The Comparative Effect of Online Self-Correction, Peer- correction, and Teacher Correction in Descriptive Writing Tasks on Intermediate EFL Learners’ Grammar Knowledge The Prospect of Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL)

Mojtaba Aghajani, Mahsa Zoghipour

Abstract


60 participants of the study were selected based on their scores on the Nelson proficiency test and divided into three Telegram groups comprising a peer-correction, a self-correction and a teacher-correction group, each with 20 students. The pretest was administered to measure the subjects' grammar knowledge. Subsequently, three Telegram groups each with 21 members (20 students + 1 teacher) were formed. Then during a course of nearly one academic term the grammatical notions were taught by the teacher. The members were required to write on the prompt in about 50 to 70 words and post it on the group. Then, their writings were corrected through self-correction, peer-correction and teacher-correction under the feedback provided by the researcher. The study used a pretest-posttest design to compare the learners’ progress after the application of three different types of treatment. One-Way between-groups ANOVA was run to test whether there was any statistically significant difference in grammar knowledge in descriptive writing of intermediate EFL learners’ who receive mobile-assisted self-correction, peer-correction and teacher-correction. The researcher also used Post-Hoc Tests to determine the exact difference between correction methods. Online self-correction, peer-correction and teacher-correction were the independent variables and grammar knowledge was the dependent variable. Examining the result of the study prove that significance level between self-correction and teacher-correction was the strongest (sig. = 0.000) but the significance level was a little less strong between peer-correction and teacher-correction whereas no significance was observed between self-correction and peer-correction.


Keywords


Self-Correction, Peer - Correction, Teacher - Correction, Grammar Knowledge, Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL)  

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abraham, L. B. (2008). Computer-mediated glosses in second language reading comprehension and vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 199–226.

Alessi, S. & Trollip, S. (2001). Multimedia for learning methods and development (3rd Ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.

Allwright, D. & Bailey, K. M. (1991), Focus on the Language Learner. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Benson, P. (2007). State-of-the-art article: Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching,

(1), 21–40.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy – 2nd Edition. New York: Longman.

Brown, H.D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th Ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.

Burston, J. (2006). Measuring Effectiveness. In Donaldson, R.P. & Haggstrom, M.A. (Eds.). Changing language education through CALL. London: Routledge.

Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd Ed.). New York: Heinle & Heinle.

Chaudron, C. (1988). Second Language Classrooms: Research on Teaching and Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Chunhong, Z. & Griffiths, C. (2012).Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives on Individual Differences in Error Correction Preferences. In M.Pawlak (Ed.), New Perspectives on Individual Differences in Language Learning and Teaching, pp. 305-317.

Corder, S. P. (1974).The significance of learners’ errors. In J. Richards (Ed.), Error Analysis: Perspectives in Second Language Acquisition. pp. 19–30. London: Longman.

Dexter, S. (2002). ETIPs – Educational technology integration and implementation principles [Online]. In P. Rodgers (Ed.). Designing instruction for technology enhanced learning (pp.56-70). New York: Idea Group Publishing. Retrieved June 10, 2012, from http://www.sdexter.net/Vitae/papers/etips.pdf

Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83–107.

Fowler, W. S., & Coe, N. (1976). Nelson proficiency tests. London, England: Butler & Tanner Ltd.

Gass S., & Selinker L., (2008). Second language acquisition: an introductory course (3rdEdition). Routledge: New York.

Graves, D.H. (1991). Build a literate classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Greenwald, E.A., Persky, H.R., Campbell, J.R., & Mazzeo, J. (1999). The NAEP 1998 writing report card for the nation and the states (NCES 1999-462).

Gromik, N (2012). Cell phone video recording feature as a language learning tool: A case study. Computers and education, 58(1), 223-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.013

Hansol, L. & Jang, L. (2013). Implementing glossing in mobile-assisted language learning environments: direction & outlook. Language learning and technology, 17(3), 6-22.

Harmer, J. (1988a). How to Teach English. London: Person Longman, The Practice of English Language Teaching. 4th ed. London: Pearson Longman, 1988b.

Harmer, J. (2004). How to Teach Writing. Pearson: Longman.

Hedge, T. (2005). Writing. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.

Heller, M. (1991).Reading-writing connections: From theory to practice. New York, NY: Longman.

Hicks, J.R. (1993). Let’s get serious about teaching children to write. Lanham, MD: University Press.

Hillocks, G. (1987). Synthesis of research on teaching writing. Educational Leadership, 44 (8), 71–82.

Köhlmyr, P. (2003). “To Err is Human...” An investigation of grammatical errors in Swedish 16-year-old learners’ written production in English. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg, Department of English.

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2009). Will mobile learning change language learning? ReCALL, 21(2), 157–165.

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20(3), 271–289.

Lan, Y.-J., Sung, Y.-T., & Chang, K.-E. (2007). A mobile-device-supported peer- assisted learning system for collaborative early EFL reading. Language Learning & Technology, 11(3), 130–151.

Langer, J. (2001). Beating the odds: Teaching middle and high school students to read and write well.

American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 837-880.

Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. (1994).A communicative Grammar of English (2nded.). Longman.

Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake; negotiation of form in communicative

classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 37-66.

Mackey, A., Gass, S. & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in

Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471-497.

Mustafa, Z. (2001). Non-Courseware Factors in Using Multimedia in Foreign Language Instruction. Proceedings of the 7th Conference of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 244-259 [Online].

Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative metaanalysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528.

Paulston, C. B., & Bruder, M. N. (1976). Teaching English as a second language: techniques and procedures. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Winthrop Publishers.

Philp, J. (2003). Constraints on “noticing the gap”: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 99-126.

Pusack, J.P. & Otto, S.K. (1997). Taking control of multimedia. In M. Bush & R. Terry (Eds.). Technology-enhanced language learning (pp.1-46). Chicago: National Textbook Company.

Rahimi, A., & Dastjerdi, H. (2012). Impact of Immediate and Delayed Error Correction on EFL Learners’ Oral

Production: CAF. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 3(1) 45-54.

Richards, C. & Schmidt, R. (2002). Dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. London: Pearson

Education.

Richardson, K., & Hessey, S. (2009). Archiving the self? Facebook as biography and relational memory. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 7 (1), 25-38.

Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005) towards a theory of mobile learning. Available at: http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/Towards%20a%20theory%20of%20mobile%20learning.pdf.

Surakka, K. (2007). Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake in an EFL Classroom. University of Jyväskylä, Department of Languages [online]. http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:jyu-2007551. (15 June, 2012).

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.). (2001). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (3rd Ed.). New York: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Taipale, P. (2012). Oral Errors, Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake in an EFL Setting. University of Jyväskylä, Department of Languages [online]: http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:jyu-201203121409. (21 June, 2012).

Warschauer, M., & Meskill, C. (2000). Technology and second language learning. In J. Rosenthal (Ed.), Handbook of undergraduate second language education (pp. 303-318). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Weigle, S. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.3p.14

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2020 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.