WEKO3
アイテム
作文のフィードバックと書き直し作業について : L1の授業から
https://iuj.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/630
https://iuj.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/630e740c2b1-8fc2-4a1d-8507-1744294530b6
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
01_15_0001 (2.2 MB)
|
|
| Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2004-08-01 | |||||
| タイトル | ||||||
| タイトル | 作文のフィードバックと書き直し作業について : L1の授業から | |||||
| タイトル | ||||||
| タイトル | Written feedback and revision : Some data from a L1 writing class | |||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 言語 | ||||||
| 言語 | eng | |||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||
| 著者 |
Clements, Peter
× Clements, Peter× Clements, Peter |
|||||
| 抄録 | ||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
| 内容記述 | Commenting on student writing is generally considered to hold a central place in both first (L1) and second language (L2) writing pedagogy. However, despite several decades of research on feedback and response, our understanding of its complex nature is still far from complete, which is due in part to methodological flaws that have made it difficult to compare results across studies. The present study aims to address this by applying a well-developed analytical framework to teacher comments and student revisions collected from a university L1 composition course in the United States. Comments were analyzed according to a framework that included length, textual referent, focus, mode, and salience; revisions were analyzed according to uptake and success. This analysis revealed both general patterns and a substantial amount of variation in the types of comments that the teacher provided as well as the revisions that followed those comments. Some of this variation was clearly associated with contextual factors such as mode of delivery (handwritten versus online commentary), sequencing of assignments and drafts, and individual student factors. It is concluded that teachers may comment more effectively by addressing a limited number of issues on any given draft in greater depth. Moreover, future research on commentary may benefit from both quantitative and qualitative analyses. | |||||
| 書誌情報 |
語学プログラム ワーキングペーパー en : Working papers, the language programs 発行日 2004-08-01 |
|||||
