masterThesis
The effect of direct and indirect written feedback on spelling in two different populations of efl/esl learners
Fecha
2018-10-09Registro en:
Amrhein, H. R., & Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do students prefer and
why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13, 95–127.
Apel, K. (2011). What is orthographic knowledge? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in
School, 42, 592–603.
Bailey, K. (1991). The use of diary studies in teacher education programs. In J. Richards & D.
Nunan (Eds.), Second language (pp. 215–226). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press
Bailey, M. (1998). Learning about language assessment. Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage
Learning.
Barkaoui, K. (2007). Revision in second language writing: What teachers need to know. TESL
Canada Journal, 25(1), 81–92
Bates, L., Lane, J., & Lange, E. (1993). Writing clearly: Responding to ESL compositions.
Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Beare, H., & Slaughter, R. (1993). Education for twenty first century. London, UK: Routledge.
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 17, 102–118.
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition
and writing. New York, NY: Routledge.
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008a). The value of focused approach to written corrective
feedback. ELT Journal, 63(3), 204–211.
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008b). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and
international students. Language Teaching Journal, 12(3), 409–431
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written
corrective feedback. System, 37, 322–329.
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contributions of written corrective feedback to language
development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193–214.
Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective
feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191–205.
Bolger, D. J., Minas, J., Burman, D. D., & Brooth, J. (2008). Differential effects of orthography
and phonological consistency in cortex for children with and without reading impairment.
Neuropsychologia, 46(14), 3210–3224.
Brookhart, S., Moss, C., & Long, B. (2008). Formative assessment that empowers. Educational
Leadership, 66, 55–57
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy.
(Second ed.). New York, NY: Longman
Brown, J. D. (2005). Testing in language programs. A comprehensive guide to English language
assessment. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Bruton, A. S. (2009). Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were...
System, 37(4), 600–613.
Burns, D. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching. A guide for practitioners.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Chan, J. C. Y., & Lam, S. (2010). Effects of different evaluative feedback on students’ self
efficacy in learning. Instructional Science, 38(1), 37–58
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.
Conrad, N. J. (2008). From reading to spelling and spelling to reading: Transfer goes both ways.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 869–878.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL Content language integrated learning.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cronnell, B. (1985). Language influences in the English writing of the third and sixth grade
Mexican American students. Journal of Educational Research, 78(3), 168–173.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
De Wet, K. (2010). The importance of ethical appraisal in social science research: Reviewing a
faculty of humanities research committee. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8, 301–314.
Eales, F., Wilson, J., Clare, O., & Oakes, S. (2011). Speakout: Pre-intermediate. London, UK:
Pearson Education.
Ehri, L. (1986). Sources of difficulty in learning to spell and read. Advances in Developmental
and Behavioral Pediatrics, 7, 121–195.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press
Ellis, R. (2008). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 28(2), 97–107.
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analyzing learner language. Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the
acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339–368.
Evans, W. N., Hartshorn, K. J., McCollum, R. M., & Wolfersbeger, M. (2010). Contextualizing
corrective feedback in second language writing pedagogy. Language Teaching Research,
14(4), 445–463.
Fashola, O., Drum, P., Mayer, R., & Kang, S. (1996). A cognitive theory of orthographic
transitioning: Predictable errors in how Spanish speaking children spell English words.
American Educational Research Journal, 33(4), 825–843.
Fazio, L. L. (2001). The effects of corrections and commentaries on the journal writings of
minority and majority language students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 235–
249.
Ferris, D. (2004). The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: A response to Truscott (1996).
Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49–62
Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 classes. A response to Truscott.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–11
Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on short and longterm effects of written correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81–104). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (1998). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and
practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it
need to be? Journal of Educational Psychology, 10(1), 161–184.
Foresman, S. (2007). Fresh reads for differentiated practice. London, UK: Pearson Education.
Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language production.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 282–200.
Georgiou, G. K., Parilla, R., & Kirby, J. R. (2009). RAN components and reading developments
from grade 3 to grade 5: What underlies their relationship? Scientific Studies of Reading, 13,
508–534.
Goldstein, L. (2005). Teacher written commentary in second language classrooms. Ann Arbor,
MI: University of Michigan Press.
Goldstein, L. (2006). Feedback and revision in second language writing: Contextual, teacher and
student variables. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing:
Contexts and issues. (pp. 185–205). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Gould, R., & Colleen, R. (2013). Introductory statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Gregory, M., & Carroll, S. (1978). Language and situation: Language varieties and their social
contexts. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Grossi, G., Murphy, J., & Boogan, J. (2009). Word and pseudoword superiority effects in ItalianEnglish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 113–120.
Gudmundsdottir, G. B., & Utne, B. V. (2010). An exploration of piloting and access as action
research. Educational Action Research, 18, 359–372
Guennette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Journal of Second Language Writing,
16, 40–63.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing,
77, 81–112
Hendrickson, J. (1977). Error in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research and practice.
Modern Language Journal, 62, 387–398.
Hendrickson, J. (1980). The treatment of written work. Modern Language Journal, 64, 216–221.
Hilte, M., & Reitsma, P. (2008). What type of computer assisted exercise supports young less
skilled spellers in resolving problems in open and closed syllable words? Annals of
Dyslexia, 58, 97–114
Hopkins, D. (1985). A teacher’s guide to classroom research. Philadelphia, PA: Open University
Press
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language
acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461–473.
Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31,
217–230.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language
Teaching, 39, 77–95
Jacobson, N., Gerwurtz, R., & Haydon, E. (2007). Ethical review of interpretative research:
Problems and solutions. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 29(5), 1–8.
Joy, R. (2017). The concurrent development of spelling skills in two languages. Internal
Electronic Journal of Elementary Education., 3(2), 105–121.
Kelley, K., Clark, B., Brown, V., & Sitzia, T. (2003). Good practice in the conduct and reporting
of survey research. In International Journal of Quality Health Care (Vol. 15, pp. 261–266).
Kelter, D., & Ekman, P. (2000). Facial expression of emotion. In M. Lewis & J. Haviland-Jones
(Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 236–245). New York, NY: Guilford.
Keltner, D., Ekman, P., Gonzaga, G. C., & Beer, J. (2003). Facial expression of emotion. In R. J.
Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of Affective Sciences (pp.
415–432). New York: Oxford University.
Kember, D. (2000). Action learning and action research: Improving the quality of teaching and
learning. London, UK: Kogan Page
Kemp, N. (2006). Children’s spelling of base inflected and derived words: Links with
morphological awareness. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19(7), 737–765.
Kidd, R. (1992). Teaching ESL grammar through dictation. TESL Canada Journal, 10(1), 49–61.
Kim, S., Ubel, P., & De Vries, R. (2009). Pruning the regulatory tree. Nature, 457, 534–535.
Kirby, J. R., Desrochers, A., Roth, L., & Lai, S. S. V. (2008). Longitudinal predictors of word
reading development. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Cannadien, 49(2), 103–110
Krashen, S. D. (1984). Writing, research, theory, and application. Oxford, UK: Pergham Press.
Kvale, S. (1989). Issues in validity in quantitative research. Lund, Sweden: Studenlitteratur.
Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors, an experiment. Modern Language Journal,
66, 140–149.
Lee, J. (2008). Understanding teacher’s written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary
classrooms. Journal of Secondary Writing, 17, 69–85
Littlejohn, S. W., & Foss, K, A. (2011). Theories of human communication. Long Grove, IL:
Waveland Press.
Long, M. (2005). Second language needs analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Lukatela, G., Popadic, D., Ognjenovic, P., & Tirvety, M. T. (1980). Lexical decision in a
phonologically shallow orthography. Memory and Cognition, 8(2), 124–132.
Maleki, A., & Eslami, E. (2013). The effects of written corrective feedback techniques on EFL
students’ control over grammatical construction of their written English. Theory and
Practice in Language Studies, 3(7), 1250–1257.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San
Francisco, CA.: Jossey-Bass
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage
Mohammad, A., & Benis, A. R. S. (2014). The effect on transcribing on beginning learners’
dictation. Theory into Practice, 4(11), 2203–2208.
Moss, L. (2003). Jerome Bruner: Language, culture, self. Canadian Psychology, 44(1), 77–83.
Murphy, E., & Dingwall, R. (2007). Informed consent, anticipatory regulation and ethnographic
practice. Social Science & Medicine, 65(11), 2223–2234.
Nunan, D., & Bailey, K. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research. Boston, MA:
Heinle Cengage Learning.
Oller, J. W. (1978). Pragmatics and language testing. In B. Polsky (Ed.), . Arlington, VA: Center
for Applied Linguistics
Ouellet, G., & Senechal, M. (2008). Pathways to literacy: A study on invented spelling and its
role in learning to read. Child Development, 19(4), 899–913.
Owren, M. J., & Barochorowski, J. A. (2003). Reconsidering the evolution of nonlinguistic
communication: The case of laughter. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27(3), 183–200
Pagan, B. (2006). Positive contributions of constructivism to educational design. Europe’s
Journal of Psychology, 2(1).
Raynolds, L. B., & Uhry, J. K. (2010). The invented spelling of non-Spanish phonemes by Spanish-English bilinguals and English monolingual kindergarteners. Reading and Writing,
23(5), 495–513.
Reppen, R. (2010). Using corpora in the language classroom. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied
linguistics. (3rd ed.). London, UK: Pearson Education.
Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teacher College Records, 105, 1623–1640.
Rob, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL
writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 83–95.
Russel, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2
grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing
research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133–164). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John
Benjamins.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional
Science, 18(2), 119–144
Saito, H. (1994). Teacher’s practices and student’s preferences for feedback on second language
writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2)
Sanders, M., & Banda, G. (1997). Questioning the validity of research instruments: An essential
step in educational research. Journal of the Southern African Association for Research in
Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 1(1), 12–25.
Santos, M., Lopez-Serrano, S., & Manchon, R. M. (2010). The differential effect of two types of
direct written corrective feedback on noticing and uptake: Reformulation vs. error
correction. IJES, 10(1), 131–154
Schaertel, S. A. (2012). Giving feedback: An integral part of education. Best Practice and
Research: Clinical Anaesthesiology, 26(1), 77–87.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Cognition and second language instruction. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning.
Proceedings of ClaSIC, 4, 731–737.
Schuh, K. L. (2003). Knowledge construction in the learner centered classroom. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 2, 426–442
Semke, H. (1984). The effects of red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195–202.
Sergey, L. (2008). Top languages in global information production. The Canadian Journal of
Library and Information Practice and Research, 3(2).
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’
acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 255–284
Slaven, R., & Cheung, A. (2004). How do English language learners learn to read? Educational
Leadership, 61, 52–57.
Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International
Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29–46.
Tarone, E., & Yule, G. (1989). Focus on the language learner: Approaches to 130 identifying and meeting the needs of second language learners. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Templeton, S., & Morris, D. (2000). Spelling. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. Pearson, & R. Barr
(Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 525–543). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tong, X., Mc Bride-Chang, C., Shu, H., & Wong, A. .-Y. (2009). What exactly is yait anyway.
The role of semantics in orthographic learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,
104, 239–251.
Torto, R. T. (2014). Language in communication in a multilingual setting: A case study of a
cross section of first year students of the University of Cape Coast, Ghana. Language in
India, 14(12), 339–359.
Trim, J. (1978). Some possible lines of development of an overall structure for a European unit
credit scheme for foreign language learning by adults. Strasbourg, France: Council of
Europe
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language
Learning, 46, 327–369.
Truscott, J. (1997). A problem and a non-problem for English learners. English Teaching and
Learning, 22(5), 59–57.
Truscott, J. (1999). The case against grammar correction in L2 classes: A response to Ferris.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111–122
Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 337–343
Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal
of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255–272.
Truscott, J. (2010). Further thoughts on Anthony Bruton’s critique of the correction debate.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255–272.
Van Beuninge, C. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical
insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1–27.
Van Beuninge, C. G., Dejong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of
comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1–
41.
Verhoeven, L., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, H. R. (2006). Learnability of graphostatic rules in
visual word identification. Learning and Instruction, 16, 538–548.
Wallerstein, I., Juma, C., Keller, E. F., Kocka, J., Lecourt, D., Mudimbe, V. Y., … Trouillot, M.
R. (1998). Luk samfundsvidenskaberne op! Report from “The Gulbenkian Commission of
the Restructuring of the Social Sciences.” Copenhagen, Denmark: Roskilde
Universitetsforlag.
Wiggins, G. (1997, June). Feedback: How learning occurs. Paper presented at the American
Association of Higher Education Conference on Assessment Quality, Miami Beach, FL
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design. A framework for effecting
curriculum assessment. Alexandria, VA: ASCD (Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development).
270058
TE09902
Autor
Anderson, Carl Edlund
Institución
Resumen
This study focused on observing and analyzing the highly form-specific issue of accurate spelling by Spanish L1 learners of English with the purpose of contributing to the ongoing debate on feedback’s relative efficacy, centered upon whether errors should be corrected or not and on whether feedback is effective or not. The treatment of direct and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) was applied to spelling errors in learners of two distinct populations. An experimental action research design was appropriate to the study’s comparison of the two types of written corrective feedback, direct and indirect, on learners’ errors to determine their relative efficacy; and this research design permitted the establishment of relationships between the feedback treatment (direct or indirect) and spelling outcomes. The results indicated no statistically significant differences between and within groups among the two populations, suggesting that there are still no simple answers regarding feedback’s effectiveness. However, although many feedback studies give limited attention to the effects of language learners’ preexisting (L1) schemata, patterns in the spelling errors produced by the participants in the present study suggest that further work on the efficacy of feedback should indeed consider such issues more explicitly, as future research should consider not merely whether feedback can be valuable but how contextual factors can affect what kind of feedback (and responding to what in the learner) may be most valuable.