Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback for Academic Discourse: The Sociomaterial Potential for Writing Development and Socialization in Higher Education

Daron Loo

doi:10.17323/jle.2022.12996

Daron Loo National University of Singapore https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9203-3608

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.12996

Ключевые слова: нефокусированная обратная связь, социоматериальный подход, академическая социализация, экология обучения

Аннотация

Введение. Существует преобладающее мнение, что нефокусированная письменная корректирующая обратная связь может не подходить для развития академического письма учащихся.

Цель. Эта перспективная статья демонстрирует, как нефокусированная письменная корректирующая обратная связь отражает принципы социоматериальности, которые рассматривают обучение как динамический процесс.

Перспективы. Нефокусированая письменная корректирующая обратная связь может способствовать социализации академического дискурса студентов университетов. Эта точка зрения основана на наблюдении, что реальная письменная корректирующая обратная связь в классе разнообразна и зависит от контекста, а не сосредоточена на какой-либо конкретной грамматической форме или особенности письма.

Заключение. Нефокусированная письменная корректирующая обратная связь представляет собой оптимальный подход для поддержки уровня информированности и вовлеченности студентов университетов в показатели, характеризующие процесс их обучения. Эти переменные могут способствовать развитию академического письма учащихся.

Скачивания

Данные скачивания пока не доступны.

Литература

Anderson, T. (2017). The doctoral gaze: Foreign PhD students' internal and external academic discourse socialization. Linguistics and Education, 37, 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2016.12.001

Anderson, T. (2021). The socialization of L2 doctoral students through written feedback. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 20(2), 134-149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2020.1726758

Brudermann, C., Grosbois, M., & Sarré, C. (2021). Accuracy development in L2 writing: Exploring the potential of computer-assisted unfocused indirect corrective feedback in an online EFL course. ReCALL. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834402100015X

Dang, T. K. A., Bonar, G., & Yao, J. (2021). Professional learning for educators teaching in English-medium-instruction in higher education: a systematic review. Teaching in Higher Education. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1863350

Dimova, S. (2020). English language requirements for enrolment in EMI programs in higher education: A European case. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100896

Elliott, S., Hendry, H., Ayres, C., Blackman, K., Browning, F., Colebrook, D.,.. & White, P. (2019). ‘On the outside I'm smiling but inside I'm crying': Communication successes and challenges for undergraduate academic writing. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(9), 1163-1180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2018.1455077

Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001

Fenwick, T., & Landri, P. (2012). Materialities, textures and pedagogies: Socio-material assemblages in education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(1), 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2012.649421

Frear, D., & Chiu, Y. H. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners' accuracy in new pieces of writing. System, 53, 24-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.006

Gourlay, L. (2017). Student engagement, ‘learnification' and the sociomaterial: Critical perspectives on higher education policy. Higher Education Policy, 30, 23-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0037-1

Gravett, K. (2020). Feedback literacies as sociomaterial practice. Critical Studies in Education. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1747099

Guerrettaz, A. M., Engman, M. M., & Matsumoto, Y. (2021). Empirically defining language learning and teaching materials in use through sociomaterial perspectives. The Modern Language Journal, 105(S1), 3-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12691

Kobayashi, M., Zappa-Hollman, S., & Duff, P. A. (2017). Academic discourse socialization. In P.A. Duff, & S. May (Eds.), Language Socialization (pp. 239-254). https:. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02255-0_18

Knoch, U., May, L., Macqueen, S., Pill, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Transitioning from university to the workplace: Stakeholder perceptions of academic and professional writing demands. IELTS Research Reports Online Series (Reference: 2016/1).

Lee, I. (2020). Utility of focused/comprehensive written corrective feedback research for authentic L2 writing classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100734

Lee, I., Luo, N., & Mak, P. (2021). Teachers' attempts at focused written corrective feedback in situ. Journal of Second Language Writing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100809

Loo, D. B. (2020). Is Language Awareness Supported by Grammar Lessons, Indirect and Metalinguistic Feedback? An Examination of Graduate Students' Writing across Drafts. rEFLections, 27(1), 1-21.

Loo, D. B. (2021). Am I promoting feedback cycle and sociomaterial learning? Insights from practitioner inquiry on written corrective feedback in final drafts. Issues in Language Studies, 10(1), 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33736/ils.2573.2021

Loo, D. B., Keough, W., Sundaresan, A., & Thomas, D. (2018). Perceptions towards engagement: The case of Thai English majors in an international higher education environment. LEARN Journal, 11(2), 116-133.

Mao, Z., & Lee, I. (2020). Feedback scope in written corrective feedback: Analysis of empirical research in L2 contexts. Assessing Writing, 45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100469

McKinley, J. (2019). Evolving the TESOL teaching-research nexus. TESOL Quarterly, 53(3), 875-884. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.509

Morita, N. (2009). Language, culture, gender, and academic socialization. Language and Education, 23(5), 443-460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780902752081

Nguyen, Q., & Buckingham, L. (2019). Source-use expectations in assignments: The perceptions and practices of Vietnamese Master's students. English for Specific Purposes, 53, 90-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.10.001

Nicolás-Conesa, F., Manchon, R. M., & Cerezo, L. (2019). The effect of unfocused direct and indirect written corrective feedback on rewritten texts and new texts: Looking into feedback for accuracy and feedback for acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 103(4), 848-873. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12592

Nieminen, J. H., Tai, J., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2021). Student agency in feedback: beyond the individual. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1887080

Pineteh, E. A. (2014). The academic writing challenges of undergraduate students: A South African case study.International Journal of Higher Education, 3(1), 12-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v3n1p12

Rahimi, M. (2019). A comparative study of the impact of focused vs.comprehensive corrective feedback and revision on ESL learners' writing accuracy and quality. Language Teaching Research. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819879182

Reynolds, B. L., & Kao, C. W. (2021). The effects of digital game-based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747

Rose, H. (2019). Dismantling the ivory tower in TESOL: A renewed call for teaching-informed research. TESOL Quarterly, 53(3), 895-905. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.517

Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System, 37(4), 556-569. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002

Winstone, N. E., & Carless, D. (2021). Who is feedback for? The influence of accountability and quality assurance agendas on the enactment of feedback processes. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1926221

Yu, S., Jiang, L., & Zhou, N. (2020). Investigating what feedback practices contribute to students' writing motivation and engagement in Chinese EFL context: A large scale study. Assessing Writing, 44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100451

Yusuf, N. K., Yunus, M. M., & Mohamed, A. E. (2018). Workplace writing in L2 experiences among millennial workforce: Learning to write in English. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 24(1), 145-161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2401-11

Zhang, Y., Yu, S., & Yuan, K. (2020). Understanding Master's students' peer feedback practices from the academic discourse community perspective: A rethinking of postgraduate pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 25(2), 126-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1543261

Zukas, M., & Malcolm, J. (2019). Reassembling academic work: A sociomaterial investigation of academic learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 41(3), 259-276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2018.1482861

Аннотация

Скачивания

Литература

Indexing