• 영어어문교육
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.83-104
• /
• 2009

This study examined whether self-correction or metalinguistic explanation might make a difference in the ability to accurately write two English grammatical structures when learners received indirect teacher feedback in the form of underlining target errors in a Korean EFL college classroom. With the goal of helping low-proficiency students improve their ability to accurately write sentences including nonfinite present participial relative clauses and present participial constructions, four groups were formed: a group which received indirect feedback, a group which received indirect feedback and metalinguistic explanation, a group which received indirect feedback and self-corrected errors, and a group which received indirect feedback and self-corrected errors after receiving metalinguistic explanation. The results showed that the effects of either metalinguistic explanation or self-correction integrated with indirect feedback on learners' ability to accurately write the target structures were not meaningful, while the combined effects of metalinguistic explanation and self-correction were statistically significant.

• 영어어문교육
• /
• 제17권3호
• /
• pp.73-98
• /
• 2011

This study investigated the feasibility and effectiveness of incorporating oral corrective feedback into the content-based business English writing class. Two types of oral corrective feedback, recasts and metalinguistic feedback, were integrated into business English writing classes to help low intermediate-proficiency Korean university students improve the ability to use the simple past, present progressive, and present perfect tenses correctly in their written production. Prior to the treatments, the subjects had basic grammatical knowledge of the target verb tenses, but they had only limited control over them in their written production. Three groups were formed: recast group that received corrective recasting, metalinguistic group that received metalinguistic clues, and control group that received no oral corrective feedback. The study demonstrated that it was feasible to incorporate recasts and metalinguistic feedback into content-based business English writing classes and that metalinguistic feedback had greater and more endurable effects than recasts on promoting the correct use of the target verb tenses in written production. It can be concluded that oral corrective feedback, metalinguistic feedback in particular, can be used in the business English writing classroom to help students gain greater control over already partially acquired forms and therefore improve their writing accuracy.

• 한국어교육
• /
• 제28권1호
• /
• pp.141-171
• /
• 2017

This study investigates Korean language teachers' perception/beliefs and practices in written feedback. Two types of data were collected: (1) teachers' feedback on three compositions by elementary-level learners, and (2) a survey questionnaire. The result showed that teachers perceived written feedback to be important even though they had not enough opportunities to receive appropriate training. Lack of training brought about limited feedback in terms of both quantity and quality, and inconsistency between their beliefs and practice. This study closes with the needs for teacher training and further studies on teachers' feedback practices.

• 영어어문교육
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.111-131
• /
• 2007

This study explores teacher's corrective feedback types in an error treatment sequence in Korean EFL classroom setting. Corrective feedback moves are coded as explicit correction, recast, or initiations to self-repair. The frequency and distribution of each corrective feedback type are examined. But the special focus was given on feedback types eliciting learner's self-repair (clarification request, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition of error) because initiations to self-repair are believed to facilitate language learning more than other strategies. The results of the study are as follows. First, there was an overwhelming tendency for teacher to use recasts whereas initiations to self-repair were not used as much as recast (52.4% vs. 29.5%). Second, the teacher tended to select feedback types in accordance with error types: namely, recasts after phonological, lexical, and translation errors and initiations to self-repair after grammatical errors though the differences were not significant. Finally, teacher's belief and students' expectation on corrective feedback were compared with actual corrective feedback representations respectively and some mismatches were found. Though both teacher and the students acknowledged the importance and necessity of self-repair, self-repair were not put into practice as such. Therefore, this study suggests more initiations to self-repair be used for effective language learning.