O impacto que as preferências dos alunos têm na eficácia do feedback corretivo escrito

Autores/as

Palabras clave:

feedback corretivo escrito, preferências dos alunos, aquisição, precisão gramatical

Resumen

Apesar de o feedback corretivo escrito (FCE) ter sido demonstrado como promotor de precisão linguística entre aprendizes de L2, o debate sobre sua real eficácia ainda permanece aberto devido a resultados divergentes. Nesse contexto, as preferências individuais foram identificadas como fatores cruciais que exigem uma pesquisa abrangente, uma vez que poderiam mediar o efeito de um tratamento com FCE. Embora essa conjectura tenha chamado a atenção dos pesquisadores, ela continua sendo uma variável pouco explorada, uma vez que os estudos existentes, na maioria das vezes, enfatizaram as estratégias que os aprendizes preferem e como elas se alinham com as respostas dos professores a textos escritos; no entanto, falta uma abordagem mais experimental para observar esse fenômeno. Portanto, esta pesquisa quantitativa, com um desenho de pré/pós-teste, teve como objetivo determinar a eficácia do FCE quando o tratamento é ajustado às preferências dos aprendizes. A amostra correspondeu a 61 estudantes de Pedagogia em Inglês de uma universidade chilena. As preferências dos alunos em relação ao FCE foram coletadas por meio de um questionário. Em seguida, os participantes foram divididos em um grupo de controle e dois grupos experimentais: explicação direta mais explicação metalinguística e clarificação indireta mais explicação metalinguística. Cada grupo experimental era composto por alunos que haviam selecionado a estratégia de feedback que receberam e alunos que não o haviam feito. Os resultados mostram que ambos os grupos experimentais tiveram um desempenho significativamente melhor do que o grupo de controle, mas não foram encontradas diferenças estatísticas entre eles. Além disso, não foi encontrada uma relação significativa entre o ajuste das estratégias de feedback às preferências dos alunos e a eficácia de qualquer dos tipos de feedback, o que é substancial em um contexto educacional, já que considerar as preferências dos alunos nem sempre tem um impacto positivo no processo de aprendizado.

Descargas

Los datos de descarga aún no están disponibles.

Referencias

AMRHEIN, H.; NASSAJI, H. Written Corrective Feedback: What Do Students and Teachers Think is Right and Why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 13, n. 2, p. 95–127, 2010.

ATKINSON, D.; TARDY C. SLW at the Crossroads: Finding a Way in the Field. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 42, p. 86–93, 2018.

BEUNINGEN, C. van; DE JONG, N.; KUIKEN, F. Evidence on the Effectiveness of Comprehensive Error Correction in Second Language Writing. Language Learning, v. 62, n. 1, p. 1–41, 2012.

BITCHENER, J.; FERRIS, D. Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing. New York, NY: Routledge, 2012. 232p.

BITCHENER, J.; KNOCH, U. The Value of Written Corrective Feedback for Migrant and International Students. Language Teaching Research, v. 12, n. 3, p. 409–431, 2008.

BITCHENER, J. Why Some L2 Learners Fail to Benefit From Written Corrective Feedback. In: NASSAJI, K.; KARTCHAVA, E. (ed.). Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning: Research, Theory, Applications, Implications. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis, 2017. p. 129–140.

CHEN, S.; NASSAJI, H.; LIU, Q. EFL Learners’ Perceptions and Preferences of Written Corrective Feedback: A Case Study of University Students From Mainland China. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, v. 1, n. 5, p. 1–17, 2016.

DEMBO, M.; HOWARD, L. Advice About the Use of Learning Styles: A Major Myth in Education. Journal of College Reading and Learning, v. 37, n. 2, p. 101–109, 2007.

DIAB, N. Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback: Does Type of Error and Type of Correction Matter? Assessing Writing, v. 24, p. 16–34, 2015.

ELLIS, R. A Typology of Written Corrective Feedback Types. ELT Journal, v. 63, n. 2, p. 97–107, 2009.

ELLIS, R. Epilogue: A Framework for Investigating Oral and Written Corrective Feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 32, n. 2, p. 335–349, 2010.

ELLIS, R.; BARKHUIZEN, G. Analyzing Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 416 p.

ELWOOD, J.; BODE, J. Student Preferences vis-à-vis Teacher Feedback in University EFL Writing Classes in Japan. System, v. 42, n. 1, p. 333–343, 2014.

FERRIS, D. Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing Studies. Language Teaching, v. 45, n. 4, p. 446–459, 2012.

FREAR, D.; CHIU, Y. The Effect of Focused and Unfocused Indirect Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Accuracy in New Pieces of Writing. System, v. 53, p. 24–34, 2015.

GAN, Z.; AN, Z.; LIU, F. Teacher Feedback Practices, Student Feedback Motivation, and Feedback Behavior: How Are They Associated With Learning Outcomes? Frontiers in Psychology, v. 12, p. 1–14, 2021.

GHANI, M.; ASGHER, T. Effects of Teacher and Peer Feedback on Students’ Writing at Secondary Level. Journal of Educational Research, v. 15, n. 2, p. 84–98, 2012.

GOLDSCHNEIDER, J.; DEKEYSER, R. Explaining the “Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition” in English: A Meta-Analysis of Multiple Determinants. Language Learning, v. 55, n. 1, p. 27–77, 2005.

GUO, X.; YANG, Y. Effects of Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Third-Person Singular Form and the Mediating Role of Cognitive Style. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, v. 47, n. 4, p. 841–858, 2018.

HAN, Y. Mediating and Being Mediated: Learner Beliefs and Learner Engagement With Written Corrective Feedback. System, v. 69, p. 133–142, 2017.

HU, G. Culture and Peer Feedback. In: HYLAND, K.; HYLAND, F. (ed.). Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. p. 45–63.

HYLAND, K.; HYLAND, F. Feedback on Second Language Students’ Writing. Language Teaching, v. 39, n. 2, p. 83–101, 2006.

IRWIN, B. Written Corrective Feedback: Student Preferences and Teacher Feedback Practices. IAFOR Journal of Language Learning, v. 3, n. 2, p. 35–58, 2018.

KARIM, K.; NASSAJI, H. ESL Students’ Perceptions of Written Corrective Feedback: What Type of Feedback Do They Prefer and Why? The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, v. 4, n. 1, p. 5–25, 2015.

KARIM, K.; NASSAJI, H. The Effects of Written Corrective Feedback. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, v. 3, n. 1, p. 28–52, 2019.

LEE, I. Understanding Teachers’ Written Feedback Practices in Hong Kong Secondary Classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 17, n. 2, p. 69–85, 2008.

LEE, I. Utility of Focused/Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback Research for Authentic L2 Writing Classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 49, p. 1–7, 2020.

LIU, Q.; WU, S. Same Goal, Different Beliefs: Students’ Preferences and Teachers’ Perceptions of Feedback on Second Language Writing. Journal of Writing Research, v. 11, n. 2, p. 299–330, 2019.

MIAO, Y.; BADGER, R.; ZHEN, Y. A Comparative Study of Peer and Teacher Feedback in a Chinese EFL Writing Class. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 15, p. 179-200, 2006.

MOZGALINA, A. More or Less Choice? The Influence of Choice on Task Motivation and Task Engagement. System, v. 49, p. 120–132, 2015.

MUÑOZ, B. Contribución del feedback correctivo escrito indi-recto en el aprendizaje del morfema –s de verbos en inglés en tercera persona singular, en estudiantes de enseñanza básica. Literatura y Lingüística, v. 35, n. 1, p. 275-296, 2017.

MUÑOZ, B.; FERREIRA, A. El feedback correctivo escrito indirecto en el aprendizaje de la forma comparativa de adjetivos en inglés. Logos, v. 27, n. 1, p. 73-89, 2017.

MUÑOZ, B.; ORTIZ, M.; SÁEZ, K. Preferencias y opiniones de estudiantes de un programa de Pedagogía en Inglés con distinto nivel de competencia lingüística acerca del tratamiento de los errores en la escritura en LE: estudio de caso en una universidad chilena. Literatura y Lingüística, v. 47, p. 279-306, 2023.

MUÑOZ, B.; SÁEZ, K. El feedback correctivo escrito indirecto en el tratamiento de la concordancia sujeto-verbo en tercera persona singular entre estudiantes de Inglés como LE. Alpha, v. 49, p. 275-290, 2019.

ORTIZ, M. Uso de la retroalimentación correctiva focalizada indirecta con claves metalingüísticas en la adquisición del sufijo -s en la tercera persona del singular en inglés, en estudiantes de un programa de formación pedagógica en EFL de una universidad chilena. Revista Folios, v. 44, p. 127–136, 2016.

RUMMEL, S.; BITCHENER, J. The Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback and the Impact Lao Learners’ Beliefs Have on Uptake. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, v. 38, n. 1, p. 64–82, 2015.

SAELI, H.; CHENG, A. Student Writers’ Affective Engagement With Grammar-Centred Written Corrective Feedback: The Impact of (Mis)Aligned Practices and Perceptions. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 22, n. 2, p. 109–132, 2019.

SCHMIDT, R. Attention, Awareness, and Individual Differences in Language Learning. In: CLS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE (CLaSIC), 4., 2010, Singapore. Proceedings […]. Singapore: National University of Singapore/ Centre for Language Studies, 2010. p. 721–737.

SCHULZ, R. Cultural Differences in Student and Teacher Perceptions Concerning the Role of Grammar Instruction and Corrective Feedback: USA-Colombia. Modern Language Journal, v. 85, n. 2, p. 244–258, 2001.

SHEEN, Y. Corrective Feedback, Individual Differences and Second Language Learning. New York, NY: Springer Verlag, 2011. 216 p.

SHINTANI, N.; ELLIS, R.; SUZUKI, W. Effects of Written Feedback and Revision on Learners’ Accuracy in Using Two English Grammatical Structures. Language Learning, v. 64, n. 1, p. 103–131, 2014.

SINHA, T.; NASSAJI, N. ESL Learners’ Perception and its Relationship With the Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 32, n. 1, p. 41–56, 2022.

STORCH, N.; WIGGLESWORTH, G. Learners Processing, Uptake, and Retention of Corrective Feedback on Writing: Case Studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 32, n. 2, p. 303–334, 2010.

SUZUKI, W.; NASSAJI, H.; SATO, K. The Effects of Feedback Explicitness and Type of Target Structure on Accuracy in Revision and New Pieces of Writing. System, v. 81, p. 135–145, 2019.

VAN DER KLEIJ, F. Comparison of Teacher and Student Perceptions of Formative Assessment Feedback Practices and Association With Individual Student Characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education, v. 85, n. 1, p. 175–189, 2019.

ZHANG, L.; CHENG, X. Examining the Effects of Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback on L2 EAP Students’ Linguistic Performance: A Mixed-Methods Study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, v. 54, p. 1–15, 2021.

ZHANG, T.; CHEN, X.; HU, J.; KETWAN, P. EFL Students’ Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback: Do Error Types, Language Proficiency, and Foreign Language Enjoyment Matter? Frontiers in Psychology, v. 12, p. 1–12, 2021.

ZHANG, T. The Effect of Focused Versus Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback on the Development of University-Level Learners’ Explicit and Implicit Knowledge in an EFL Context. 2018. Thesis (Doctorate on Philosophy) – The University of Sydney, Sidney, 2018.

ZHANG, Z.; HYLAND, K. Student Engagement With Teacher and Automated Feedback on L2 Writing. Assessing Writing, v. 36, p. 90–102, 2018.

ZHENG, Y.; YU, S. Student Engagement With Teacher Written Corrective Feedback in EFL Writing: A Case Study of Chinese Lower-Proficiency Students. Assessing Writing, v. 37, p. 13–24, 2018.

Descargas

Publicado

29-11-2024