東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency, Reformulation as a Corrective Feedback Strategy in Pair and Individual Writing and Revision : = A Study in an EFL Context.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency, Reformulation as a Corrective Feedback Strategy in Pair and Individual Writing and Revision :/
其他題名:	A Study in an EFL Context.
作者:	Hakim, Abdul.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (182 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International83-02A.
標題:	Linguistics. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28546390click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798535510316

Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency, Reformulation as a Corrective Feedback Strategy in Pair and Individual Writing and Revision : = A Study in an EFL Context.
Hakim, Abdul.

Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency, Reformulation as a Corrective Feedback Strategy in Pair and Individual Writing and Revision :A Study in an EFL Context. - 1 online resource (182 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Memphis, 2021.

Includes bibliographical references

Some research (e.g., Dobao, 2012; Shehadeh, 2011; Wigglesworth & Storch, 2009; Storch, 2005) suggests that collaborative L2 writing results in higher quality L2 writing production than individual writing. Similarly, collaborative L2 writing has also been found to bring about more L2 learning opportunities for learners (e.g., Dobao & Blum, 2013; Dobao, 2012; Wigglesworth & Storch, 2012; Brooks & Swain, 2009). However, much is still unknown about how CW promotes higher quality L2 writing and other L2 learning opportunities. The purpose of the current study was to examine second language collaborative writing in an under-researched EFL context to determine (1) whether CW promotes higher quality written production as measured by complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) dimensions and (2) to determine whether collaboration influences learner noticing and use in revision of second language reformulation feedback. Adopting a quasi-experimental, quantitative research design, this study was carried out in 3 intact EFL classes of students at a private university in Bangladesh (n=80). For this study, the participants wrote short, paragraph-sized texts on Facebook in pairs and individually which were reformulated by the researcher, and the participants compared their writing with the reformulated versions of the texts in pairs and individually and revised their texts in pairs and individually based on the reformulations. The results from statistical analyses showed that the writing condition influenced written production in terms of lexical complexity and accuracy but did not influence other aspects of written production, i.e., syntactic complexity and fluency, as measured using CAF scales. Similarly, the results also showed that although collaborative writing did not result in more noticing and incorporations of reformulations into the revision of students' L2 writing than individual writing, student collaboration when comparing feedback and revision resulted in significantly more noticing and incorporation of reformulations into the revisions of students' writing. These findings suggest that collaborative writing may not always lead to higher quality language production, possibly because of the unfamiliarity of collaborative writing in this context. They also suggest that collaboration at the revision stage may be more important than at the drafting stage in terms of raising student awareness of feedback.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798535510316Subjects--Topical Terms:

524476
Linguistics.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Collaborative writingIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency, Reformulation as a Corrective Feedback Strategy in Pair and Individual Writing and Revision : = A Study in an EFL Context.
LDR:03918nmm a2200409K 4500 001 2354020
005 20230324111137.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s2021 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798535510316
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28546390
035 $a AAI28546390
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Hakim, Abdul. $3 3694359
245 1 0 $a Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency, Reformulation as a Corrective Feedback Strategy in Pair and Individual Writing and Revision : $b A Study in an EFL Context.
264 0 $c 2021
300 $a 1 online resource (182 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Adams, Rebecca J.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Memphis, 2021.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Some research (e.g., Dobao, 2012; Shehadeh, 2011; Wigglesworth & Storch, 2009; Storch, 2005) suggests that collaborative L2 writing results in higher quality L2 writing production than individual writing. Similarly, collaborative L2 writing has also been found to bring about more L2 learning opportunities for learners (e.g., Dobao & Blum, 2013; Dobao, 2012; Wigglesworth & Storch, 2012; Brooks & Swain, 2009). However, much is still unknown about how CW promotes higher quality L2 writing and other L2 learning opportunities. The purpose of the current study was to examine second language collaborative writing in an under-researched EFL context to determine (1) whether CW promotes higher quality written production as measured by complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) dimensions and (2) to determine whether collaboration influences learner noticing and use in revision of second language reformulation feedback. Adopting a quasi-experimental, quantitative research design, this study was carried out in 3 intact EFL classes of students at a private university in Bangladesh (n=80). For this study, the participants wrote short, paragraph-sized texts on Facebook in pairs and individually which were reformulated by the researcher, and the participants compared their writing with the reformulated versions of the texts in pairs and individually and revised their texts in pairs and individually based on the reformulations. The results from statistical analyses showed that the writing condition influenced written production in terms of lexical complexity and accuracy but did not influence other aspects of written production, i.e., syntactic complexity and fluency, as measured using CAF scales. Similarly, the results also showed that although collaborative writing did not result in more noticing and incorporations of reformulations into the revision of students' L2 writing than individual writing, student collaboration when comparing feedback and revision resulted in significantly more noticing and incorporation of reformulations into the revisions of students' writing. These findings suggest that collaborative writing may not always lead to higher quality language production, possibly because of the unfamiliarity of collaborative writing in this context. They also suggest that collaboration at the revision stage may be more important than at the drafting stage in terms of raising student awareness of feedback.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Linguistics. $3 524476
650 4 $a Language. $3 643551
650 4 $a Teaching. $3 517098
650 4 $a English as a second language. $3 516208
650 4 $a Collaboration. $3 3556296
650 4 $a Revisions. $3 3681635
650 4 $a Cooperation. $3 594090
653 $a Collaborative writing
653 $a Reformulation
653 $a Written corrective feedback
653 $a Complexity
653 $a Accuracy
653 $a Fluency
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0441
690 $a 0290
690 $a 0679
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a The University of Memphis. $b English. $3 3426709
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 83-02A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28546390 $z click for full text (PQDT)