Online Collaborative Feedback

download Online Collaborative Feedback

of 25

  • date post

  • Category


  • view

  • download


Embed Size (px)


Online Collaborative Feedback on second language writing of high school students, Presentation by Masaya Fujino at AFMLTA conference Sydney 2009

Transcript of Online Collaborative Feedback

  • 2. These corrections are not part of this research.
  • 3. Introduction On-line poll Previous research Overview Research Questions Participants Theoretical Framework Data Collection Data Analysis Findings Conclusion
  • 4. On-line Poll What forms of feedback on students writing do you use? Use of text-messages by a mobile phone Type 36263 in your text message. Also type any code(s) listed below. Send your message to 0429 883 481. Codes WCOM Written comments CD Codes WCOM&CD Written comments with codes WCON Writing conference in class TSFS Teacher-student feedback session PFS Peer feedback session TFS Tutor feedback session OTH Other forms of feedback session
  • 5. Previous Research Teachers written feedback Use of direct correction and underlines: Chandler (2003), Appropriation: Tardy (2006) Ambiguity: Leki (1990) Face-to-face teacher-student feedback sessions Negotiation: Goldstein & Conrad (1990) Stress situations: Ferris (2003) Face-to-face peer feedback sessions 53% of uptake: Mendonca & Johnson (1994) 5% of uptake: Connor & Asenavage (1994) Possible decrease in quality: Nelson & Murphy (1993) Face-to-face tutor feedback sessions Negotiation: Kobayashi (2007) Williams (2004)
  • 6. Overview Action Research Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Context Methodology
  • 7. 4 Stage Data Collection 4 written tasks
  • 8. Research questions 1. What contributes to improved revisions in subsequent texts of VCE students of Japanese? 2. What hinders revisions in subsequent texts? 3. What differences in interactions are displayed by student at different developmental levels?
  • 9. Participants Writers Tutors High School Students in Australia (A) Japanese University Students in Japan (J) Name Year Japanese Background Name University English Overseas (pseudonym) Level Study (pseudonym) Level Level Experience Shane Year 11 5 years Born in Yoshiko 3rd Year Intermediate Nil + A 2 week stay Cantonese in J Victor Year 12 4 years Born in A Keiko 4th Year Intermediate Nil Chinese Sat Primary School Ken Year 12 5 years Born in J Hanae 4th Year Advanced 3 yrs in US 3 years in J Mature-age Student
  • 10. Data Collection Students writings Draft, revised draft during the interaction & post test Audio recordings Feedback sessions & follow-up interviews Screen capture & video recording Records of what each dyad involved Back up data
  • 11. Devices for Data Collection Desk-top web camera Audio line splitter Digital video camera Monitor Line-out jack Line-in jack Headphone with a microphone Digital voice recorder
  • 12. Software for Data Collection
  • 13. Data Collection Captured Screen Activities
  • 14. Theoretical Framework The zone of proximal development (ZPD) (Vygotsky 1985) Possible development level with assistance ZPD Current student independent level
  • 15. Data Analysis 5 levels of internalisation from interpsychological to intrapsychological functioning (Aljaafreh & Lantolf 1994) Regulatory Scale (RS) (Aljaafreh & Lantolf 1994) Product oriented criteria for writing tasks
  • 16. Modified from the 5 levels of internalisation from interpsychological to intrapsychological functioning (Aljaafreh & Lantolf 1994, p.470) Learner can notice the error correct the error Learners With Without With Without Level help help help help Level 1 X X X X Level 2 Only with explicit help ? Level 3 Understands assistance & incorporates feedback offered. Level 4 Correct form is not yet fully ? internalised. Level 5
  • 17. Regulatory Scale (Aljaafreh & Lantolf 1994, p.471) Tutors assistance - implicit to explicit 0 Tutor asks the learner to read prior to the tutorial 1 Construction of a collaborative frame prompted by the presence of the tutor. 2 Prompted or focussed reading of the sentence that contains the error by the learner or the tutor. 3 Tutor indicates that something may be wrong in a segment Is there anything wrong in ? 4 Tutor rejects unsuccessful attempts at recognising the error. 5 Tutor narrows down the location of the error. 6 Tutor indicates the nature of the error, but does not identify the error. 7 Tutor identifies the error You can not use Te-form here. 8 Tutor rejects learners unsuccessful attempts at correcting error. 9 Tutor provides clues to help the learner arrive at the correct form. 10 Tutor provides the correct form. 11 Tutor provides some explanation for use of the correct form. 12 Tutor provides examples of the correct pattern when other forms of help fail to produce an appropriate responsive action.
  • 18. Findings 1. What contributes to improved revisions in subsequent texts of senior high students of Japanese? Long, collaborative interaction beginning level or high syntax/ lexicon complexity Short, less collaborative interaction accomplished items or lower syntax/ lexicon complexity
  • 19. Findings Long, collaborative interaction on complex item Evidence of other-regulation Excerpt 1 (Shanes 2nd Draft: successful revision in the post test) 1 Yoshiko: (RS 7) Yes. As for Please write a reply soon before goodbye, what is the Te Form of write? Go ahead. 2 Shane: Write, writing, hehehe. 3 Yoshiko: (RS 8) Hehehe. Te Form of write.