기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
장바구니
 고객센터
본문검색
  • 검색 히스토리
실시간 인기검색어
서지반출
Training EFL Learners How to Benefit from Teacher Feedback in Writing Revision
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • Training EFL Learners How to Benefit from Teacher Feedback in Writing Revision
  • 영어 작문 수정을 위한 교사 피드백 활용 훈련 효과 분석
ㆍ 저자명
Yeon Hee Choi
ㆍ 간행물명
교과교육학연구KCI
ㆍ 권/호정보
2014년|18권 1호(통권46호)|pp.215-241 (27 pages)
ㆍ 발행정보
이화여자대학교 교과교육연구소|한국
ㆍ 파일정보
정기간행물|ENG|
PDF텍스트(0.39MB)
ㆍ 주제분야
교육학
서지반출

영문초록

This study aims at investigating how Korean EFL university student writers undergo training in revision with teacher feedback with an ultimate goal to suggest in what way they need to be trained to use teacher feedback effectively. It specifically purposes to examine how they incorporate teacher feedback in their revision through a succession of revision training procedures, and also to analyze changes in feedback incorporation after the training, the quality and product of their drafts, and their perceptions on teacher feedback and the training. It also explores whether Korean students’ utilization of teacher feedback varies across functional types of feedback and of in-class revision activities. The results of the training show that Korean students benefited from in-class revision and group revision over off-class or individual revision, though their revised drafts with teacher feedback are of better quality than the original draft regardless of revision setting. They also illustrate individual variations; the importance of how to group; the problem of the lack of language resources; and the influence of functional types and specificity and concreteness of feedback on its incorporation in revision. The findings from the study suggest a revision training with a focus on how to help EFL learners get access to language resources to find appropriate grammatical structures or expressions.

국문초록

영어 작문에 대한 교사 피드백은 학생들이 자신의 작문을 효과적으로 수정하도록 도와주기 위해 제공되지만, 피드백이 이해가 되지 않거나 어떻게 수정해야하는지 몰라 활용을 못하는 경우가 많다. 이에 본 연구는 교사 피드백을 효과적으로 활용하여 영어 작문을 수정할 수 있도록 도와주고자 하는 목적을 위해 교사의 수정 예시 제공과 수업 내 개별 및 집단 수정을 포함한 교사 피드백 활용 훈련 모형을 구상하고, 이러한 훈련 과정들이 어떤 효과가 있는지 알아보고자 하였다. 이러한 훈련의 효과를 작문 수정 빈도수, 교사 피드백 활용 및 성공적 활용 비율, 작문의 질적 향상도 분석을 통해 조사하였다. 또한 훈련에 대한 학생들의 평가를 설문 조사를 통해 분석하였다. 18명의 대학생들을 대상으로 3주에 걸쳐 훈련을 실시한 결과, 훈련 단계 활동 유형과 관계없이 교사 피드백 활용을 통해 작문이 질적으로 향상되는 것으로 나타났지만, 수업 내 수정과 집단 수정이 수업 밖 개별 시간에서의 수정 또는 개별 수정보다 더 효과적인 것으로 나타났다. 또한 학생별 효과 변이성이나 교사 피드백 유형에 따른 변이성도 나타났다. 특히 내용과 구성에 대한 거시적 피드백 활용 효과가 수정된 작문에서 분명하게 드러나는 경우가 많았으며, 명시적 피드백 활용이 더 용이하면서 효과적으로 활용하도록 훈련하는 것이 가능한 것으로 나타났다. 반면에 암시적 피드백, 특히 어휘 문제에 대한 피드백은 훈련 효과가 떨어졌는데, 이는 이러한 피드백을 활용할 언어적 능력 부족인 것으로 보인다. 따라서 교사 피드백 활용 훈련의 효과를 위해서는, 피드백을 통해 학생들이 작문의 문제점을 파악한 후에도 이를 수정할 언어적 능력이 부족할 때 어떻게 도와주어야 하는지에 대한 후속 연구가 더 필요하다고 본다.

목차

I. Introduction
II. Teacher Feedback and Revision Training
III. Research Method
IV. Results and Discussion
V. Conclusion

키워드

revisionteacher feedbackrevision trainingfeedback incorporationEFL writing수정교사 피드백수정 훈련피드백 활용영어작문

참고문헌 (54건)

  • 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.
  • Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 215-241.
  • Cha, Y. J., & Park, L. E. (2010). Exploring multiple feedback methods in a Korean EFL writing class. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 14(2), 265-287.
  • Chenoweth, N. A. (1987). The need to teach rewriting. ELT Journal, 41, 25-29.
  • Choi, H. Y. (2002). A study on Korean students’ perceptions on teacher’s feedback in English writing classes. Unpublished master’s thesis. Sookmyung Women’s University, Graduate School of TESOL, Seoul, Korea.
  • Choi, Y. H. (2007). On-line revision behaviors in EFL writing process. English Teaching, 62(4), 69-93.
  • Choi, Y. H. (2010). Effects of revision training on revisions and quality in L2 writing. English Teaching, 65(1), 25-56.
  • Cohen, A. D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 57-69). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‑Hall International.
  • Cohen, A. D., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (1990). Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 155-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Conrad, S. M., & Goldstein, L. M. (1999). ESL student revision after teacher-written comments: Text, contexts, and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 147-180.
  • DiCamilla, F. J., & Anton, M. (1997). Repetition in the collaborative discourse of L2 learners: A Vygotskian perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 609-633.
  • Enginarlar, H. (1993). Student response to teacher feedback in EFL writing. System, 21, 192-203.
  • Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33-53.
  • Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315-339.
  • 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: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ferris, D. R. (2003). Responding to writing. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring second language writing (pp. 119-140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • 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 (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81-104). Cambridge:
  • Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. J. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-184.
  • Goldstein, L. M. (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). Cambridge: Cambridge University
  • Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445-476.
  • Hall, C. (1990). Managing the complexity of revising across languages. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 43-60.
  • Higgins, L., Flower, L., & Petraglia, J. (1992). Planning text together. Written Communication, 9, 48-94.
  • Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher-written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 255-186.
  • Hyland, F., & Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 185–212.
  • Kim, H. (2009). The perception change toward feedback in L2 writing: An analysis of graduate students’ writing processes. English Teaching, 64(3), 79-105.
  • Kim, J. (2013). Written corrective feedback and accuracy development in EFL classrooms: Types of feedback and errors. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 17(2), 441-460.
  • Kim, J. Y. (2009). Teacher and peer feedback in process-oriented composition classes and their effects on students’ essay revisions. Unpublished master’s thesis. Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
  • Kim, Y., & Joo, M. (2010). The effectiveness of diverse types of written feedback: Comparative study of teacher and student feedback. English Language & Literature Teaching, 16(4), 133-152.
  • Lee, G., & Schallert, D. L. (2008). Meeting in the margins: Effects of the teacher-student relationship on revision processes of EFL college students taking a composition course. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 165-182.
  • Lee, I. (2008a). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second language Writing, 17, 69-85.
  • Lee, I. (2008b). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second language Writing, 17, 144-164.
  • Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203-218.
  • Lee, K. L., & Jeon, J. (2012). Yeongeo sseuy hakseup-ey iss-eo gyosa phideuybaek-ey gwanhan inshik-gwa hakseup-donggi-euy yeongwan-seong-ey gwanhan yeongu (EFL students’ perceptions of teacher feedback on writing in relation to their motivation). Journal o
  • Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33, 293-308.
  • Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118-141.
  • Min, H. T. (2008). Reviewer stances and writer perceptions in EFL peer review training. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 285-305.
  • Myhill, D., & Jones, S. (2007). More than just error correction: Students’ perspectives on their revision processes during writing. Written Communication, 24, 323-343.
  • Park, S. (2012). The effects of training on incorporation of teacher feedback in L2 writing revision. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 12(1), 101-127.
  • Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 265–289.
  • Pea, R., & Kurland, D. (1987). Cognitive technologies for writing. Review of Research in Education, 14, 277-326.
  • Raimes, A. (1990). The TOEFL test of written English: Causes for concern. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 427-442.
  • Shin, H.-H. (2006). A study of the relationship between the teachers' feedback and the university students' motivation in English writing. Unpublished master's thesis. The Korea University of Foreign Studies, Seoul, Korea.
  • Shin, S.-K. (2008). “Fire your proofreader!” Grammar correction in the writing classroom. ELT Journal, 62, 358-365.
  • Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 148-56.
  • Song, M. J. (1998). Munja feedback-euy yuhyeong-gwa yeong-jakmun silryeok hyangsanggan-euy gwangyey (Relationship between types of written feedback and development of English writing skills). English Teaching, 53(2), 135-156.
  • Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 217-233.
  • Stevenson, M., Schoonen, R., & de Glopper, K. (2006). Revising in two languages: A multi-dimensional comparison of online writing revisions in L1 and FL. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 201-233.
  • Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 153-173.
  • Storch, N. (2007). Investigating the merits of pair work on a text editing task in ESL classes. Language Teaching Research, 11, 143-159.
  • Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
  • Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255-272.
  • Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 292-315.
  • Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class, Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 209-222.
  • Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing, 15, 3-17.
구매하기 (5,600)
장바구니
추천 연관논문