The Relationship Between Language Mindsets and Feedback Preferences in L2 Writings of EFL Learners

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

详细

The present study intended to investigate intermediate Iranian EFL learners’ language mindsets and examine the possible relationships between language mindsets and feedback preferences in L2 writing. To achieve these aims, 150 EFL volunteer learners were recruited from several language institutes in Isfahan, Iran, and their language proficiency level was determined through a proficiency test. The learners were then given the Language Mindsets Questionnaire and the Feedback Preferences Scale to fill out. Frequency counts, mean scores, one-sample t-tests, and SEM in Smart PLS were employed to analyze the collected data. The results of the study indicated that for the three subcomponents of the mindsets questionnaire (i.e., general language intelligence beliefs, second language aptitude beliefs, and age sensitivity beliefs about language learning), the learners did not agree (though not significantly) with the entity items, while they expressed significant agreement with the incremental items. The SEM results also revealed that the model (examining the relationship between entity/incremental mindsets and feedback preferences) indicated that entity mindsets were a significant predictor of feedback preferences, yet the incremental mindsets failed to do so. Among the feedback types, EFL learners’ preferences, in a deductive order, were found to be for commentary and conferencing significantly, and then for peer correction, prompts, self-correction to a non-significant extent. The significance of the obtained results are presented and the implications of the study are enumerated.

作者简介

Shima Vaghei

Islamic Azad University

Email: shima.vaghei@yahoo.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4632-5858
English Department, Shahrekord Branch

Fariba Esfahani

Islamic Azad University

Email: Rahimi_fariba@yahoo.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1516-4369
English Department, Shahrekord Branch

Sajad Shafiee

Islamic Azad University

Email: s.shafiee@iaushk.ac.ir
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3501-1757
English Department, Shahrekord Branch

参考

  1. Abbaspour, E., Atai, M.R., & Maftoon, P. (2020). The effect of scaffolded written corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners' writing quality: An activity theory perspective. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 8(30), 177-196. DOI:https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2020.16.01
  2. Albalawi, F. H. E. (2017). L2 demotivation among Saudi learners of English: The role of language learning mindsets [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Nottingham.
  3. Barcelos, A. M. F. (2003). Researching beliefs about SLA: A critical review. In P. Kalaja & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp. 7-33). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  4. Benson, P., & Lor, W. (1999). Conceptions of language and language learning. System, 27(4), 459-472.
  5. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child development, 78(1), 246-263. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x
  6. Burnette, J. L., O'Boyle, E. H., VanEpps, E. M., Pollack, J. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological bulletin, 139(3), 655 -701. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029531
  7. Carroll, S., Swain, M., & Roberge, Y. (1992). The role of feedback in adult second language acquisition: Error correction and morphological generalizations. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13(02), 173-198. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.637
  8. Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms. Cambridge University Press.
  9. Chiu, C. -Y., Hong, Y. -Y., & Dweck, C. S. (1997). Lay dispositionism and implicit theories of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 19-30.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.19
  10. Cimpian, A., Arce, H. M. C., Markman, E. M., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Subtle linguistic cues affect children's motivation. Psychological Science, 18(4), 314-316.https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9280.2007.01896.x.
  11. Claro, S., Paunesku, D., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Mindset equals income as a predictor of achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(31), 8664-8668. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1608207113
  12. Cohen, A. D., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (1990). Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom, 13(2), 155-177. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310000992X
  13. Cotterall, S. (1999). Key variables in language learning: What do learners believe about them? System, 27(4), 493-513. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00047-0
  14. Destin, M., Hanselman, P., Buontempo, J., Tipton, E., & Yeager, D. S. (2019). Do student mindsets differ by socioeconomic status and explain disparities in academic achievement in the United States? AERA Open, 5(3).https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2332858419857706.
  15. Diab, R. L. (2005). EFL university students' preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 38(1), 27-51.http://hdl.handle.net/10725/2796.
  16. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Psychology Press.
  17. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2011.24038
  18. Dweck, C. S. (2007). The perils and promises of praise. Kaleidoscope, Contemporary and Classic Readings in Education, 12, 34-39.
  19. Dweck, C. S. (2019). The choice to make a difference. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(1), 21-25.https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1745691618804180.
  20. Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C. -Y., & Hong, Y. -Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgements and reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6(4), 267-285. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0604_1
  21. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological review, 95(2), 256. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037130
  22. Dweck, C. S., & Molden, D. C. (2007). Self theories: Their impact on competence motivation and acquisition. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 122-140). The Guilford Press.
  23. Ebrahimzade, M. & Khodareza, M.R. (2016). The effect of hedged-form feedback vs. uncoded feedback on grammatical accuracy of Iranian intermediate EFL learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4(15), 25-33.
  24. Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focused instruction on L2 acquisition. AILA Review, 19, 18-41. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.19.04ell
  25. Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Wiley Blackwell.
  26. Ellis, R., S. Loewen & R. Erlam (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.
  27. Farrokhi, F., Zohrabi, M., & Chehr Azad, M.H. (2017). The effect of corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners' speaking accuracy and breakdown fluency. Journal of Language Horizons, 1(2), 107-129.
  28. Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: a response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6
  29. Ferris, D. R. (2004). The grammar correction debate in L2 writing: where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime..?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49-62. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005
  30. Gonzales, M.L.L., de Tejeda, M.L., Krous, J.T., & Vasquez, D. (2018). EFL teachers' corrective feedback and students' revision in a Peruvian university: A descriptive study. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 6(23), 11-22.
  31. Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A premier on partial least squares structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Sage.
  32. Halimi, S. S. (2008). Indonesian teachers' and students' preferences for error correction. Wacana, 10(1), 50-71. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5539/efl.v4n3p128
  33. Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(2), 141-163. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4
  34. Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1996). Some input on input: Two analyses of student response to expert feedback in L2 writing. The Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 287-308. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01612.x
  35. Hong, Y. Y., Chiu, C. Y., Dweck, C. S., Lin, D. M. S., & Wan, W. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 588-599.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.588
  36. Horwitz, E. K. (1998). The beliefs about language learning of beginning foreign language students. The Modem Language Journal, 72(3), 283-294. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1988.tb04190.x
  37. Johansson, M. (2018). Formative assessment: Students' attitudes and preferences in Swedish upper secondary school [Unpublished master's thesis]. Orebro University.
  38. Karami, M., & Heidari Darani, L. (2018). Impact of prompts as corrective feedback strategy on teaching /ᶿ/ and /ᶞ/ among Iranian intermediate EFL learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 6(24), 67-82.
  39. Katayama, A. (2007). Japanese EFL students' preferences toward correction of classroom oral errors. Asian EFL Journal, 9, 289-305.
  40. Kelly, G. A. (1955). The Psychology of personal constructs. Norton. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/11175-008
  41. Lee, E. J. E. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41, 217-230. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SYSTEM.2013.01.022
  42. Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285-312. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001
  43. Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada journal, 1-16. DOI:https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v22i2.84
  44. Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203-218. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x
  45. Lou, M. T. (2014). Changing language learning mindsets: The role of implicit theories of L2 intelligence for goal orientations and responses to failure [Unpublished master's thesis]. University of Alberts.
  46. Lou, N. M., & Li, L. M. W. (2017). Interpersonal relationship mindsets and rejection sensitivity across cultures: The role of relational mobility. Personality and Individual Differences, 108, 200-206.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.12.004
  47. Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. A. (2016). Changing language mindsets: Implications for goal orientations and responses to failure in and outside the second language classroom. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 22-33.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.03.004
  48. Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. A. (2017). Measuring language mindsets and modeling their relations with goal orientations and emotional and behavioral responses in failure situations. The Modern Language Journal, 101(1), 214-243. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.12.004
  49. Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. A. (2019a). Sensitivity to language-based rejection in intercultural communication: The role of language mindsets and implications for migrants' cross-cultural adaptation. Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 478-505. %2FAMX047. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/APPLIN
  50. Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. (2019b). Does my teacher believe I can improve? Meta-perceptions of potential mediate the effect of teachers' feedback on ESL students' mindsets and need satisfaction. Paper presented at the American educational research association (AERA) conference, Toronto, ON.
  51. Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. (2019c). Breaking the vicious cycle of language barriers: Growth language-mindsets improve migrant university students' communication experiences [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Alberta. DOI:https://doi.org/10.7939/r3-tnzx-4736
  52. Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. A. (2020). Breaking the vicious cycle of language anxiety: Growth language mindsets improve lower-competence ESL students' intercultural interactions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101847. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101847
  53. Lyster, R. & L. Ranta (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034
  54. Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(01), 1-40. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365
  55. McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (2000). Communicative tasks, conversational interaction, and linguistic form: An empirical study of Thai. Foreign Language Annals, 33, 82-91. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2000.tb00893.x
  56. Mercer, S. (2012). Dispelling the myth of the natural-born linguist. ELT Journal, 66(1), 22-29. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr022
  57. Mercer, S., & Ryan, S. (2010). A mindset for EFL: Learners' beliefs about the role of natural talent. ELT Journal, 64(4), 436-444. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp083
  58. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Sage publications.
  59. Mir, F., & Ghornavi, K. (2017). Effect of corrective feedback on the acquisition of English prepositions of movement and place in third-grade high school EFL learners' grammar performance. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 5(20), 125-140.
  60. Naeimi, A., Saeidi, M., & Behnam, B. (2017). Effect of oral corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners' phonological uptake and retention. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 5(17), 57-75.
  61. Noori Khaneghah, R. (2016). The efficiency of different types of corrective feedback on vocabulary development of Iranian EFL learners: A comparative study. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Special January Issue, 1(1), 2534-2548.
  62. Papi, M., Bondarenko, A. V., Wawire, B., Jiang, C., & Zhou, S. (2019). Feedback-seeking behavior in second language writing: Motivational mechanisms. Reading and Writing, 33, 485-505. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09971-6
  63. Papi, M., Rios, A., Pelt, H., & Ozdemir, E. (2019). Feedback-seeking behavior in language learning: Basic components and motivational antecedents. The Modern Language Journal, 103(1), 205-226. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12538
  64. Ramadhani, S.A.F. (2019). Investigating corrective feedback in speaking practice: Students' preferences. Advances in Social Science, Education, and Humanities Research, 424, 187-192.
  65. Reid, J.M. (1997). Understanding learning styles in the second language classroom. Prentice Hall.
  66. Rennie, C. (2000). Error feedback in ESL writing classes: What do students really want [Unpublished Master's thesis]. California State University.
  67. Rissanen, I., Kuusisto, E., Tuominen, M., & Tirri, K. (2019). In search of a growth mindset pedagogy: A case study of one teacher's classroom practices in a Finnish elementary school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 204-213. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.10.002
  68. Robins, R. W., & Pals, J. L. (2002). Implicit self-theories in the academic domain: Implications for goal orientation, attributions, affect, and self-esteem change. Self and Identity, 1(4), 313-336. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860290106805
  69. Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46-73. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000036
  70. Roy, S. (2019). Exploring multilingual writers' preference between audio and written feedback, and the impact of feedback format on their revision process in a U.S. composition class [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
  71. Ryan, S., & Mercer, S. (2011). Natural talent, natural acquisition and abroad: Learner attributions of agency in language learning. In G. Murray, X. Gao & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning (pp. 160-176). Multilingual Matters.
  72. 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(2), 46-70. DOI:https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633
  73. Schulz, R. A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students' and teachers' views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 343-364. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01247.x
  74. Sippel, L. (2019). The impact of peer corrective feedback on vocabulary development. Foreign Language Annals, 52(3), 595-611. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12416
  75. Sternberg, R. J. (2002). The theory of successful intelligence and its implications for language aptitude testing. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. John Benjamins Publishing.
  76. Tesnim, O. (2019). Oral corrective feedback and its impacts on learners' speaking skills: Tunisian ESL students as a case study. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 7(3), 138-149. DOI:https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20190703.15
  77. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
  78. Truscott, J. (1999). The case for The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111-122. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6
  79. Wang, P. (2010). Dealing with English majors' written errors in Chinese universities. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(3), 194-205. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.1.3.194-205
  80. White, C. (2008). Beliefs and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons from good language learners (pp. 121-130). Cambridge University Press.
  81. Witt, J. (2019). Disciplinary writing feedback practices: Comparing preference, expectations, and practices. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Arizona.
  82. Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302-314. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.722805
  83. Zhai, K., & Gao, X. (2018). Effects of corrective feedback on EFL speaking task complexity in China's university classroom. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1-13. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1485472
  84. Zohi Rad, M., & Ghafournia, N. (2016). The effect of focused corrective feedback and attitude on grammatical accuracy: A study of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4(15), 75-85

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML
下载


Creative Commons License
此作品已接受知识共享署名 4.0国际许可协议的许可