Retroalimentação escrita corretiva direta vs. Indireta: Percepções dos estudantes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v22n01a02Palavras-chave:
ensino do inglês como língua estrangeira, correção de erros, retroalimentação corretiva escrita, retroalimentação direta, retroalimentação indireta, investigação-açãoResumo
Os estudos demostram que a maioria dos professores fazem retroalimentação corretiva por escrito para os trabalhos escritos no ensino de inglês como língua estrangeira e que os estudantes desejam recebê-la. No entanto, está longe de ser resolvido o debate ao redor de qual tipo de retroalimentação pode ser mais eficaz. Este artigo informa sobre um estudo de tipo investigação-ação realizado em uma universidade chilena com seis estudantes de nível intermediário. A professora/pesquisadora trocou a retroalimentação direta por indireta codificada, e analisou as percepções dos estudantes em relação com os dois tipos de retroalimentação. A informação coletada indica como o contexto de aprendizagem e as diferenças individuais podem incidir nas percepções dos estudantes. A maioria deles, nesse contexto em que o inglês é um idioma estrangeiro, considerou que a retroalimentação indireta era mais útil, pois induz a um processamento e uma aprendizagem mais profunda. Também houve evidência de que a retroalimentação indireta pode ajudar a reforçar os conhecimentos gramaticais e fomentar uma conduta de aprendizagem autônoma.
Downloads
Referências
Benson, P. and Lor, W. (1999). Conceptions of language and language learning. System, 27, 459-472.
Bitchener, J. (2012). A reflection on the ‘language learning potential’ of written CF. Journal of Second Language Writing,21, 348-363.
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12, 409-431.
Bitchener, J. and Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 learners with writ-ten corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 207-217.
Bruton, A. (2009). Designing research into the effects of grammar correction: Not so straightforward. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 136-140.
Burns, A. (2005). Action research: An evolving paradigm? Language Teaching,32(2), 57-74
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for the improvement in accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 266-296.
Cohen L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge Falmer.
Cotterall, S. (1995) Readiness for autonomy: Investigating learner beliefs. System, 23(2), 195-205.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2010). A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32(2), 335-349.
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M. and Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused writ-ten corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36, 353-371.
Farrokhi, F. and Sattapour, S. (2011). The Effects of Focused and Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback on Grammatical Accuracy of Iranian EFL Learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(12), 1797-1803.
Ferris, D. (2003). Response to Student Writing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short-term and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland, and F. Hyland. (eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (83-102). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ferris, D. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and Practical Applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,32, 181-201.
Ferris, D.R., Liu, H., Sinha, A. and Senna, M. (2013). Writ-ten corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Assessing Writing, 22, 307-329.
Ferris D. and 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.
Furneaux, C., Paran, A., and Fairfax, B. (2007). Teacher stance as reflected in feedback on student writing: An empirical study of secondary school teachers in five countries. IRAL, 45, 69-94.
Guénette, D., and Lyster, R. (2013). Written Corrective Feedback and Its Challenges for Pre-Service ESL Teachers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 69(2): 129-152.
Hanaoka, Osamu and Shinichi Izumi (2012). Noticing and uptake: Addressing pre-articulated covert problems in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 332-347.
Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: student engagement with teacher feedback. System,31, 217-230.Hyland, F. (2011). The language learning potential of form-focused feedback on writing: Students’ and teachers’ perceptions. In R. M. Manchón (ed.), Learning-to-write and Writing-to-learn in an Additional Language (159-180). Amsterdam: Benjamins
Lalande, J. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal,66, 140-149.
Lee, I., (2007). Feedback in Hong Kong secondary writing classrooms: Assessment for learning or assessment of learning? Assessing Writing, 12, 180-198.
Lee, I., (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Learning, 17, 144-164.
Lee, I., (2014). Feedback in writing: Issues and challenges. Assessing Writing,19, 1-5.
Leki, I., (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals,24, 203-218.
Manchón, R. M. (2011) Situating the learning-to-write and writing-to-learn dimensions of writing. In R. M.
Manchón (ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (3-16). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Polio, C. (2012). The relevance of the second language acquisition theory to the written error correction debate. The Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 375-389.
Robb, T., Ross, S., and Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly,20, 83-93.
Saito, H., (1994). Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal,11, 46-70.
Semke, H., (1984). The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals,17, 195-202.
Shin, S., (2008). ‘Fire your proof-reader!’ Grammar correction in the writing classroom. ELT Journal, 62, 358-365.}
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feed-back and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly,41(2), 255-283
Shintani, N., Ellis. R., and Suzuki, W. (2014) Effects of Written Feedback and Revision on Learners’ Accuracy in Using Two English Grammatical Structures. Language Learning, 64(1), 103-131.
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting Qualitative Data. Lon-don: Sage Publications.
Storch, N., (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29-46.
Storch, N. and Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners’ processing, uptake and retention of correction feedback on writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,32, 303-334.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer (eds.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics (125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Truscott, J., (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning,46, 327-369.
Van Beuningen, C. (2010). Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing: Theoretical Perspectives, Empirical In-sights, and Future Directions. International Journal of English Studies,10(2), 1-27.
Van Beuningen, C.G., De Jong, N.H., Kuiken, F. (2008). The Effect of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback on L2 Learner’s Written Accuracy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 279-296.
Van Beuningen, C., De Jong, N. H., and Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the Effectiveness of Comprehensive Error Correction in Second Language Writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1-41.
Williams, J. (2012). The potential role(s) of writing in second language development. The Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 321-331.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2016 Ikala
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
