Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Corrective Feedback
And The Correct Use Of Prepositions: Is It Really Effective?

Year 2012, Volume: 13 Issue: 4, 95 - 111, 01.12.2012

Seyyed Behrooz Hosseını

Abstract

An area that has recently attracted increasing attention is providing feedback on learners’ writing accuracy through the Internet. However, research in this area has largely focused on synchronous communication, i.e., chatting, with fewer studies assessing asynchronous technologies, i.e., e-mailing. Therefore, this study investigates the effectiveness of asynchronous computer-mediated corrective feedback-explicit and implicit, on increasing the correct use of prepositions. Forty-five Iranian elementary EFL learners at the ILI in Tehran were randomly assigned to two experimental groups, receiving explicit and implicit corrective feedback respectively, and one control group receiving no corrective feedback. Each group included 15 participants. After the treatment, a post-test was administered to assess the probable increase in the correct use of prepositions for the experimental groups compared to the control group. Analysis of the results through a one-way ANOVA revealed that the experimental group 1 who received explicit corrective feedback significantly outperformed the experimental group 2 and the control group. The experimental group 2 who received implicit corrective feedback showed no significant improvement over the experimental group 1 and the control group. Although the findings support the current view on feedback through technology, due to the scarcity of research, more investigation is merited as there is much to gain regarding this burgeoning field.

Keywords

Computer-mediated communication, asynchronous CMC, Synchronous CMC, The Internet, Corrective Feedback, e-Mail, Chat.

References

• Askland, S. (2010). The role of instruction and corrective feedback in second language acquisition. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Adger.
• Barnes, S. B. (2002). Computer-Mediated Communication. Boston, USA: Pearson Publication.
• Barson, J., Frommer, J., & Schwartz, M. (1993). Using e-mail in a task-oriented perspective: Interuniversity experiments in communication and collaboration. Journal of Science Education andTechnology, 2(4), 565–584.
• Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, (3), 191–205.
• Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 120–136. Retrieve May 6, 2001, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/blake
• Bordia, P. (1996). Studying verbal interaction on the Internet: The case of rumor transmission research. Behavior research methods, instruments & computers, 28(2), –151.
• Brown, R. (1988). Classroom pedagogics – a syllabus for the interactive stage? The Teacher Trainer, 2(3), 13–17.
• Campillo, P. S. (2003). An analysis of the impact and explicit feedback on grammatical accuracy. Journal of English and American Studies, 27, 209–228 .
• Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 357–386.
• Carter, R. (1997). Investigating English Discourse. London: Routledge.
• December, J. (1997). Notes on defining of computer-mediated communication.
• Computer- Mediated Communication, 4(1). Retrieved June 18, 2010, from http://www.december.com/cmc/mag/1997/jan/december.html
• Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184.
• Fey, M. (1998). Critical literacy in school-college collaboration through computer networking: A feminist research project. Journal of Literacy Research, 30(1), 85–117.
• Galbarczyk, M., & Szmerdt, D. (2001). Opportunities:Elementary. London: Longman.
• Goodman, S., & Graddol, D. (1996.). Redesigning English-new texts, new identities.
• New York, USA: Routledge in association with The Open University, 1996.
• Hanson-Smith, E. (2001). Computer-assisted language learning. In Ronald Carter &
• David Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (pp. 107-113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heisler, J. M., & Crabill, S. L. (2006). Who are “Stinkybug” and “packerfan4”? email pseudonyms and participants’ perceptions of demography, productivity, and personality. Journal of Computer-M ediated Communication, 12(1), 114–135.
• Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1978). The netw ork nation: Human communication via computer. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Holliday, L. (1999). Theory and research: Input, interaction and CALL. In Joy Egbert &
• Elizabeth Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL Environments: Research, Practice and Critical Issues (pp. 181–188). Alexandria, VA: TESOL. Jonassen, D. H., & Kwon, H. (2001). Communication patterns in computer-mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(10), 35–52.
• Lea, M. (2001). Computer conferencing and assessment: new ways of writing in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 163–181.
• Lee, L. (1997). ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for college-level teaching. System,25(4), 465–477.
• Lee, L. (2004). Learners' perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native speakers of Spanish in the US. LanguageLearning and Technology, 8(1), 83–
• Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus on form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in
• Second Language Acquisition, 12(4), 429–448. Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 1–14.
• Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C.
• Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp. 15– ). New York: Cambridge University Press. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–
• Maynor, N. (1994). The language of electronic mail: Written speech? In G. D. Little & M.
• Montgomery (Eds.), Centennial usage studies: American Dialect Society, 78, 48–54. Murphy, R., Altman, R., & Rutherford, W. E. (1989). Grammar in use: Reference and practice for intermediate students of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Neylor, H., & Murphy, R. (1996). Essential grammar in use supplementary exercises.
• Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Quan-Hasse, A., Cothrel, J., & Wellman, B. (2005, July). Instant messaging for collaboration: A case study of a high-tech firm. Journal of Computer Mediated
• Communications, 10(4). Retrieved May 9, 2007, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue4/quan-haase.htm
• Razagifard, P., & Rahimpour, Ma. (2010, May). The effect of computer-mediated corrective feedback on the development of second language learners’ Grammar.
• Instructional Technology & Distance Learning,7(5), 11–30. Romm, C. T., & Pliskin, N. (1999). The role of charismatic leadership in diffusion and implementation of e-mail. The Journal of Management Development, 18(3), 273–290.
• Sachs, R., & Suh, B. (2007). Textually enhanced recasts, learner awareness, an L2 outcomes in synchronous computer-mediated interaction. In A. Mackey (Eds.),
• Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 197-227). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sauro, S. (2009, February). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 96–120.
• Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.
• Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Eds.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research,8(3), 263−300.
• Sheen, Y. (2007, June). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255−283.
• Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System,37(4), 556−569.
• Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 82–119.
• St. John, E., & Cash, D.. (1995). Language learning via e-mail: Demonstrable success with German. In M. Warschaur (Eds.), Virtual connections: Online activities and projects for netw orking language learners, (pp. 191-197). Honolulu, HI: University of
• Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Swan, M. (2005). Practical English Usage, Oxford University Press
• Truscott, J. (1996). The case against correction in L2 classes. Language Learning, (2), 327–369.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Warschauer, M. (1995). E-mail for English teaching. Washington, D.C.
• Warschauer, M. (1996). Motivational aspects of using computers for writing and communication. In M. Warschauer (Eds.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Haw ai'i Symposium (pp. 29-46). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
• Warschauer, M. (2001). On-line communication. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (pp. 207-212).
• Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zhao, S. (2006, April). Do Internet users have more social ties? A call for differentiated analyses of Internet use. Journal of Computer M ediated Communications, 11(3).
• Retrieved May 9, 2007, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue3/zhao.html
• Zhuo, C. (2010, December). Explicit recast, implicit recast and the acquisition of English noun plural: A comparative study. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics,33(6), 55−70. APPENDIX
• Characteristics of Lyster & Ranta's (1997) Categories of Corrective Feedback Corrective Feedback Type Explicit Error Correction Example(s) Error Indicated Yes Elicited Output Explicit provision of the target like reformulation You should say visited. Provided directly None or repetition