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
This study attempts to add new empirical evidence on the language learning (operationalized and measured in terms of several dimensions of accuracy) that may derive from accessing and processing written corrective feedback (WCF) on one's own writing. The research questions examined potential in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.) Colo.), 2019-12, Vol.103 (4), p.848-873 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 873 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 848 |
container_title | The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.) |
container_volume | 103 |
creator | NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA CEREZO, LOURDES |
description | This study attempts to add new empirical evidence on the language learning (operationalized and measured in terms of several dimensions of accuracy) that may derive from accessing and processing written corrective feedback (WCF) on one's own writing. The research questions examined potential interactions between type of WCF (direct vs. indirect), type of errors (grammar vs. nongrammar), and the perspective of feedback (accuracy vs. acquisition) in a single research design. To this end, 46 English majors at a Spanish university participated in a pretest-posttest design, with 2 intervention groups (those receiving direct or indirect WCF and asked to process it via written languaging) and a control group (who wrote and rewrote their texts without the help of WCF but also engaged in languaging). The analyses conducted show (a) limited appropriation of the WCF received, (b) positive short-term and longer term benefits resulting from the combined effect of WCF and written languaging, and (c) differential effects of type of WCF on error types. These findings are discussed from the perspective of current theory and research on the manner in which WCF may contribute to language learning in terms of the dual distinction between feedback for accuracy and feedback for acquisition. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/modl.12592 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2316317285</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45286641</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>45286641</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3312-446fc471d1c81b3e5d5e0a1b5d26552936436d7e36638b28483a0df8ad40c2503</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1uEzEURi0EEqGw4QksITZIU3z9Nw67Km1ppUAllIqlNbGvwWlqt_YMIY_EWzbJFIFY4I313XuOvfgIeQ3sGHbn_W3262PgasqfkAkoyRrZGnhKJoxx3bRTxp-TF7WuGGMARk7Ir8V3pGchoOtpDvQ6heyGip6exrKfdcnTy-TH8LXEvsdEZ7nsc_yB9BzRLzt3Q3OiX3DzCCzwZ18P7mfcjOkDned8E9M3GlOf_3ghF3ri3FA6tz0Y_2zuh1hjH3N6SZ6Fbl3x1eN9RK7Pzxazi2Z-9fFydjJvnBDAGyl1cLIFD87AUqDyClkHS-W5VopPhZZC-xaF1sIsuZFGdMwH03nJHFdMHJE347t3Jd8PWHu7ykNJuy8tF6AFtNyoHfVupFzJtRYM9q7E265sLTC7r8Luq7CHKnYwjPAmrnH7H9J-ujqd_3bejs6q9rn87XDBWisVN1pLEA-VYJgN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2316317285</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>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</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA ; MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA ; CEREZO, LOURDES</creator><creatorcontrib>NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA ; MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA ; CEREZO, LOURDES</creatorcontrib><description>This study attempts to add new empirical evidence on the language learning (operationalized and measured in terms of several dimensions of accuracy) that may derive from accessing and processing written corrective feedback (WCF) on one's own writing. The research questions examined potential interactions between type of WCF (direct vs. indirect), type of errors (grammar vs. nongrammar), and the perspective of feedback (accuracy vs. acquisition) in a single research design. To this end, 46 English majors at a Spanish university participated in a pretest-posttest design, with 2 intervention groups (those receiving direct or indirect WCF and asked to process it via written languaging) and a control group (who wrote and rewrote their texts without the help of WCF but also engaged in languaging). The analyses conducted show (a) limited appropriation of the WCF received, (b) positive short-term and longer term benefits resulting from the combined effect of WCF and written languaging, and (c) differential effects of type of WCF on error types. These findings are discussed from the perspective of current theory and research on the manner in which WCF may contribute to language learning in terms of the dual distinction between feedback for accuracy and feedback for acquisition.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0026-7902</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1540-4781</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/modl.12592</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Control Groups ; English as a second language ; error types ; Feedback ; feedback for accuracy ; feedback for acquisition ; Higher education ; Research design ; Spanish language ; unfocused feedback ; written languaging</subject><ispartof>The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.), 2019-12, Vol.103 (4), p.848-873</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2019 National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations</rights><rights>National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations</rights><rights>2019 by The Modern Language Journal</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3312-446fc471d1c81b3e5d5e0a1b5d26552936436d7e36638b28483a0df8ad40c2503</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3312-446fc471d1c81b3e5d5e0a1b5d26552936436d7e36638b28483a0df8ad40c2503</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45286641$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45286641$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CEREZO, LOURDES</creatorcontrib><title>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</title><title>The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.)</title><description>This study attempts to add new empirical evidence on the language learning (operationalized and measured in terms of several dimensions of accuracy) that may derive from accessing and processing written corrective feedback (WCF) on one's own writing. The research questions examined potential interactions between type of WCF (direct vs. indirect), type of errors (grammar vs. nongrammar), and the perspective of feedback (accuracy vs. acquisition) in a single research design. To this end, 46 English majors at a Spanish university participated in a pretest-posttest design, with 2 intervention groups (those receiving direct or indirect WCF and asked to process it via written languaging) and a control group (who wrote and rewrote their texts without the help of WCF but also engaged in languaging). The analyses conducted show (a) limited appropriation of the WCF received, (b) positive short-term and longer term benefits resulting from the combined effect of WCF and written languaging, and (c) differential effects of type of WCF on error types. These findings are discussed from the perspective of current theory and research on the manner in which WCF may contribute to language learning in terms of the dual distinction between feedback for accuracy and feedback for acquisition.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Control Groups</subject><subject>English as a second language</subject><subject>error types</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>feedback for accuracy</subject><subject>feedback for acquisition</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Research design</subject><subject>Spanish language</subject><subject>unfocused feedback</subject><subject>written languaging</subject><issn>0026-7902</issn><issn>1540-4781</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc1uEzEURi0EEqGw4QksITZIU3z9Nw67Km1ppUAllIqlNbGvwWlqt_YMIY_EWzbJFIFY4I313XuOvfgIeQ3sGHbn_W3262PgasqfkAkoyRrZGnhKJoxx3bRTxp-TF7WuGGMARk7Ir8V3pGchoOtpDvQ6heyGip6exrKfdcnTy-TH8LXEvsdEZ7nsc_yB9BzRLzt3Q3OiX3DzCCzwZ18P7mfcjOkDned8E9M3GlOf_3ghF3ri3FA6tz0Y_2zuh1hjH3N6SZ6Fbl3x1eN9RK7Pzxazi2Z-9fFydjJvnBDAGyl1cLIFD87AUqDyClkHS-W5VopPhZZC-xaF1sIsuZFGdMwH03nJHFdMHJE347t3Jd8PWHu7ykNJuy8tF6AFtNyoHfVupFzJtRYM9q7E265sLTC7r8Luq7CHKnYwjPAmrnH7H9J-ujqd_3bejs6q9rn87XDBWisVN1pLEA-VYJgN</recordid><startdate>20191201</startdate><enddate>20191201</enddate><creator>NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA</creator><creator>MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA</creator><creator>CEREZO, LOURDES</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20191201</creationdate><title>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</title><author>NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA ; MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA ; CEREZO, LOURDES</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3312-446fc471d1c81b3e5d5e0a1b5d26552936436d7e36638b28483a0df8ad40c2503</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Control Groups</topic><topic>English as a second language</topic><topic>error types</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>feedback for accuracy</topic><topic>feedback for acquisition</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Research design</topic><topic>Spanish language</topic><topic>unfocused feedback</topic><topic>written languaging</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CEREZO, LOURDES</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>NICOLÁS-CONESA, FLORENTINA</au><au>MANCHÓN, ROSA MARÍA</au><au>CEREZO, LOURDES</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>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</atitle><jtitle>The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.)</jtitle><date>2019-12-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>103</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>848</spage><epage>873</epage><pages>848-873</pages><issn>0026-7902</issn><eissn>1540-4781</eissn><abstract>This study attempts to add new empirical evidence on the language learning (operationalized and measured in terms of several dimensions of accuracy) that may derive from accessing and processing written corrective feedback (WCF) on one's own writing. The research questions examined potential interactions between type of WCF (direct vs. indirect), type of errors (grammar vs. nongrammar), and the perspective of feedback (accuracy vs. acquisition) in a single research design. To this end, 46 English majors at a Spanish university participated in a pretest-posttest design, with 2 intervention groups (those receiving direct or indirect WCF and asked to process it via written languaging) and a control group (who wrote and rewrote their texts without the help of WCF but also engaged in languaging). The analyses conducted show (a) limited appropriation of the WCF received, (b) positive short-term and longer term benefits resulting from the combined effect of WCF and written languaging, and (c) differential effects of type of WCF on error types. These findings are discussed from the perspective of current theory and research on the manner in which WCF may contribute to language learning in terms of the dual distinction between feedback for accuracy and feedback for acquisition.</abstract><cop>Malden</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/modl.12592</doi><tpages>26</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0026-7902 |
ispartof | The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.), 2019-12, Vol.103 (4), p.848-873 |
issn | 0026-7902 1540-4781 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2316317285 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Accuracy Control Groups English as a second language error types Feedback feedback for accuracy feedback for acquisition Higher education Research design Spanish language unfocused feedback written languaging |
title | 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 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T00%3A26%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Effect%20of%20Unfocused%20Direct%20and%20Indirect%20Written%20Corrective%20Feedback%20on%20Rewritten%20Texts%20and%20New%20Texts:%20Looking%20into%20Feedback%20for%20Accuracy%20and%20Feedback%20for%20Acquisition&rft.jtitle=The%20Modern%20language%20journal%20(Boulder,%20Colo.)&rft.au=NICOL%C3%81S-CONESA,%20FLORENTINA&rft.date=2019-12-01&rft.volume=103&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=848&rft.epage=873&rft.pages=848-873&rft.issn=0026-7902&rft.eissn=1540-4781&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/modl.12592&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45286641%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2316317285&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=45286641&rfr_iscdi=true |