Effects of Metalinguistic Feedback on Grammatical Accuracy of Iranian Field (In)dependent L2 Learners’ Writing Ability

Document Type: Research Article

Authors

English Department, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

Abstract

An increasing number of studies have investigated the effects of different types of corrective feedback. However, doubts have been raised whether field (in)dependent (FI/FD) L2 learners benefit differently from the explicit type of corrective feedback (i.e., metalinguistic). This study examined the (possible) effects of metalinguistic feedback on FI/FD intermediate L2 learners’ writing accuracy. To this aim, 52 Iranian intermediate L2 learners in intact classes were classified into FI/FD learners through Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT). They were, then, randomly assigned into 2 experimental and 1 control groups. Experimental groups received metalinguistic feedback and the control group received no feedback. Two sample IELTS tests (i.e., the Writing section) were used as the pretest and posttest to measure the participants’ learning of English articles as a result of metalinguistic feedback. Data were analyzed through ANCOVA and post-hoc. Although the results revealed that both the FI/FD learners benefited from metalinguistic feedback, the FD participants outperformed the FI ones. Findings have implications for L2 teachers and researchers to help L2 learners with different cognitive styles to improve their writing accuracy.

Keywords


Allen, L. (2004). The Oxford placement test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ausubel, D. P. (1964). Creativity, general creative abilities, and the creative individuals. Psychology in the Schools, 1, 344-347.

Birjandi, P., & Sayyari, M. (2010). Self-assessment and peer-assessment: A comparative study of their effects on writing performance and rating accuracy. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 23-45.

Bitchener, J. (2012). A reflection on ‘the language learning potential’ of written CF. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 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., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A 10-month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31, 193-214.

Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 191-205.

Cao, Y. (2006). Effects of field dependent-independent cognitive styles and cueing strategies on students’ recall and comprehension. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, United States.

Carroll, S. E. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Daniels, H. L., & Moore, D. M. (2000). Interaction of cognitive style and learner control in a hypermedia environment. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(4), 369-38.

DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499-533.

Doughty, C. J. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224-255). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197-262). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141-172.

Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63, 97-107.

Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

Ferris, D. R., & Helt, M. (2000). Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2 writing classes. Proceedings of the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, Vancouver, B.C.

Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 307-329.

Goo, J. (2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 445-474.

Guenette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), 40-53.

Hashemian. M., & Fadaei, B. (2012). L2 Learners’ strategy preference in metaphorical test performance: Effects of working memory and cognitive style. Issues in Language Teaching, 1(2), 279-231.

Hashemian, M., Jafarpour, A., & Adibpour, M. (2015). Exploring relationships between field (in)dependence, multiple intelligences, and L2 reading performance among Iranian L2 learners. Research in Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 40-63.

Hsu, P. S., & Dwyer, F. (2004). Effect of level of adjunct questions on achievement of field (in)dependent learners. International Journal of Instructional Media, 31(1), 99-106.

Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 255-286.

Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4, 33-54.

Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31, 217-230.

Jones, S. (1993). Cognitive learning styles: Does awareness help? A review of selected literature. Language Awareness, 2(4), 195-207.

Khalili Sabet, M., & Mohammadi, S. (2013). The Relationship between field (in)dependence styles and reading comprehension abilities of EFL readers. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(11), 2141-2150.

Kunnath, M. L. A. (2000). Cognitive issues for learning and performance from multimedia interfaces: Implications for design. Interaction, 9(2), 151-168.

Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365.

Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. J. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lyster, R., & Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts vs. recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59, 453-498.

Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Corrective feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265-302.

Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528.

Panek, P. E., Funk, L. G., & Nelson, P. K. (1980). Reliability and validity of the Group Embedded Figures Test across the life span. Percept Motor Skills, 50(3), 171-174.

Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 573-95.

Rahimi Domakani, M., Roohani, A., & Abdollahian, Z. (2010). The effect of direct and indirect written corrective feedback on grammatical collocations in L2 writing. The Journal of Teaching Language and Literature Society of Iran, 4(2), 159-185.

Rassaei, E. (2014). Recasts, field (in)dependence cognitive style, and L2 development. Language Teaching Research, 19(4), 499-518.

Rassaei, E. (2015a). Oral corrective feedback, foreign language anxiety, and L2 development. System 49, 98-109.

Rassaei, E. (2015b). Journal writing as a means of enhancing L2 learners’ awareness and effectiveness of recasts. Linguistics and Education, 32, 118-130.

Rassaei, E. (2017). Video chat vs. face-to-face recasts, learners’ interpretations and L2 development: A case of Persian EFL learners. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 1-16.

Rassaei, E., Moeinzadeh, A., & Youhannaee, M. (2012). Effects of recasts and metalinguistic corrective feedback on the acquisition of implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 58-74.

Richards, J., & Renandya, W. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rostampour, M., & Niroomand, S. M. (2014). Field (in)dependence cognitive styles: Are they significant at different levels of vocabulary knowledge? International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 2(1), 52-57.

Salmani-Nodoushan, M. A. (2007). Is field dependence or independence a predictor of EFL reading performance? TESL Canada Journal, 24(2), 82-108.

Sauro, S. A. (2007). Comparative study of recasts and metalinguistic feedback through computer mediated communication on the development of L2 knowledge and production accuracy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of Texas, San Antonio.

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.

Schwartz, B. (1993). On explicit and negative data effecting and affecting competence and linguistic behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 147-163.

Sheen, Y., (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301-322). New York: Oxford University Press.

Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences, and second language learning. New York: Springer.

Sheen, Y., & Ellis R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 593-610). New York: Routledge.

Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2013). The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 286-306.

Suzuki, M. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in adult ESL classrooms. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 1-19.

Swain, M. (2006). Languaging, agency, and collaboration in advanced language proficiency. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95-108). New York: Continuum.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 285-304.

Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “the case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111-122.

Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field (in)dependent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1-64.

Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Rastkin, E., & Karp, S. A. (1971). Group Embedded Figures Test manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.

Worley, G. M., & Moore, D. M. (2001). The effects of highlight color on immediate recall on subjects of different cognitive styles. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28(2), 169-179.

Yarahmadi, M., (2011). Field (in)dependence and ownership writing differences. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 1(12), 2734-2735.

Young, R. (1996). Form-function relations in English interlanguage. In R. Bayley & D. R. Preston (Eds.), Second language acquisition and linguistic variation (pp. 135-175). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.