The use of video feedback in teaching process‐approach <scp>EFL</scp> writing

Özkul, Sertaç; Ortaçtepe, Deniz

doi:10.1002/tesj.362

Cited by 19 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The quantitative and qualitative data indicated that the lecturers provided comprehensive feedback on all aspects of writing, including language use, mechanics and referencing style, content, and organisation and rhetoric. This finding accords with many previous studies on screencast feedback in L2 writing (e.g., Ali, 2016;Bakla, 2020;Ducate & Arnold, 2012;Özkul & Ortactepe, 2017;Tseng & Yeh, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The results have shown that students showed positive perception of screencast feedback (e.g., Cunningham, 2019). Similarly, studies on student"s perception of screencast feedback in L2 writing (Alvira, 2016;Ghosn-Chelala & Al-Chibani, 2018;Orlando, 2016;Özkul & Ortactepe, 2017;Tseng & Yeh, 2019) have reported students" positive perceptions of teacher screencast feedback.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…Previous studies have investigated the effectiveness of screencast feedback in L2 writing (e.g., Ali, 2016;Bakla, 2020;Ducate & Arnold, 2012;Özkul & Ortactepe, 2017;Tseng & Yeh, 2019). Özkul and Ortactepe (2017) investigated two groups of Turkish EFL students in university preparatory classes (N=47) who received different feedback modes: written feedback (control group, n=24) and screencast feedback (experimental group, n=23). The researchers found that students who received screencast feedback could produce better revision than written feedback group.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An increasing number of studies has started to investigate both audio and screencast feedback in L2 writing contexts using both experimental and naturalistic settings. Studies in this field predominantly examined students' perception (Alvira, 2016;Ghosn-Chelala & Al-Chibani, 2018;Orlando, 2016;Özkul & Ortactepe, 2017;Tseng & Yeh, 2019), students" preference (Cunningham, 2019;Tseng & Yeh, 2019), and uptake (Bakla, 2020;Cunningham, 2019;Hung, 2016). Researchers have also investigated the effectiveness of video feedback (Bakla, 2020;Özkul & Ortactepe, 2017;Tseng & Yeh, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

EFL Lecturers’ Perception and Practice of Screencast Feedback

Zubaidi

2022

JEELS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study aims to deepen knowledge on Indonesian English as a foreign language (EFL) lecturers' perception of screencast feedback, their feedback practice, and the consistency between their feedback practice and perception. To investigate the phenomena, five Indonesian university-level EFL lecturers and their EFL students (N=30) were recruited to participate in the study. The researcher employed several data collection techniques including open ended pre-survey, students' essay collection, think-aloud protocol, and semi-structured interviews. The results showed that the EFL teacher participants have positive perception and towards screencast feedback in L2 writing, which influenced their feedback practice. However, the study also discovered two inconsistencies between the teachers' perception of the focus and the type of feedback they provided and their actual practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

EFL Lecturers’ Perception and Practice of Screencast Feedback

Zubaidi

2022

JEELS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To manage such constrains, teachers need to employ some professional adjustment (Ferris, Brown, Liu, Eugenia, and Stine, 2011) by dealing with three crucial contextual variables that are learners, situation, and instructional methodology (Hartshorn, McCollum, and Wolfersberger, 2010). Several attempts have also been empirically tested for example the use of video which is multimodal for conferencing thus the information delivered to the students could be richer (Ozkul and Ortactepe, 2017), the addition of affective comments to complement the written corrective feedback (Tang and Liu, 2018), the use of models (Mayo and Labandibar, 2017), and the application of supplementary rubrics (Ene and Kosobucki, 2016). Besides, reciprocal caring and dialogue interactions between teachers and students during the writing process could improve trust (Lee and Schallert, 2008) which then facilitate the linguistic revisions of the student writing (Merkel, 2018).…”

Section: Teachers' Perceptions and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers’ Corrective Feedback on Students’ L2 Writing: State of the Art

Susanti

2017

Abjada

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers’ corrective feedback has been largely practiced in L2 writing programs and still extensively researched especially in the last decade. In the literature about ESL and EFL writing pedagogy, it is not only the typology but also the effectiveness as well as the relationship to others have been discussed. This paper synthesizes the current progress in the field to draw what has been done by the researchers in the area particularly in both ESL and EFL setting. As many as sixty-six studies mostly published in reputable journals from 2008 to 2018 are synthesized; and the result is categorized into five themes that include: first, the effectiveness of teachers’ corrective feedback on L2 writing accuracy; second, the stance of teachers’ corrective feedback comparing to peer feedback and computer-generated feedback; third, teachers’ perceptions and practices, fourth, students’ response and engagements; and finally experts’ recommendation for further studies and for synergizing research findings and practices.لقد تم استخدام التغذية الراجعة للمدرسين بشكل كبير في برامج كتابة المستوى الثاني، ولا تزال تبحث على نطاق واسع خاصة في العقد الأخير. في الأدب حول تدريس اللغة الإنجليزية كلغة أجنبية (ESL) وعلم اللغة الإنجليزية (EFL)، لا يقتصر الأمر على التصنيف فحسب ، بل تمت أيضاً مناقشة الفعالية بالإضافة إلى العلاقة مع الآخرين. هذه الورقة تجمع التقدم الحالي في المجال لرسم ما قام به الباحثون في المنطقة خاصة في كل من ESL و EFL. يتم تجميع ما يصل إلى ستة وستين دراسة يتم نشرها في الغالب في المجلات ذات السمعة الجيدة من عام 2008 إلى عام 2018؛ ويتم تصنيف النتيجة في خمسة محاور تتضمن: أولاً، مدى فاعلية ملاحظات المدرسين التصحيحية على دقة الكتابة في المستوى الثاني؛ ثانياً، موقف المدرسين التصحيحي التصحيحي مقارنةً بملاحظات الزملاء والمعلومات المرتجعة بالحاسوب؛ ثالثا، تصورات وممارسات المدرسين، رابعاً، استجابة الطلاب ومشاركاتهم؛ وأخيرًا توصية الخبراء بإجراء المزيد من الدراسات وتوحيد نتائج البحوث والممارسات.Umpan balik korektif para guru telah banyak dipraktekkan dalam program penulisan L2 dan masih banyak diteliti terutama dalam dekade terakhir. Dalam literatur tentang pedagogi penulisan ESL dan EFL, tidak hanya tipologi tetapi juga efektivitas serta hubungan dengan orang lain telah dibahas. Makalah ini mensintesis kemajuan saat ini di lapangan untuk menggambarkan apa yang telah dilakukan oleh para peneliti di daerah tersebut terutama dalam pengaturan ESL dan EFL. Sebanyak enam puluh enam studi yang kebanyakan diterbitkan dalam jurnal terkemuka dari tahun 2008 hingga 2018 disintesis; dan hasilnya dikategorikan ke dalam lima tema yang meliputi: pertama, efektivitas umpan balik korektif guru pada akurasi penulisan L2; kedua, sikap umpan balik koreksi guru dibandingkan dengan umpan balik teman dan umpan balik yang dihasilkan komputer; ketiga, persepsi dan praktik guru, keempat, respon dan keterlibatan siswa; dan akhirnya rekomendasi para ahli untuk studi lebih lanjut dan untuk mensinergikan temuan dan praktik penelitian.

show abstract