Revisiting Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication: Learner Perception and the Meaning of Corrective Feedback

Abstract

Effectively exploring the efficacy of synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC) for pedagogical purposes can be achieved through the careful investigation of potentially beneficial, inherent attributes of SCMC. This study provides empirical evidence for the capacity of task-based SCMC to draw learner attention to linguistic forms by offering opportunities for corrective feedback and incidental recasts, highlighting learners' errors. The findings open up the discussion on the meaning of feedback considering learners' perceptions and the unique SCMC features. The findings indicate that learners do not attend to corrective feedback that promote "the corrector" and "the corrected" relationships. Rather, they benefit from incidental recasts that coincidentally contrast with their ill-formed L2 production. This study also challenges the previous assumptions regarding certain SCMC features believed to be beneficial to learners. Features like split turns increase learners' cognitive load and make it difficult for learners to follow the flow of the conversation. Considering split turns of SCMC and learners' different perceptions on tasks, this study calls for reframing recasts in SCMC and more sensitive research methods for investigating SCMC interaction.

Teacher Electronic Written Corrective Feedback, Trends and Future Directions

“…The results' analysis indicates that the salient forms of EWCF tend to be more direct and explicit. In the four studies that analyzed the types of EWCF, it was found that in three of them (Ene & Upton, 2014Kim, 2014), teachers provided ECF that is direct and explicit, with only one study that indicated that recast is used in synchronous CMC (Ene & Upton, 2018). To conclude, feedback tends to be more effective when provided explicitly and directly and less effective when provided implicitly.…”

“…The second study (Ene & Upton, 2014) investigated the relationship between three writing teachers' ECF practices and their effect on twelve ESL students when given asynchronously. Only one study examined synchronous EWCF (Kim, 2014). It was conducted on 28 intermediate ESL students and attempted to explain how synchronous writing activities may help draw learners' attention to their written grammatical errors.…”

“…There is a tendency to target students with good proficiency levels of English. Most of the studies (n=4) were conducted on intermediate ESL students (Guénette & Lyster, 2013a;Kim, 2014;Ribeiro, 2018;Shintani, 2015). Two studies were conducted on higher intermediate ESL students (Akbar, 2017;Lee et al, 2018).…”

“…Providing Electronic WCF has an obvious advantage over the traditional method (pen and paper) to rectify the students' grammatical errors (Xu, Banerjee, Ramirez, Zhu, & Wijekumar, 2019). Written computer-mediated communications have the potential of helping learners to acquire complex forms (Kim, 2014;Sauro, 2009) and deepen the learners' commitment (Maas, 2017). Using technology in writing leads to decreased students' anxiety and increased motivation (Pellettieri, 2000).…”

Can you guess who I am?: An interactive task for young learners to practice yes/no question formation in English

“…While research has provided ample evidence that interaction in a target language is conducive to second/foreign language (L2) learning (e.g., [1]), interaction research in recent years has shifted from a focus on instructional effectiveness to a focus on how interaction works [2]. While much of this type of research has focused on classroom-based interaction [3], an increasingly growing area of research has focused on how interaction works in computer-mediated learning environments among adult L2 learners (e.g., [4], [5]). In addition, several research studies in the field of computer assisted language learning (CALL) have investigated patterns of language use in interactions between L2 learners and automated agents through the use of spoken dialog systems (SDS); most of these studies have focused on adults (e.g., [6], [7]), but some have also investigated young L2 learners (e.g., [8], [8]).…”