Effects of teacher, automated, and combined feedback on syntactic complexity in EFL students' writing

被引:2
作者
Thi, Nang Kham [1 ]
Nikolov, Marianne [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Szeged, 32 34 Petof Sgt, H-6722 Szeged, Hungary
[2] Univ Pecs, 6 Ifjusag St, H-7624 Pecs, Hungary
关键词
Written corrective feedback; Automated feedback; Syntactic complexity; Learner corpus analysis; Second language writing; WRITTEN-CORRECTIVE-FEEDBACK; ERROR-CORRECTION; ACCURACY; PROFICIENCY; EFFICACY; ABILITY; WRITERS;
D O I
10.1186/s40862-022-00182-1
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Although studies on written feedback have confirmed the effectiveness of multiple sources of feedback in promoting learners' accuracy, much remains to be discovered about its impact on other aspects of language development. Concerns were raised with regard to the possible unfavourable impact of feedback on the complexity of students' writing which resulted from their attention to producing accurate texts. In response to this need for research, the study investigated the effects of teacher, automated, and combined feedback on students' syntactic complexity over a 13-week semester. Our data collection included 270 students' texts including their drafts and revised texts and pre-and post-test writing. Essays were analysed using the web-based interface of the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer. Regardless of feedback from multiple sources, paired sample t-test results indicate no significant differences between initial and revised texts, resulting in minimal variance between comparison pairs. Moreover, no significant differences were found between the pre-and post-writing assessment in all complexity measures. These findings suggest that providing feedback on students' writing does not lead them to write less structurally complex texts. The syntactic complexity of their revised essays varied among high-, mid-, and low-achieving students. These variations could be attributed to proficiency levels, writing prompts, genre differences, and feedback sources. A discussion of pedagogical implications is provided.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]   In the face of fallible AWE feedback: how do students respond? [J].
Bai, Lifang ;
Hu, Guangwei .
EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 37 (01) :67-81
[2]   Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in the argumentative writing of ESL and EFL learners [J].
Barrot, Jessie ;
Gabinete, Mari Karen .
IRAL-INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF APPLIED LINGUISTICS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING, 2021, 59 (02) :209-232
[3]   Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy [J].
Benson, Susan ;
DeKeyser, Robert .
LANGUAGE TEACHING RESEARCH, 2019, 23 (06) :702-726
[4]   EFFECTS ON 2ND LANGUAGE-LEARNING OF VARIATIONS IN WRITTEN FEEDBACK ON HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENTS [J].
CARDELLE, M ;
CORNO, L .
TESOL QUARTERLY, 1981, 15 (03) :251-261
[5]   Automated Essay Scoring feedback for second language writers: How does it compare to instructor feedback? [J].
Diklil, Semire ;
Bleyle, Susan .
ASSESSING WRITING, 2014, 22 :1-17
[6]   Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback in First-Year Composition: Accuracy and Lexical and Syntactic Complexity [J].
Eckstein, Grant ;
Bell, Lisa .
RELC JOURNAL, 2023, 54 (03) :630-647
[7]   Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback among Graduate Students: The Effects of Feedback Timing [J].
Eckstein, Grant ;
Sims, Maureen ;
Rohm, Lisa .
TESL CANADA JOURNAL, 2020, 37 (02) :78-102
[8]  
El Ebyary K, 2010, INT J ENGL STUD, V10, P121
[9]   A Framework for Investigating Oral and Written Corrective Feedback EPILOGUE [J].
Ellis, Rod .
STUDIES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, 2010, 32 (02) :335-349
[10]  
Euroexam International, 2019, EUR DET SPEC