京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(地球環境学) / 甲第23592号 / 地環博第219号 / 新制||地環||42(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院地球環境学舎地球環境学専攻 / (主査)教授 宇佐美 誠, 教授 佐藤 淳二, 教授 山村 亜希, 准教授 徳永 悠, 教授 服部 高宏 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Global Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM

Abstract This study investigates the effectiveness of using Oral Corrective Feedback (OCF) as a way of promoting young learners' language acquisition from an EFL (English As a Foreign Language) perspective. Furthermore, this study also looks at learners' and teachers' thoughts about oral corrective feedback and whether it serves its intended purpose in the classroom towards learners' language learning. My method is based on scientific articles and sets out previous studies to investigate how oral corrective feedback may be beneficial for young learners' EFL and L2 language development. Previous experimental research indicates that the use of oral corrective feedback has a positive effect on learners' L2 development and language acquisition. In this current study I provide an overview of the possible advantages and disadvantages of using oral corrective feedback in young learners' L2 development in an educational context which also includes an insight into teachers' attitude. The results show that OCF is beneficial for young learners’ L2 development if the learners are aware of the OCF that is being provided. The results also indicate that OCF is affected by the teachers' attitude towards OCF. Key terms: OCF, EFL, L2, corrective oral feedback, oral feedback types, teacher’s attitude OCF, learners' attitude OCF, teacher OCF and uptake.

Particular English language learners have a need to demonstrate high levels of accuracy in their written and spoken language production. Dynamic corrective feedback (dynamic CF) has been shown to facilitate L2 learner written accuracy attainment through providing manageable, meaningful, timely and constant feedback on authentic and frequent written language production. The research of this thesis examined the benefits of altering the dynamic CF model to be responsive to students' spoken production rather than solely their written production and measured the impact this adaptation would have on the established benefits of the instructional strategy on students' gains in written accuracy. The study also looked at the impact of both forms of dynamic CF on students' attainment of written complexity, fluency, and lexical development. The study included two groups of students whose language proficiency ranged from intermediate-low to advanced-mid who were studying English for academic purposes in an intensive English language program. These students participated in a one-semester Linguistic Accuracy course. Half of the students received the traditional form of dynamic CF in which they received feedback on only their written production, and the other half received a modified version of dynamic CF that provided students with feedback on only their spoken production. Before and after the treatment, samples of students' written production were collected through a thirty-minute essay test. These writing samples were analyzed for accuracy, fluency, complexity, and lexical development. Changes in each of these variables for both groups were contrasted using a mixed-model repeated measure Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). These tests revealed that there was not a significant difference in terms of the changes in accuracy or lexical development between the two groups; however, participants receiving the modified variation of dynamic CF did perform significantly better on the measurement of written complexity. Also, lower proficiency students receiving the modified version of dynamic CF did significantly better on the measurement of written fluency than students of a similar proficiency receiving the traditional form.

Second language (L2) learning has begun recognizing that intelligibility, comprehensibility, and accentedness influence how nonnative speakers of English are perceived by others. As such, pronunciation instruction is becoming more common in L2 curriculum around the world. Corrective Feedback (CF) is commonly given in the pronunciation classroom to draw attention to and correct learners’ errors. Research has tried to understand what forms of CF are most effective for language learning, how CF affects pronunciation, and what learners believe about CF. What is lesser known is if the frequency or rate of CF affects learner’s uptake and pronunciation error repair. Participants in this study were nonnative English speakers who were placed in the high frequency feedback group (HFFG) or the low frequency feedback group (LFFG). After an initial demographic and language beliefs survey, participants experienced a one-on-one pronunciation session with a pronunciation researcher. In the pronunciation session, participants received either high frequency feedback (100% of errors corrected) or low frequency feedback (50% of errors corrected defined as every other error corrected). An immediate follow up survey asked learners about their frequency preference for feedback and their emotional reactions to the feedback. After a nonparametric statistical analysis, results indicated that there were no statistically significant differences between the uptake rates of the HFFG and LFFG. Marginal significance was found in the repair rates between the HFFG and LFFG with the LFFG performing marginally better, but not to a statistically significant level. Frequency of CF may affect learners’ error repair rates. The immediate follow up survey indicated that most participants were inaccurate in their perception of the frequency of CF they received during the lesson. Only two participants changed their preference for frequency of CF after the lesson. These two wanted more feedback and no learner wanted less feedback. Finally, the same survey indicated that learners felt mostly positive emotions when receiving feedback, while only two experienced nervousness/anxiousness. Conclusions are that feedback frequency does not seem to affect learner uptake, but that frequency may affect pronunciation error repair.

No description available.

Performance anxiety has been a much-discussed topic in recent years, but many questions surrounding it remain unanswered. This essay investigates how written corrective feedback affects students' performance anxiety and how students and teachers attempt respond to performance anxiety in the classroom. Two questionnaires were administered to teachers and students to investigate how they give and receive feedback and how they handle negative emotions. The results show that a large majority of the students experience anxiety about written assignments and that teachers need to work more on teaching emotional regulation in the classroom to help students better deal with performance anxiety.

L’objectif de cette étude qualitative est de décrire et de comprendre le processus décisionnel sous-jacent à la rétroaction corrective d’un enseignant de langue seconde à l’oral. Pour ce faire, elle décrit les principaux facteurs qui influencent la décision de procéder à une rétroaction corrective ainsi que ceux qui sous-tendent le choix d’une technique de rétroaction particulière. Trois enseignantes de français langue seconde auprès d’un public d’adultes immigrants au Canada ont participé à cette recherche. Des séquences complètes d’enseignement ont été filmées puis présentées aux participantes qui ont commenté leur pratique. L’entretien de verbalisation s’est effectué sous la forme d’un rappel stimulé et d’une entrevue. Cet entretien constitue les données de cette étude. Les résultats ont révélé que la rétroaction corrective ainsi que le choix de la technique employée étaient influencés par des facteurs relatifs à l’erreur, à l’apprenant, au curriculum, à l’enseignant et aux caractéristiques des techniques. Ils ont également révélé que l’apprenant est au cœur du processus décisionnel rétroactif des enseignants de langue seconde. En effet, les participantes ont affirmé vouloir s’adapter à son fonctionnement cognitif, à son état affectif, à son niveau de langue et à la récurrence de ses erreurs. L’objectif de cette étude est d’enrichir le domaine de la formation initiale et continue des enseignants de L2. Pour cela, des implications pédagogiques ont été envisagées et la recommandation a été faite de porter à la connaissance des enseignants de L2 les résultats des recherches sur l’efficacité des techniques de rétroaction corrective, particulièrement celles qui prennent en compte les caractéristiques des apprenants. / The aim of this qualitative study is to describe and understand the underlying decision-making process in the oral corrective feedback of a second language teacher. More specifically, this study describes the main factors which influence the decision to proceed to a corrective feedback as well as those which underlie the choice of a specific feedback technique. Three teachers of French as a second language, with adult immigrants in Canada, participated in this research. Entire teaching sequences were filmed and then presented to participants who commented on their practices. The comments were made in the form of a stimulated recall and an interview. These constitute the data of this research. Results revealed that the corrective feedback and the choice of the technique were influenced by factors related to the error, to the learner, to the curriculum, to the teacher and to the characteristics of corrective feedback techniques. They also revealed that the learner is at the center of the retroactive decision making of the second language teachers. Indeed, participants said that they want to adapt to the learner’s cognitive functioning, to his emotional state, to his language level and to the recurrence of his mistakes. The goal of this study is to contribute to the initial and continuous training of L2 teachers. For this purpose, pedagogical implications were proposed and recommendations were made specifically to notify the L2 teachers about the results of the research regarding the efficiency of the techniques of corrective feedback, particularly those ones which take into account the characteristics of the learners.

English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers use different strategies to support language acquisition when teaching. This study focuses on one particular strategy: Oral Corrective Feedback (OCF). It is provided to support learners’ oral language skills, and takes numerous potential forms which can either be implemented implicitly and/or explicitly. According to many studies, recast is the type of OCF most commonly used by EFL teachers. Studies demonstrate however, that recast is the least effective approach for EFL learners’ uptake. The aim of this research study is to investigate how Swedish EFL teachers provide students with OCF. In addition, the intention is also to explore teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the usefulness of OCF for their skills development in English. The focus of this research study is on Swedish primary schools of grades 4-6. Two types of data-gathering methods were used in this study: interviews and observations. The results confirm that both explicit and implicit OCF was provided when observing the teachers’ approaches and strategies in classroom settings. Surprisingly, this research study reveals that recast was not favoured by the Swedish EFL teachers as they considered other types of OCF to be more beneficial to EFL classroom settings.

Feedback can be given in many different forms, and the type that is written and strives to either correct students written errors or support their overall writing ability is suitably enough referred to as written corrective feedback (WCF) of which there are two main types of: indirect and direct WCF. We know that second language writers meet many obstacles, be that lack of motivation and vocabulary or misspellings and phrasal issues; nonetheless, teachers thought processes about what type of feedback to give on what type of error is of importance for the continuation of the development of sound feedback approaches. Therefore, we intend to investigate English teachers perceptions on the WCF they give with the help of the following research questions: What are primary school English teachers’ perceptions about WCF in order to promote their ESL students writing development? What are primary school English teachers’ perceptions regarding their choice between written direct CF or written indirect CF on their ESL students written production?To investigate these questions we wrote an interview guide, and conducted interviews with seven teachers in 4th to 6th grade, asking about their perceptions on the development of writing in English as a second language and how they would describe their corrective feedback and their thought process on what type to give and when to give it on their student’s writing. Our findings showed that all teachers acknowledged two types of students in their ESL classroom: the high proficiency and the low proficiency. The low proficiency need more direct, clear and specific corrections on most of their writing whilst the high proficiency benefit from more indirect CF in order to make use of their metacognitive thinking skills. The findings also revealed that teachers choose to use indirect or direct CF based on the activity and whether the purpose is to learn grammar or not. If the focus is grammar, they would choose direct CF, and if it was to write a fictional story, they would give more indirect CF in order to not stifle the student’s creative process and “take the fun out of it”. Our study points to a need of more research within the field of feedback in general, since there is not much evidence showing what approaches are the most beneficial. Another issue is that there are practically no guidelines for teachers to follow, telling them what type to choose and for what activities. This is something for future research to dig deeper into.

The study investigated the impacts of different strategies of providing teacher written corrective feedback on first semester ESL/EFL students’ writing accuracy and writing quality. Four feedback strategies (indirect feedback, direct feedback, indirect feedback followed by direct feedback with explicit corrective comments, and no feedback) were employed in this study. One hundred twenty-one EFL freshman university students were randomly assigned into four feedback groups (IF, DF, IDECC, NF). Students in each group produced two narrative essays. Teacher feedback was provided in two segments for the first essay and students made two revisions based on the feedback. The errors on each stage of students’ writing were marked and counted to be compared among each stage of the writing and between groups. The results of data analysis showed that the mean number of errors in all three treatment groups decreased in each writing stage. All three treatment groups outperformed the no-feedback control group in each stage of writing in terms of grammatical accuracy and writing quality. There was no difference in the mean number of errors among three treatment groups in the first and second revisions. However, the IDECC group, who received indirect feedback followed by direct feedback with explicit corrective comments, outperformed all other groups in the second revision and in the new essay. The results also showed that the mean number of errors of all three treatment groups decreased in the new essay indicating that there was a long-term effect of teacher corrective feedback on the new essay. The results of the study suggest that providing teacher corrective feedback was effective in reducing students’ grammatical errors on their essays. All three treatment groups also gained in writing quality scores in the new essay indicating that, to a certain extent, there was an effect of teacher corrective feedback on writing quality. The findings are discussed in the context of the related literature. Areas of future research are discussed and practical implications are suggested. / Ph. D.