Error correction strategies used by learners of Japanese when revising a writing task

Kubota, Mariko

doi:10.1016/s0346-251x(01)00026-4

Cited by 28 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The teachers discussed the codes and changed some of them because they were more comfortable using their own codes for the same target structures. Examining the codes used in indirect feedback is worthwhile (Kubota, 2001), and if necessary codes should be adapted for learners (Sampson, 2012). The teachers then applied the codes on a given essay.…”

Section: Training Of Teacher Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Grammatical Accuracy in Thai Learners' Writing : Comparing Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback

Tan¹,

Manochphinyo²

2017

The Journal of AsiaTEFL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Written corrective feedback (WCF) is widely used to point students to the grammatical errors in their written work and help reduce them. This paper reports a quasi-experimental study that compared the effectiveness of direct and indirect teacher WCF in a Thai context. One hundred and twenty Thai students at two public universities in southern Thailand were assigned to write argumentative essays within a treatment period; each treatment had 60 students. The feedback was given by four ESL/EFL lecturers at the two universities. Grammatical aspects focused on were tenses, subject-verb agreement, articles, singular/plural nouns, prepositions and adjectives/adverbs. Means for the number of errors were obtained at three points, namely, pretest, immediate posttest and delayed posttest. The findings revealed that time and WCF type as main effects showed differentiated results on all six grammatical aspects. Interaction effects between time and WCF were found for tenses and subject-verb agreement. For between-subjects effects, indirect WCF was more effective than direct WCF. For within-subjects effects, generally the differences in the mean values were significant between pretest and delayed posttest, but not between pretest and immediate posttest. These findings have implications for writing instruction and research in an ESL/EFL tertiary context.

show abstract

Section: Training Of Teacher Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Grammatical Accuracy in Thai Learners' Writing : Comparing Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback

Tan¹,

Manochphinyo²

2017

The Journal of AsiaTEFL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in the case of written text, instructors can indicate on the margin of the text that a number of errors have occurred in a specific line or paragraph (Elwood & Bode, 2014). They can also move a step forward and indicate the location of error by circling or underling it (Ferris & Roberts, 2001) or showing its category and type by using specific codes (Kubota, 2001) which possibly reduces the cognitive loads, time and effort expended on the part of students to correct the errors. The instructors can also adopt more elaborate feedback procedures and provide learners with both score (in a holistic or analytic way) and some comments regarding their performance on different aspects of writing.…”

Section: Significance Of Feedback In Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Macro-level Error Analysis of Iranian Undergraduate EFL Learners’ Performance on Writing Tasks

Davoudi¹,

Nafch²,

Mallahi³

2015

JSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Writing in a foreign language is a highly complex activity and creating an accurate and fluent text demands the dedication of effort and acquisition of expertise in different aspects of writing. Many EFL students are not competent enough in this skill and it is natural to see some instances of errors and deficiencies in their written texts and it is expected that writing instructors be equipped with the essential knowledge and tools to respond to these problems. Accordingly, the present study incorporated insights from the practices of error analysis and the principles of feedback and effective written commentaries in examining a semester-long ISSN 2162-6952 2015 www.macrothink.org/jse 223 corpus of a group of Iranian undergraduate EFL learners' written texts in a paragraph writing course. The study identified and analyzed the instances of errors in different aspects of writing (namely, content and organization, support and development, cohesion and coherence, structure, vocabulary and mechanics), and explored the instructor's feedback and written commentary on these aspects. The study introduces a flexible, analytic, comprehensive and context-sensitive feedback providing rubric to EFL writing. Journal of Studies in Education

show abstract

“…Hence, issues in L2 Japanese writing include: how students define L2 writing tasks (Nakayama 2002;Haneda 2004Haneda , 2005, the effects of L1 and learning backgrounds (Woodall 2002;Iwashita & Sekiguchi 2009), L2 proficiency (Kubota 2001), computer use (Chikamatsu 2003;Takahashi 2009), and the role of feedback (Kubota 2001;Kondo-Brown 2002;Hirose 2004). Haneda (2005) views L2 writing as the interplay between L2 learners' daily interactions with others and macrosocial situations, where their L2 use takes place.…”

Section: Reading and Writing In L2 Japanesementioning

confidence: 99%

Review of recent research (2000–2010) on learning and instruction with specific reference to L2 Japanese

Mori¹,

Mori²

2011

Lang. Teach.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review aims to identify major issues in and the direction of recent L2 Japanese research by reviewing over 200 empirical studies published in English or Japanese between 2000 and 2010. The first part of this article examines topics in second language acquisition (SLA) research with regard to L2 Japanese, including vocabulary andkanji(Chinese characters transferred into Japanese) learning, syntactic development, reading and writing in L2 Japanese, interlanguage pragmatics and language socialization, affective factors, and multilingualism and the acquisition of Japanese as a heritage language. The second part offers an overview of issues and problems in pedagogical practices, including curriculum design, culture in language education, classroom discourse, and study abroad. The review of these themes illustrates a broad picture of current research in L2 Japanese learning and instruction inspired by general trends in SLA and applied linguistics research, as well as unique features of Japanese language and social contexts.

show abstract

Error correction strategies used by learners of Japanese when revising a writing task

Cited by 28 publications

References 25 publications

Improving Grammatical Accuracy in Thai Learners' Writing : Comparing Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback

Improving Grammatical Accuracy in Thai Learners' Writing : Comparing Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback

A Macro-level Error Analysis of Iranian Undergraduate EFL Learners’ Performance on Writing Tasks

Review of recent research (2000–2010) on learning and instruction with specific reference to L2 Japanese

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About