CALL; Feedback; Grammar Checker; Lexical errors; Self-correction; Language and Linguistics; Education; Linguistics and Language
Abstract :
[en] This research aims at revisiting the role of software when it comes to providing learners with corrective feedback on their pieces of writing. The study, based on the analysis of handwritten and software-corrected versions of essays written by 33 undergraduate students enrolled in the undergraduate degree programme in English Studies at a Spanish University contributed to confirming the assumption that technology can indeed be a useful tool in the teaching and learning process. More specifically, this study demonstrated that students could reduce significantly the number of lexical errors in their essays through the autonomous use of error-correction software and that, over time, the students can improve on their ability to avoid such errors. Nevertheless, the study has also confirmed that software can in no way completely replace teachers, as computer programming is quite limited and there are errors that only proficient language users can detect and correct.
Disciplines :
Languages & linguistics
Author, co-author :
Beltrán, Rubén Chacón ; National University of Distance Education, Spain
Echitchi, Raymond ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de langues modernes : linguistique, littérature et traduction ; National University of Distance Education, Spain
Language :
English
Title :
Improving lexical errors in EFL writing by using software-mediated corrective feedback
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.
Bibliography
Agustín-Llach, M.P. (2011). Lexical errors and accuracy in foreign Language writing. Multilingual Matters.
Agustín-Llach, M.P. (2014). Lexical errors in writing at the end of Primary and Secondary Edu-cation: Description and pedagogical implications. Porta Linguarum, 23, 109-124
Attali, Y., & Burstein, J. (2006). Automated essay scoring with e-rater v.2.Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 4(3), 1-30.
Bejoint, H. (2000). Modern lexicography. An introduction. Oxford University Press
Bitchener, J. (2012). Written corrective feedback for L2 development: Current knowledge and future research. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 855–867. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.62
Bitchener, J. & Ferris, D.R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
Brill, J.M., & Galloway, C. (2007). Perils and promises: University instructors’ integration of technology in classroom-based practices. British Journal of Educational Technology 38(1), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00601.x
Carrió-Pastor, M.L., & Mestre-Mestre, E.M. (2013). Lexical errors in second language scientific writing: Some conceptual implications. International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), 97-108. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/14/1/154361
Cenoz, J. (2003) The influence and age on the acquisition of English: General proficiency, attitudes and code-mixing. In M.P. García-Mayo, & M.L. García Lecumberri (Eds.) Age and the acquisition of a foreign language (pp. 77-93). Multilingual Matters.
Chacón-Beltrán, R. (2006). Towards a tyological classification of false friends (Spanish-English). RESLA, 19, 29-39.
Chacón-Beltrán, R. (2017). Free-form writing: computerized feedback for self-correction. ELT Journal, 71(2), 141-149. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw064
Chacón-Beltrán, R. (2018). Vocabulary learning strategies outside the classroom context: What adults learn in a technology-based learner-centred environment. The Language Learning Journal, 46(5), 583-593. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2018.1503135
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9
Chodorow, M., Gamon, M., & Tetreault, J. (2010). The utility of article and preposition error correction systems for English language learners: Feedback and assessment. Language Testing, 27(3), 419-436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210364391
El Ebyary, K. & Windeatt, S. (2010). The impact of Computer-based feedback on student s’ written work. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 121-142. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.10.2.119231
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001
Fazio, L. (2001). The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority-and majority-language students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10 (4), 235-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00042-X
Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6
Ferris, D. R. (2015). Written corrective feedback in L2 writing: Connors & Lunsford (1988); Lunsford & Lunsford (2008); Lalande (1982). Language Teaching, 48(4), 531–544. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000257
García-Lecumberri, M.L. & Gallardo, F. (2003). English FL sounds in school learners of different ages. In M.P. García-Mayo, & M.L. García Lecumberri (Eds.) Age and the acquisition of a foreign language (pp. 115-135). Multilingual Matters.
Guichon, N., Betrancourt, M. & Prié, Y. (2012). Managing written and oral negative feedback in a synchronous online teaching situation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(2), 181-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.636054
Harvey-Scholes, C. (2017). Computer-assisted detection of 90% of EFL student errors. Computer Assisted Language Learning. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1392322
Hernandez Puertas, T. (2018). Teachers’ feedback vs. Computer-generated feedback: A focus on articles. Language Value, 10(1), 67-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.6035/LanguageV.2018.10.5
Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. The Modern Language Journal, 75, 305–313. https://doi.org/10.2307/328724
Lawley, J. (2015). New software to help EFL students self-correct their writing. Language Learning & Technology, 19(1), 23-33.
Lee, I. (2013). Research into practice: Written corrective feedback. Language Teaching, 46(1), 108-119. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000390
Lee, I. (2016). Teacher education on feedback in EFL writing: Issues, challenges, and future directions. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 518–527. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.303
Lee, Y-W., Gentile, C., & Kantor, R. (2010) Toward automated multi-trait scoring of essays: Investigating links among holistic, analytic, and text feature scores. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 391-417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp040.
Makino, T.Y. (1993). Learner self-correction in EFL written compositions. ELT journal, 47(4), 337-341. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/47.4.337
Mohebbi, H. (2021). 25 years on, the written error correction debate continues: an interview with John Truscott. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 6(3). https://sfleducation.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40862-021-00110-9
Morrison, G.R., Ross, S.M., Kemp, J.E, & Kalman, H. (2010). Designing effective instruction. Applications of instructional design (6th edition). Wiley.
Mukattash, L. (1986). Persistence of Fossilization. IRAL, 24: 187-203. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1986.24.1-4.187
Senra-Silva, I. (2010). Designing computer-generated pedagogical feedback for Spanish students of EFL. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 23, 281-296.
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829202300107
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “the case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111–122. https://doi. org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6
Olsen, S. (1999). Errors and compensatory strategies: a study of grammar and vocabulary in texts written by Norwegian learners of English. System, 27, 191-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00016-0
Verspoor, M., Schmid, M.S. & Xu, X. (2012). A dynamic usage based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 239-263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jslw.2012.03.007
Ware, P. (2011). Computer-generated feedback on student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 45(4), 769-774. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.272525
Warschauer, M. (2010). Invited commentary: New tools for teaching writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14 (1), 3–8.
Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. (2006). Automated writing evaluation: Defining the classroom research agenda. Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr190oa
Similar publications
Sorry the service is unavailable at the moment. Please try again later.
This website uses cookies to improve user experience. Read more
Save & Close
Accept all
Decline all
Show detailsHide details
Cookie declaration
About cookies
Strictly necessary
Performance
Strictly necessary cookies allow core website functionality such as user login and account management. The website cannot be used properly without strictly necessary cookies.
This cookie is used by Cookie-Script.com service to remember visitor cookie consent preferences. It is necessary for Cookie-Script.com cookie banner to work properly.
Performance cookies are used to see how visitors use the website, eg. analytics cookies. Those cookies cannot be used to directly identify a certain visitor.
Used to store the attribution information, the referrer initially used to visit the website
Cookies are small text files that are placed on your computer by websites that you visit. Websites use cookies to help users navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. Cookies that are required for the website to operate properly are allowed to be set without your permission. All other cookies need to be approved before they can be set in the browser.
You can change your consent to cookie usage at any time on our Privacy Policy page.
