1887
Volume 167, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

A number of studies have shown that learners’ beliefs about the corrective feedback for improving their L2 (a second or a foreign language) use influences the extent to which learners can utilize that same feedback. It seems, then, that changing some of these beliefs could benefit the L2 learning process. The present article reports on two small-scale studies, both drawing on a sociocultural perspective on the development of beliefs. Changes in learners’ beliefs about corrective feedback were observed both within a period of six months (Case study) and over the course of one research interview (Group study). The studies exemplify how the interplay of one’s own and other’s experience, others’ mediation, and authoritative voices facilitated these changes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/itl.167.1.03leo
2016-09-26
2019-10-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alanen, R
    (2003) A sociocultural approach to young language learners’ belief about language learning. In P. Kalaja & A.M.F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp.55–85). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4751‑0_3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4751-0_3 [Google Scholar]
  2. (2013) Noticing and mediation: A sociocultural perspective. In J.M. Bergsleithner , S.N. Frota , & J.K. Yoshioka (Eds.), Noticing and second language acquisition: Studies in honor of Richard Schmidt (pp.315–325). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1994.tb02064.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02064.x [Google Scholar]
  4. Amrhein, H.R. , & Nassaji, H
    (2010) Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers think is right and why?Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquee, 13(2), 95–127. Retrieved fromhttps://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/article/view/19886/21712
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Aro, M
    (2009) Speakers and doers: Polyphony and agency in children’s beliefs about language learning (Doctoral dissertation, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland). Retrieved fromhttps://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/handle/123456789/19882
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 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), 227–257. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(00)00027‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bakhtin, M
    (1981) The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (1986) Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Barcelos, A.M.F
    (2003) Researching beliefs about SLA: A critical review. In P. Kalaja & A.M.F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp.7–33). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4751‑0_1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4751-0_1 [Google Scholar]
  10. Barcelos, A.M.F. , & Kalaja, P
    (2013) Beliefs in second language acquisition: Teacher. In C.A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. New York: Blackwell Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bråten, I
    (1991a) Vygotsky as precursor to metacognitive theory: I. The concept of metacognition and its roots. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 35(3), 179–192. doi: 10.1080/0031383910350302
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383910350302 [Google Scholar]
  12. (1991b) Vygotsky as precursor to metacognitive theory: II. Vygotsky as metacognitivist. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 35(4), 305–320. doi: 10.1080/0031383910350406
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383910350406 [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown, A.V
    (2009) Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 46–60. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00827.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00827.x [Google Scholar]
  14. Cole, M
    (1996) Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Cornillie, F. , Clarebout, G. , & Desmet, P
    (2012) Between learning and playing? Exploring learners’ perceptions of corrective feedback in an immersive game for English pragmatics. ReCALL: The Journal of EUROCALL, 24(03), 257–278. doi: 10.1017/S0958344012000146
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344012000146 [Google Scholar]
  16. Diab, R.L
    (2005) Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canada Journal, 23(1), 28–43. Retrieved fromwww.teslcanadajournal.ca/index.php/tesl/article/view/76 doi: 10.18806/tesl.v23i1.76
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v23i1.76 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dufva, H
    (2003) Beliefs in dialogue: A Bakhtinian view. In P. Kalaja & A.M.F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp.131–151). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4751‑0_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4751-0_6 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2004) The contribution of the Bakhtin Circle to the psychology of language. In M. Nenonen (Ed.), Papers from the 30th Finnish Conference of Linguistics (pp.21–26). Joensuu, Finland: University of Joensuu.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Goldman-Eisler, F
    (1961) A comparative study of two hesitation phenomena. Language and Speech, 4(1), 18–26. doi: 10.1177/002383096100400102
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002383096100400102 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hedgcock, J. , & Lefkowitz, N
    (1994) Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 39(1), 141–163. doi: 10.1016/1060‑3743(94)90012‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4 [Google Scholar]
  21. Heift, T
    (2002) Learner control and error correction in ICALL: Browsers, peekers, and adamants. Calico Journal, 19(2), 295–313. Retrieved fromwww.jstor.org/stable/24149363
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Horwitz, E.K
    (1985) Using student beliefs about language learning and teaching in the foreign language methods course. Foreign Language Annals, 18(4), 333–340. doi: 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1985.tb01811.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1985.tb01811.x [Google Scholar]
  23. 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]
  24. Kalaja, P. , & Barcelos, A.M.F
    (2013) Beliefs in second language acquisition: Learner. In C.A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. New York: Blackwell Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kern, R.G
    (1995) Students’ and teachers’ beliefs about language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 28(1), 71–92. doi: 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1995.tb00770.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1995.tb00770.x [Google Scholar]
  26. Kozulin, A
    (1998) Psychological tools: A sociocultural approach to education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Leki, I
    (1991) The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1991.tb00464.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x [Google Scholar]
  28. Leontjev, D
    (2014) The effect of automated adaptive corrective feedback: L2 English questions. APPLES: Journal of applied language studies, 8(2), 43–66. Retrieved fromapples.jyu.fi/ArticleFile/download/459
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Mercer, S
    (2011) Language learner self-concept: Complexity, continuity and change. System, 39(3), 335–346. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2011.07.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.07.006 [Google Scholar]
  30. Nation, I.S.P
    (2001) Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524759
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759 [Google Scholar]
  31. Plonsky, L. , & Mills, S.V
    (2006) An exploratory study of differing perceptions of error correction between a teacher and students: Bridging the gap. Applied Language Learning, 16(1), 55–74. Retrieved fromwww.dliflc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/all16one.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Poehner, M.E
    (2008) Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. Berlin: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Poehner, M.E , & Lantolf, J.P
    (2013) Bringing the ZPD into the equation: Capturing L2 development during Computerized Dynamic Assessment (C-DA). Language Teaching Research, 17(3), 323–342. doi: 10.1177/1362168813482935
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813482935 [Google Scholar]
  34. Pujolà, J
    (2001) Did CALL feedback feed back? Researching learners’ use of feedback. ReCALL: The Journal of EUROCALL, 13(1), 79–98. doi: 10.1017/S0958344001000817
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344001000817 [Google Scholar]
  35. Põhikooli riiklik õppekava õigusakt: Lisa 1 [Basic School National Curriculum Act: Annex 1]
    (2010) Pub. L. No. RT I 2010, 6, 22. Retrieved fromhttps://www.riigiteataja.ee/aktilisa/1281/2201/0017/13275423.pdf
  36. 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), 46–69. Retrieved fromwww.teslcanadajournal.ca/index.php/tesl/article/view/633 doi: 10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633 [Google Scholar]
  37. Sato, M
    (2013) Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611–633. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2013.12035.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12035.x [Google Scholar]
  38. Schulz, R.A
    (2001) Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA-Colombia. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244–258. doi: 10.1111/0026‑7902.00107
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00107 [Google Scholar]
  39. Teo, A
    (2012) Promoting EFL students’ inferential reading skills through computerized dynamic assessment. Language Learning & Technology, 16(3), 10–20. Retrieved fromllt.msu.edu/issues/october2012/action.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Thouësny, S
    (2011) Dynamically assessing written language: To what extent do learners of French language accept mediation?In S. Thouësny & L. Bradley (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning with technology: Views of emergent researchers (pp.169–188). Dublin: Research-publishing.net.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Vasilyeva, E. , Puuronen, S. , Pechenizkiy, M. , & Rasanen, P
    (2007) Feedback adaptation in web-based learning systems. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 17(4-5), 337–357. doi: 10.1504/IJCEELL.2007.015046
    https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCEELL.2007.015046 [Google Scholar]
  42. Vygotsky, L.S
    (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wenden, A
    (1987) Metacognition: An expanded view of the cognitive abilities of L2 learners. Language Learning, 37(4), 573–597. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1987.tb00585.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1987.tb00585.x [Google Scholar]
  44. Wertsch, J.V
    (1991) A sociocultural approach to socially shared cognition. In L.B. Resnick , J.M. Levine , & S.D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp.85–100). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/10096‑004
    https://doi.org/10.1037/10096-004 [Google Scholar]
  45. (1998) Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Yoshida, R
    (2010) How do teachers and learners perceive corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom?The Modern Language Journal, 94(2), 293–314. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2010.01022.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01022.x [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/itl.167.1.03leo
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): dynamic assessment , feedback , learners' beliefs , social interaction and sociocultural theory
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