1887
image of Second language learners’ engagement with written feedback
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Studies on feedback given to second language (L2) learners have focused primarily on learners’ response to feedback on language. This study explores how L2 learners in one university EAP class respond to teacher written feedback on all aspects of writing and the factors that may affect their response. Using data from student initial and revised texts, the study first looks at nine learners’ uptake of feedback. Then, adopting a case study approach and using data from retrospective interviews, the study examines how three learners engage with feedback on different dimensions of their writing. Findings show that learners took up almost all feedback suggestions regardless of form or focus. Yet, learners’ engagement with the feedback differed. Using activity theory (AT), we explain the learners’ engagement with the feedback received by reference to the interaction of context and individual-related factors. Our findings highlight the complexity of learner behavior in response to feedback.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.20029.liu
2021-07-08
2022-05-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atkinson, D., & Tardy, C. M.
    (2018) SLW at the crossroads: Finding a way in the field. Journal of Second Language Writing, 42, 86–93. doi:  10.1016/j.jslw.2018.10.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.10.011 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bitchener, J.
    (2019) The intersection between SLA and feedback research. InK. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (2nd ed., pp.85–105). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108635547.007
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547.007 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bitchener, J., & Storch, N.
    (2016) Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783095056
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783095056 [Google Scholar]
  4. 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. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(03)00038‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9 [Google Scholar]
  5. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S.
    (Eds.) (2011) The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Dörnyei, Z.
    (2009) The L2 motivational self-system. InZ. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.9–42). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847691293‑003
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-003 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ellis, R.
    (2010) A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335–349. doi:  10.1017/S0272263109990544
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990544 [Google Scholar]
  8. Engeström, Y.
    (1987) Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (2001) Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156. doi:  10.1080/13639080020028747
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ferris, D.
    (2006) Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. InK. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp.81–104). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2007) Preparing teachers to respond to student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 165–193. doi:  10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2010) Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181–201. 10.1017/S0272263109990490
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2015) Written corrective feedback in L2 writing: Connors & Lunsford (1988); Lunsford & Lunsford (2008); Lalande (1982) Language Teaching, 48(4), 531–544. doi:  10.1017/S0261444815000257
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000257 [Google Scholar]
  14. Ferris, D., & 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. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(01)00039‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X [Google Scholar]
  15. Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E.
    (1968) The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Nursing Research, 17(4), 364. 10.1097/00006199‑196807000‑00014
    https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 [Google Scholar]
  16. Han, Y.
    (2017) Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and learner engagement with written corrective feedback. System, 69, 133–142. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2017.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  17. 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. doi:  10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2019a) Academic emotions in written corrective feedback situations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 1–13. doi:  10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  19. (2019b) Learner engagement with written feedback: A sociocognitive perspective. InK. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (2nd ed., pp.247–264). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108635547.015
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547.015 [Google Scholar]
  20. Han, Y., & Xu, Y.
    (2019) Student feedback literacy and engagement with feedback: A case study of Chinese undergraduate students. Teaching in Higher Education, 26(2), 181–196. doi:  10.1080/13562517.2019.1648410
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1648410 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hyland, F.
    (2003) Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31(2), 217–230. doi:  10.1016/S0346‑251X(03)00021‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00021-6 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hyland, F., & Hyland, K.
    (2001) Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 185–212. doi:  10.1016/S1060‑3743(01)00038‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00038-8 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hyland, K.
    (2013) Student perceptions of hidden messages in teacher written feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(3), 180–187. doi:  10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.06.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.06.003 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kormos, J.
    (2012) The role of individual differences in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 390–403. doi:  10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L.
    (2006) Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 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(3), 165–182. doi:  10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  27. Lee, I.
    (2008) Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 69–85. doi:  10.1016/j.jslw.2007.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  28. (2013) Research into practice: Written corrective feedback. Language Teaching, 46(1), 108–119. doi:  10.1017/S0261444812000390
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000390 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2014) Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 201–213. doi:  10.1002/tesq.153
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.153 [Google Scholar]
  30. Mahfoodh, O. H. A.
    (2017) “I feel disappointed”: EFL university students’ emotional responses towards teacher written feedback. Assessing Writing, 31, 53–72. doi:  10.1016/j.asw.2016.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J.
    (2015) Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley and Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Shahrani, A., & Storch, N.
    (2014) Investigating teachers’ written corrective feedback practices in a Saudi EFL context: How do they align with their beliefs, institutional guidelines, and students’ preferences?Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 37(1), 101–122. doi:  10.1075/aral.37.2.02als
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.37.2.02als [Google Scholar]
  33. Stake, R. E.
    (2000) Case studies. InN. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp.435–455). SAGE Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Storch, N.
    (2010) Critical feedback on written corrective feedback. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29–46. doi:  10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119181
    https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119181 [Google Scholar]
  35. (2018) Written corrective feedback from sociocultural perspectives: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 51(2), 262–277. doi:  10.1017/S0261444818000034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000034 [Google Scholar]
  36. Storch, N., & Aldossary, K.
    (2019) Peer feedback: An activity theory perspective on givers and receivers’ stances. InM. Sato & S. Loewen (Eds.), Evidence-based second language pedagogy: A collection of instructed second language acquisition studies (pp.123–144). Routledge. 10.4324/9781351190558‑6
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351190558-6 [Google Scholar]
  37. Swain, M.
    (2013) The inseparability of cognition and emotion in second language learning. Language Teaching, 46(2), 195–207. doi:  10.1017/S0261444811000486
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000486 [Google Scholar]
  38. Vygotsky, L. S.
    (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. (1986) Thought and language. MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhang, Z. V., & Hyland, K.
    (2018) Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102. doi:  10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  41. 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(1), 3–17. doi:  10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  42. Zheng, Y., & Yu, S.
    (2018) Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37, 13–24. doi:  10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  43. Zheng, Y., Yu, S., Wang, B., & Zhang, Y.
    (2020) Exploring student engagement with supervisor feedback on master’s thesis: Insights from a case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(2), 186–197. doi:  10.1080/14703297.2019.1617181
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1617181 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.20029.liu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.20029.liu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: second language writing ; engagement ; activity theory ; written feedback
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error