English language teaching
Fazel Alaei; Shiva Kaivanpanah; Maedeh Mohammadi
Abstract
The present study examined the difference between L1 and L2 lexical diversity of argumentative and narrative writings of L2 learners, and the contribution of syntactic complexity and lexical diversity to the writing quality in the L2 argumentative and narrative writings of EFL learners. To this end, ...
Read More
The present study examined the difference between L1 and L2 lexical diversity of argumentative and narrative writings of L2 learners, and the contribution of syntactic complexity and lexical diversity to the writing quality in the L2 argumentative and narrative writings of EFL learners. To this end, 46 pre-intermediate and intermediate Iranian EFL learners from four intact classes wrote one argumentative and one narrative essay in L2, and one argumentative and one narrative essay in L1 on different topics. Paired-samples t-tests revealed that lexical diversity surfaced more in the L1 writing of the learners. Multiple linear regressions indicated that among five measures of syntactic complexity, mean length of T-unit and clauses per T-unit better predict the quality of argumentative writing. In addition, complex nominals per clause are better predictors of narrative writing quality. Simple linear regressions showed that lexical diversity is a significant predictor of L2 writing in both genres. Based on the findings, writing instructors are advised to provide L2 learners with explicit instruction on the use of diverse vocabulary and different syntactic structures in order to help them improve the quality of their writing.
Shiva Kaivanpanah; Mohammad Alavi; Rose Meschi
Abstract
Writing is thought as the most complicated skill in second language acquisition; therefore, L2 researchers have always been in pursuit of discovering an effective approach to improve it. One of the most debated ways is feedback which has a key role in improving the quality of writing. Much of the previous ...
Read More
Writing is thought as the most complicated skill in second language acquisition; therefore, L2 researchers have always been in pursuit of discovering an effective approach to improve it. One of the most debated ways is feedback which has a key role in improving the quality of writing. Much of the previous research on feedback has focused on analyzing different types of feedback and their effect on the learners’ writings and few studies have examined the effectiveness of computer feedback. Therefore, the present study was conducted to 1) determine what aspects of students’ writings receive computer feedback, 2) examine the difference in the effect of computer-generatedfeedback (CBF) and Teacher-based feedback (TBF) on improving the students’ writing quality and 3) compare the differences in Depth of Processing (DOP) in processing computer and teacher feedback. The results indicated that content, style and organization of their essays received feedback from the teacher and the computer. Teacher feedback was more effective in terms of its impact on improving the quality of the writing of the students than computer-generatedfeedback and it resulted in deeper processing of lexical items, whereas computer-generated feedback invoked medium processing on grammar.
Ali Akbar Khomeijani Farahani; Shiva Kaivanpanah; Zainab Sadat Naseri
Volume 11, Issue 24 , December 2019, , Pages 177-200
Abstract
The importance of communicative ability in second language classroom context has increased the interest in interaction among foreign language learners. The quality of negotiations is influenced by so many factors that should be investigated in order to facilitate the process of second language acquisition. ...
Read More
The importance of communicative ability in second language classroom context has increased the interest in interaction among foreign language learners. The quality of negotiations is influenced by so many factors that should be investigated in order to facilitate the process of second language acquisition. This study seeks to investigate the effect of task type on autonomous EFL learners’ interactive negotiation in synchronous computer-mediated communication context. Total number of 60 pre- intermediate EFL learners were chosen from Iran Language Institute of Birjand based on their performance on the language learning autonomy questionnaire designed by Zhang and Li (2004). They participated in three types of tasks, including Decision making, Jigsaw, and Opinion gap tasks via Telegram Desktop. The chat history of EFL learners was analyzed in terms of the model of interaction proposed by Tsui (1994). Three main moves of Initiating, Responding, and Follow-up were included in her taxonomy of interaction analysis. The results suggested that the learners tried to utilize different frequencies of appropriate moves to achieve the goals of the specific task. Practically, this study presented a revised model that can be used as a frame work for designing suitable task types in the process of computer-mediated communication.
Mohammad Alavi; Shiva Kaivanpanah; Fatemeh Danesh
Volume 11, Issue 23 , June 2019, , Pages 1-25
Abstract
Assessment of writing skill is generally believed to be judged by a rater subjectively and qualitatively or by using analytic scoring rubrics which can potentially result in somehow not very reliable assessment. It seems that an evaluation of writing based on a model can result in a valid and reliable ...
Read More
Assessment of writing skill is generally believed to be judged by a rater subjectively and qualitatively or by using analytic scoring rubrics which can potentially result in somehow not very reliable assessment. It seems that an evaluation of writing based on a model can result in a valid and reliable writing assessment. To achieve such an objective, this study firstly aimed to develop an assessment model based on Activity Theory (AT), i. e., Activity Theory-Based Assessment Model (ATBAM), and then to employ it in the assessment of writing performances of Iranian language learners in a private language college. And finally, to achieve the concurrent validity of ATBAM, its results were compared with those of a traditional approach. Three groups of participants took part in this study: a group of upper intermediate English learners (N=29) who submitted one writing sample per week in four successive weeks, teachers (N=6) who provided learners with feedback and assigned holistic scores and course supervisors (N=2) who reassessed the writing samples on the basis of an analytic rubric of writing assessment. The results showed that using ATBAM in writing assessment results in an exploration of not only learners’ but also teachers’ engagement in the development of learners’ writing ability. The role of teachers’ feedback and teachers’ and learners’ social interaction in the development of learners’ writing ability could potentially provide comprehensive, fair, reliable, and valid scores in this model.
