1 |
A three-stage model for implementing focused written corrective feedback
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
2 |
FACTORS INFLUENCING EFL STUDENTS’ UTILISATION OF TEACHER WRITTEN FEEDBACK
|
|
|
|
In: TEFLIN Journal, Vol 33, Iss 1, Pp 98-122 (2022) (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
3 |
Written Corrective Feedback, Working Memory, and the Development of Explicit and Implicit Knowledge of English Plurals ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
The Role of Individual Preferences in the Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in an English for Academic Purposes Writing Course
|
|
|
|
In: Australian Journal of Teacher Education (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
5 |
Assessing Writing in French-as-a-Foreign-Language: Teacher Practices and Learner Uptake
|
|
|
|
In: Languages; Volume 6; Issue 4; Pages: 210 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
Student engagement with teacher written feedback on IELTS Writing Task 2 rehearsal essays
|
|
Pearson, WS. - : University of Exeter, 2021. : Graduate School of Education, 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
7 |
Can a ‘pedagogical’ spellchecker improve spelling accuracy in L2 Spanish?
|
|
Blazquez-Carretero, Miguel; Woore, Robert. - : University of Hawaii National Foreign Language Resource Center, 2021. : Center for Language & Technology, 2021. : (co-sponsored by Center for Open Educational Resources and Language Learning, University of Texas at Austin), 2021
|
|
Abstract:
Accurate spelling matters for L2 learners: It facilitates communication, affects other aspects of the writing process, and is an important assessment criterion. However, even in phonologically transparent writing systems like Spanish, L2 learners experience spelling difficulties. Nonetheless, explicit spelling instruction appears to be neglected by L2 teachers. Synchronous written corrective feedback, provided automatically by computerised spellcheckers, is one way of providing such instruction without cost to teaching time. However, evidence concerning the effectiveness of such feedback is mixed. Further, existing spellcheckers, designed for L1 speakers, present various problems for L2 learners. The current study reports on an experimental trial of a Pedagogic Spellchecker (PSC), developed specifically for L2 learners. In all, 107 adult learners of Spanish as a Foreign Language were block randomised into three treatment groups. All groups completed a short transcription task on five consecutive days. One group received feedback from the PSC; another received feedback from Microsoft Word spellchecker; the third received no feedback. Pre- and post-test data showed that the PSC group progressed significantly more in spelling accuracy than the other groups, with a large effect size. Nonetheless, Microsoft Word spellchecker reduced errors on spelling forms that it did not autocorrect. Pedagogical and theoretical implications are discussed.
|
|
Keyword:
Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL); Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL); Spellchecking Software; Written Corrective Feedback (WCF)
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10125/73437
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
8 |
Focused direct corrective feedback: Effects on the elementary English learners’ written syntactic complexity
|
|
|
|
In: Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol 7, Iss 1, Pp 132-150 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
9 |
Am I Promoting Feedback Cycle and Sociomaterial Learning?
|
|
|
|
In: Issues in Language Studies, Vol 10, Iss 1 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
10 |
Written Comments on Undergraduate Theses Written in Spanish as a First Language and English as a Foreign Language
|
|
|
|
In: Signum: Estudos da Linguagem, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 52-68 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
Omani EFL writing instructors’ attitudes and reported and actual practices towards written corrective feedback in first year foundation programmes
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
12 |
An Inquiry into Effective Written Feedback from EFL Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives at a Saudi University
|
|
Albogami, M. - : University of Exeter, 2020. : School of Education, 2020
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
13 |
Validating written feedback in clinical formative assessment
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
14 |
Less is more? The impact of written corrective feedback on corpus-assisted L2 error resolution
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
15 |
THE TEACHERS’ BELIEFS IN TEACHER WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON THE STUDENTS' WRITING
|
|
|
|
In: Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature, Vol 5, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
16 |
The Effects of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedbacks on the Business Communication Texts of Technical University Students in Ghana
|
|
|
|
In: Applied Linguistics Research Journal, Vol 4, Iss 2, Pp 25-39 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
17 |
Written corrective feedback in English compositions: Teachers’ practices and students’ expectations
|
|
|
|
In: English Language Teaching Educational Journal, Vol 3, Iss 2, Pp 95-107 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
18 |
The effects of different types of written corrective feedback on students’ texting mistakes
|
|
|
|
In: English Language Teaching Educational Journal, Vol 3, Iss 3, Pp 174-187 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
19 |
Students’ preferences and teachers’ beliefs towards written corrective feedback
|
|
|
|
In: ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching, Vol 9, Iss 1, Pp 85-95 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|