.213781

Havnes, A., Smith, K., Dysthe, O., & Ludvigsen, K. (2012). Formative assessment and feedback: Making learning visible. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 38(1), 21–27. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2012.04.001

Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 1–27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(2), 141–163. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4

Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1996). Some input on input: Two analyses of student response to expert feedback in L2 writing. The Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 287–308. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01612.x

Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51–66. https://dx.doi.org/10.14742/ajet.v0i0.1878

Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 255–286. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90017-0

Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and Feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4(1), 33–54. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/136216880000400103

Hyland, F. (2001). Providing effective support: Investigating feedback to distance language learners. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 16(3), 233–247. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680510120084959

Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31(2), 217–230. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00021-6

Hyland, F. (2010). Future directions in feedback on second language writing: Overview and research agenda. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 171–182. Retrieved from http://revistas.um.es/ijes/article/view/119251

Hyland, K. (2009). Teaching and researching writing (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Interpersonal aspects of response: Constructing and interpreting teacher written feedback. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 206–224). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Johnson, G. M., & Cooke, A. (2016). Self-regulation of learning and preference for written versus audio-recorded feedback by distance education students. Distance Education, 37(1), 107–120. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2015.1081737

Jones, N., Georghiades, P., & Gunson, J. (2012). Student feedback via screen capture digital video: Stimulating student’s modified action. Higher Education, 64(5), 593–607. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9514-7

Katayama, A. (2007). Japanese EFL students’ preferences toward correction of classroom oral errors. Asian EFL Journal, 9(4). Retrieved from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Dec_2007_ak.php

Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57–71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kormos, J. (2012). The role of individual differences in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 390–403. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.003

Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal, 66(2), 140–149. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x

Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lee, I. (1997). ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for teaching. System, 25(4), 465–477. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00045-6

Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285–312. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001

Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, 22(2), 1–16. https://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v22i2.84

Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 69–85. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.10.001

Lee, I. (2013). Research into practice: Written corrective feedback. Language Teaching, 46(1), 108–119. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000390

Lee, I. (2014). Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 201–213. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tesq.153

Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203–218. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x

Liou, H. C., & Peng, Z. Y. (2009). Training effects on computer-mediated peer review. System, 37(3), 514–525. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.01.005

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 438–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Mahfoodh, O. H. A. (2017). “I feel disappointed”: EFL university students’ emotional responses towards teacher written feedback. Assessing Writing, 31, 53–72. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.07.001

Mahfoodh, O. H. A., & Pandian, A. (2011). A qualitative case study of EFL students’ affective reactions to and perceptions of their teachers’ written feedback. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 14–27. https://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p14

Manchón, R. M. (2009). Individual differences in foreign language: The dynanics of beliefs about L2 writing. RESLA, 22, 245–268. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/3138282.pdf

Manchón, R. M. (2011). Writing to learn the language: Issues in theory and research. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 61–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Matsumura, A., & Hann, G. (2004). Computer anxiety and students’ preferred feedback methods in EFL writing. The Modern Language Journal, 88(3), 403–415. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.00237.x

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52. https://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6

McMartin-Miller, C. (2014). How much feedback is enough?: Instructor practices and student attitudes toward error treatment in second language writing. Assessing Writing, 19, 24–35. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.003

Muldrow, K. (2013). A new approach to language instruction: Flipping the classroom. The Language Educator, (November), 28–31. Retrieved from https://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/TLE_pdf/TLE_Nov13_Article.pdf

Nassaji, H. (2011). Correcting students’ written grammatical errors: The effects of negotiated versus nonnegotiated feedback. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), 315–334. https://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2011.1.3.2

Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501–517. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602931003786559

Nyikos, M., & Hashimoto, R. (1997). Constructivist Theory Applied to Collaborative Learning in Teacher Education: In Search of ZPD. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 506-517. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05518.x

O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002

Oladejo, J. A. (1993). Error correction in ESL: Learners’ preferences. TESL Canada Journal, 10(2), 71–89. https://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v10i2.619

Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (5th ed.). Berkshire, England: Open University Press.

Parton, B. S., Crain-Dorough, M., & Hancock, R. (2010). Using flip camcorders to create video feedback: Is it realistic for professors and beneficial to students? International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 7(1), 15–23. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_10/article02.htm

Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44(3), 493–527. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01115.x

Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory and the “noticing” hypothesis. Language Learning, 45(2), 283–331. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00441.x

Sachs, R., & Polio, C. (2007). Learners’ uses of two types of written feedback on a L2 writing revision task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(1), 67–100. https://dx.doi.org/10.10170S0272263107070039

Saito, H. (1994). Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46–70. https://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633

Saslow, J., & Ascher, A. (2012). Summit 1 (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129

Schmidt, R. W. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning and teaching (pp. 1–63). Honolulu, HI: University of Honolulu.

Schmidt, R. W. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Séror, J. (2012). Show me! Enhanced feedback through screencasting technology. TESL Canada Journal, 30(1), 104–116. https://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i1.1128

Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York: Springer.

Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23(1), 285–304. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/003368829202300107

Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2013). The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 286–306. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.011

Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2015). Does language analytical ability mediate the effect of written feedback on grammatical accuracy in second language writing? System, 49, 110–119. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.01.006

Silva, M. L. (2012). Camtasia in the classroom: student attitudes and preferences for video commentary or microsoft word comments during the revision process. Computers and Composition, 29(1), 1–22. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2011.12.001

Soltanpour, F., & Valizadeh, M. (2017). The effect of the collaboration of reflective notes with CALL on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 2(2), 22–52. https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.495361

Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29–46. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/3424315.pdf

Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners’ processing, uptake, and retension of corrective feedback on writing: Case studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 303–334. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990532

Suzuki, W. (2012). Written languaging ,direct correction, and second language writing revision. Language Learning, 62(4), 1110–1133. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00720.x

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 64–81). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Gook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thompson, R., & Lee, M. J. (2012). Talking with students through screencasting: Experimentations with video feedback to improve student learning. The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, February(1), 1–16. Retrieved from https://jitp.commons.gc.cuny.edu/talking-with-students-through-screencasting-experimentations-with-video-feedback-to-improve-student-learning/

Tomlin, R., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183–203. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012870

Van Beuningen, C. G. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1–27. Retrieved from http://revistas.um.es/ijes/article/view/119171

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), 1–41. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00674.x

Warschauer, M. (2005). Sociocultural perspectives on CALL. In J. L. Egbert & G. M. Petrie (Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 41–52). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Warschauer, M., Turbee, L., & Roberts, B. (1996). Computer learning networks and student empowerment. System, 24(1), 1–14. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(95)00049-P

Williams, J., & Severino, C. (2004). The writing center and second language writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(3), 165–172. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.010

Zacharias, N. T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 38(1), 38–52. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0033688206076157




DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.3p.125

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2023 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD. 

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.