This project firstly explored Iranian English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ perceptions about written corrective feedback (WCF)-related practices and preferences. Secondly, the student participants’ first language (L1; e.g., Farsi) learner identities were operationalized, especially focusing on the skill of writing, WCF, and grammar-centred WCF. Thirdly, the students’ affective engagement with WCF was scrutinized, particularly in light of L1 student identities. The participants in the study were 15 students in an Iranian EFL context. Analysis of interview data revealed that the skill of writing was held in low regard by the students. Also, several discrepancies emerged vis-à-vis WCF methods (e.g., direct vs. coded), error correctors (e.g., teacher feedback vs. peer feedback), the amount of correction (e.g., selective vs. comprehensive correction), and the relative importance of different components of writing (e.g., grammar vs. content vs. organization). In particular, the findings showed that the students’ L1 identities involved low regard for writing, but high regard for speaking skills, and that they attached high value to grammatical accuracy and teacher explicit feedback. Finally, the findings indicated that: (a) the students’ second language (L2) identities (e.g., WCF-related preferences) were profoundly affected by their L1 student identities, and (b) the discrepancies between the students’ L2 writing preferences (e.g., preferred amount of WCF) and the teachers’ reported practices could potentially hinder students’ affective engagement with WCF.
As Ferris (2014) states, teachers have received insufficient research attention regarding their perceptions and practices of feedback. This study, therefore, was an attempt to qualitatively explore Iranian EFL teachers’ feedback-related perceptions and practices. In addition, the discrepancies between the reported perceptions and practices were examined. The data collection consisted of qualitative interviews with 14 teachers. The data analysis (i.e., data coding using the grounded theory approach) helped develop a coding scheme in which a number of thematic categories and subcategories were delineated with regard to feedback. The findings, accordingly, revealed some noteworthy discrepancies between the teachers’ perceptions and practices. For instance, although the teachers valued peer-feedback and selective correction, they reported providing teacher-generated feedback and comprehensive commentary on grammatical errors, respectively. Also, the teachers were aware of the importance of indirect methods of correction (e.g., to promote learner autonomy), but mostly gave explicit feedback on their students’ grammatical issues. Overall, we showed that these discrepancies primarily resulted from students’ expectations. We also discussed the findings in light of sociocultural considerations and the tenets of learner engagement with feedback.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to shed light on corporate sustainability reports (CSRs). In doing so, a number of rhetorical moves were identified in such reports and the rhetorical purposes of those moves were investigated. The findings helped understand the corporations’ eco-ideologies and priorities. Design/methodology/approach A total of 12 CSRs from laptop-manufacturing companies were chosen. The CSRs then underwent data coding which led to the identification of rhetorical moves and sub-moves. The identified moves were then analyzed contextually to interpret the corporations’ larger-scale ideologies. Findings The findings identified a number of rhetorical moves. For instance, the corporations were shown to stress issues, such as resource management and waste management, in the CSRs. In addition, linguistic analysis of the CSRs indicated that the companies accepted their share in environmental issues and aimed to address such issues. Originality/value The present study is the first known attempt at analyzing the CSRs issues by laptop manufacturers. While some previous studies (Mason and Mason, 2012) have investigated the CSRs issued by a wide array of companies, no existing study has focused on tech companies.
The current study set out to investigate the effects of oral corrective feedback (OCF) and examine the impact of correction timing on lexical stress and sentence intonation accuracy in a Persian context. The data was collected from a sample of upper-intermediate EFL students (N = 61). Immediate teacher-explicit OCF, delayed teacher-explicit OCF, and a control group were randomly assigned to three classes. A list of 50 new words, contextualized in 50 statements/questions, were utilized to measure any possible gains. Analysis of post-test results confirmed that the teacher immediate OCF (n = 20) and teacher delayed OCF (n = 20) classes outperformed the control group (n = 21). Post-hoc analysis revealed that the treatment groups were not significantly different in lexical stress accuracy gains. In contrast, the immediate group had significantly higher gains than the delayed one in sentence intonation accuracy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.