JHASS
Using Written Corrective Feedback to Eliminate Japanese University Students’ Use of Sentence-initial Conjunctions
TOTAL VIEWS: 226
Abstract
This paper examines the effect of written corrective feedback (WCF) on eliminating sentence-initial conjunctions (SICs) from paragraphs written by Japanese university students in an English as a foreign language course. Research has shown that East Asian learners tend to overuse SICs, and the paper first discusses possible motivations for doing so. The paper then addresses WCF, analyzing the arguments for and against it while providing a taxonomy of the four major types, along with studies that support each type. The paper subsequently presents a study in which 28 first-year Japanese students completed two writing assignments while receiving a sequence of different types of WCF, along with a grammar intervention, in attempts to eliminate SICs from their work. The results showed that error rates only minimally decreased when students were provided a grammar intervention or WCF that did not include the target structure. It was only when the instructor provided WCF for the target structure that the error rates plummeted to nearly zero. In the following discussion, the researcher concludes that process writing can significantly reduce specific grammatical errors, but only if students receive WCF that addresses these errors at some point in their learning.
References
Abe, M. (2002). A corpus-based study of the use of conjunctions. PAC3 at JALT 2001 conference proceedings, 2001, 540-547.
Aimi, K. (2020). Is the use of sentence-initial But language change in progress? The Japanese Journal of Language in Society, 23(1), 210-225.
Bao, Y., Sato, K., Leis, A., & Suzuki, W. (2016). Effects of different types of written feedback on acquisition of two target structures measured by revision and new writing. ARELE: Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 27, 185-200.
Bell, D. (2007). Sentence-initial And and But in academic writing. Pragmatics, 17(2), 183-201.
DOI: 10.1075/prag.17.2.01bel.
Biber, D., Nekrasova, T., & Horn, B. (2011). The effectiveness of feedback for L1‐English and L2‐writing development: A meta‐analysis. ETS Research Report Series, 2011(1), i-99.
Chen, M. (2023). An error analysis of coordinating conjunction misuse in Chinese ESL learners’ writings: A corpus-based approach. English Language and Literature Studies, 13(1), 33-43. DOI: 10.5539/ells.v13n1p33.
Dorgeloh, H. (2004). Conjunction in sentence and discourse: sentence-initial and and discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(10). DOI:10.1016/j.pragma.2004.04.004.
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371.
Eslami, E. (2014). The effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback techniques on EFL students’ writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 445-452.
Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11.
Hosseiny, M. (2014). The role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback in improving Iranian EFL students’ writing skill. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 668-674.
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2017). Is academic writing becoming more informal? English for Specific Purposes, 45, 40-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001.
Izumi, S., & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does output promote noticing and second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 239-278.
Kang, E., & Han, Z. (2015). The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta‐analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1-18.
Kim, J. (2019). Relative effects of direct focused and unfocused WCF on the accuracy development of two language forms. English Teaching, 74(4), 29-50.
Kurzer, K. (2022). Accuracy gains from unfocused feedback: Dynamic written corrective feedback as meaningful pedagogy. Journal of Language and Education, 8(24), 102-116.
Nawal, A. (2018). Cognitive load theory in the context of second language academic writing. Higher Education Pedagogies, 3(1), 385-402. DOI: 10.1080/23752696.2018.1513812.
Nemati, M., Alavi, S., & Mohebbi, H. (2019). Assessing the effect of focused direct and focused indirect written corrective feedback on explicit and implicit knowledge of language learners. Language Testing in Asia, 9(7), 1-18.
Neumann, H. (2014). Teacher assessment of grammatical ability in second language academic writing: A case study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 24, 83-107.
Parise, P. (2013). Mind the gap: Interpretations of sentence-initial coordinating conjunctions in linguistics studies of L2 and L1 writing. Bulletin of Kanagawa Prefectural Institute of Language and Culture Studies, 2, 117-130.
Pazhakh, A. (2006). An investigation on Iranian EFL learners’ application of avoidance strategies in their writings. Iranian Journal of Language Studies (IJLS), 1(1), 1-12.
Qi, D., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(4), 277-303.
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103-110.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.
Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255-272.
Valizadeh, M. (2022). The effect of comprehensive written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ written syntactic complexity. Journal of Language and Education, 8(1), 100-113.
Wondim, B., Bishaw, K., & Zeleke, Y. (2023). Effects of teachers’ written corrective feedback on the writing achievement of first-year Ethiopian University students. Education Research International, 2023, 1-13.
Ying, S. (2007). An analysis of discourse markers used by non-native English learners: Its implication for teaching English as a foreign language. Cross-cultural Communication Research, 19, 51-83.
Yoneyama, E. (2022). Writing and feedback in the EFL classroom: Providing effective feedback for Japanese university students. The Tsuru University Graduate School Review, 26, 135-147.
How to cite this paper
Using Written Corrective Feedback to Eliminate Japanese University Students’ Use of Sentence-initial Conjunctions
How to cite this paper: Lawrence G. Knowles. (2024) Using Written Corrective Feedback to Eliminate Japanese University Students’ Use of Sentence-initial Conjunctions. Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Science, 8(9), 2022-2031.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.26855/jhass.2024.09.002
More Articles
- How to Enhance Elderly Life Satisfaction in China?—Exploring the Impact of Economic and Non-economic Factors
- Concept of Modernity: Liu Haisu’s Path to Reform in Chinese Contemporary Art
- Playing with B-boy: Course Assessment of Breakdance Based on OBE Concepts
- Using Written Corrective Feedback to Eliminate Japanese University Students’ Use of Sentence-initial Conjunctions
- Pig Breeding and Improvement of Living Conditions of Rural People: Case of the Zone of Rubirizi in Mutimbuzi Commune in Burundi
- Erratum：A Practical Study of Integrating Chinese Traditional Culture into the Research Curriculum Mode