ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Short- vs. Long-Term Effects of Reactive Incidental Focus on Form in Free Discussion EFL Classes
This study investigated the effectiveness of reactive incidental focus on form (FonF) for each learner with regard to different linguistic categories in meaning-oriented EFL classes. To this end, 30 hr of meaningful interactions of upper-intermediate EFL learners were audio-recorded in 2 free discussion classes. Instances of reactive incidental focus-on-form episodes (FFEs), where teachers offer on-the-spot corrective feedback to their learners’ linguistic mistakes, were extracted from the data. Furthermore, individualized tailor-made posttests were designed out of self-reported novel FFEs per learner. Results of learner-customized immediate and delayed posttests indicated that this type of instruction led to a substantial improvement in learning the focused language points. Achievement rates were found to be high in both test administrations. This efficacy was, however, more noticeable with regard to grammatical and phonological FFEs. Results reveal that reactive incidental FonF could enhance explicit knowledge of L2 learners both in the immediate context based on uptake rate and in the long run, as the findings from the immediate and delayed posttests demonstrated.
https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_13791_e4d117daef2ff2e712864bafc966e0e2.pdf
2018-11-01
3
23
10.22055/rals.2018.13791
Reactive Incidental Focus on Form (FonF)
Long-Term Effectiveness
Short-Term Effectiveness
Fartash
Rasaee
frasaee@gmail.com
1
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Javad
Gholami
j.gholami@urmia.ac.ir
2
English Language Department, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Gholam-Reza
Abbasian
gabbasian@gmail.com
3
English Department, Faculty of Basic Sciences, Imam Ali University, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Alcón-Soler, E. (2007). Incidental focus on form, noticing and vocabulary learning in the EFL classroom. International Journal of English Studies, 7(2), 41-60.
1
Bell, N. (2012). Comparing playful and nonplayful incidental attention to form. Language Learning, 62, 236-265.
2
Chan, A., & Li, D. (2002). Form-focused remedial instruction: An empirical study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12, 24-53.
3
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study on SL revitalization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 431-469.
4
Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51, 1-46.
5
Ellis, R., H. Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001a). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281-318.
6
Ellis, R., H. Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001b). Preemptive focus-on-form in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 407-432.
7
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2002). Doing focus on form. System, 30, 419-432.
8
Gholami, J. (2017). Four key focus on form options. International Journal of Language Studies, 11(2), 161-171.
9
Gholami, J., & Aliyari, S. (2015). The impact of planned preemptive focus on form on Iranian EFL learners’ essay writing ability. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 10(3), 1-12.
10
Hatch, E., & Farhady, H. (1982). Research design and statistics for applied linguistics. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
11
IELTS and the CEFR (n.d.). Retrieved from the World Wide Web: https://www.ielts.org/ielts-for-organisations/common-european-framework
12
Kamia, N. (2012). Proactive and reactive focus on form and gestures in EFL classrooms in Japan. System, 40, 386-397.
13
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 429-448.
15
Loewen, S. (2005). Incidental focus on form and second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 361-386.
16
Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
17
Nabei, T., & Swain, M. (2002). Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: A case study of an adult EFL student’s second language learning. Language Awareness, 11, 43-63.
18
Nassaji, H. (2010). The occurrence and effectiveness of spontaneous focus on form in adult ESL classrooms. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 66, 907-933.
19
Nassaji, H. (2013). Participation structure and incidental focus on form in adult ESL classrooms. Language Learning, 63, 835-869.
20
Nassaji, H. (2016). Anniversary article interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research, 20, 535-562.
21
Pouresmaeil, A., & Gholami, J. (2017). Incidental focus-on-form in a free discussion language class: Types, linguistic foci, and uptake rate. The Language Learning Journal, 45, 1-13.
22
Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62, 595-633.
23
Segalowitz, N., & Gatbonton, E. (1995). Automaticity and lexical skills in second language fluency: Implications for computer-assisted language learning. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 8, 129-149.
24
Segalowitz, N., & Lightbown, P. (1999). Psycholinguistic approaches to SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 43-63.
25
Spada, N., Jessop, L., Tomita, Y., Suzuki, W., & Valeo, A. (2014). Isolated and integrated form-focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 Knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 18, 453-473.
26
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42, 181-207.
27
van Patten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Input processing and second language acquisition: A role for instruction. Modern Language Journal, 77, 45-57.
28
Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325-340.
29
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Comparative Study of Graduate Students’ Self-Perceived Needs for Written Feedback and Supervisors’ Perceptions
This study was an attempt to examine the supervisors’ and graduate students’ needs for written feedback on thesis/dissertation and juxtaposed them to see how each group views feedback. A mixed-methods design was employed to collect the data. Questionnaires and interviews were deployed to collect the data from 132 graduate TEFL students and 37 supervisors from 10 Iranian Universities. Results indicated that there were similarities (argument, logical order, transition, clarity, and references decisions) and differences (inclusion of information, formatting, grammar, conclusion, introduction, and consistency) between the priorities given by the M.A. and Ph.D. students. Moreover, the findings indicated that the M.A. students’ expressed priorities were not similar to those of the supervisors except in 3 areas (argument, formatting, and grammar). On the contrary, the supervisors’ priorities were close to those expressed by the Ph.D. students in almost all cases. Different factors underlying the perceptions of the students and supervisors were also extracted and presented. Some implications and suggestions for further research are proposed.
https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_13792_c817143c3831bea4378105ccb72e2667.pdf
2018-11-01
24
46
10.22055/rals.2018.13792
Written Feedback
Thesis
Dissertation
Graduate Students
Supervisors, TEFL
Mohammad Hamed
Hoomanfard
hamedhooman@gmail.com
1
Department of TEFL and English Literature, Payame Noor University
AUTHOR
Manoochehr
Jafarigohar
jafari@pnu.ac.ir
2
Department of TEFL and English Literature, Payame Noor
LEAD_AUTHOR
Alireza
Jalilifar
ar.jalilifar@gmail.com
3
Department of English Language and Literature, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
AUTHOR
Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini
Masum
hosseinimasum@pnu.ac.ir
4
Department of Linguistics, Payame Noor University
AUTHOR
Alonso, R. A., Alonso, M. A., & Marinas, L. T. (2012). Hedging: An exploratory study of pragmatic transfer in nonnative English readers’ rhetorical preferences. Ibérica, 23, 47-62.
1
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. A. (2001). Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
2
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Razavieh, A., & Sorensen, C. (2006). Introduction to research in education. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
3
Belcher, D., & Hirvela, A. (2005). Writing the qualitative dissertation: What motivates and sustains commitment to a fuzzy genre? Journal of English for Academic Purposes (JEAP), 4, 187-205.
4
Biklen, S. K., & Casella, R. (2007). A practical guide to the qualitative dissertation. New York: Teachers College Press.
5
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge.
6
Bitchener, J., Basturkmen, H., East, M., & Meyer, H. (2011). Best practice in supervisor feedback to thesis writers. Retrieved May 2, 2017, from the World Wide Web: http://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/best-practice-supervisor-feedback
7
Boud, D. (1991). HERDSA green guide No. 5: Implementing student self-assessment (2nd ed.). Campbell Town: The Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA).
8
Brussino, G., & Gunn, C. (2008). Australasian language learners and Italian websites: A profitable learning partnership? In F. Zhang & B. Barber (Eds.), Handbook of research in computer enhanced language acquisition and learning (pp. 1-19). New York: IGI Global.
9
Caffarella, R. S., & Barnett, B. G. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39-52.
10
Can, G., & Walker, A. (2014). Social science doctoral students’ needs and preferences for written feedback. Higher Education, 68, 303-318.
11
Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219-233.
12
Chanock, K. (2000) Comments on essays: Do students understand what tutors write? Teaching in Higher Education, 5(1), 95-105.
13
Cohen, A. D. (1991). Feedback on writing: The use of verbal report. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 133-153.
14
Dong, Y. R. (1998). Nonnative graduate students’ thesis/dissertation writing in science: Self-reports by students and their advisors from two U.S. institutions. English for Specific Purposes, 17(4), 369-390.
15
Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315-339.
16
Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17
Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-184.
18
Fritz, C. O., & Morris, P. E. (2000). When further learning fails: Stability and change following repeated presentation of text. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 493-511.
19
Galagan, P. (2010). Bridging the skills gap. Alexandra, VA: American Society Training and Development.
20
Goldstein, L. M. (2004). Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: Teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 63-80.
21
Graham, S. (2006). A study of students’ metacognitive beliefs about foreign language study and their impact on learning. Foreign Language Annals, 39 (2), 296-309.
22
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2006). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
23
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
24
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F (Eds.). (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues applied linguistics series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25
James, D. (2000) Making the graduate: Perspectives on student experience of assessment in higher education. In A. Filer (Ed.), Assessment: Social practice and social product (pp. 20-35). London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
26
Kumar, V., & Stracke, E. (2007). An analysis of written feedback on a Ph.D. thesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(4), 461-470.
27
Leki, I., & Carson, J. G. (1994). Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the discipline. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81-97.
28
Leki, I., Cumming, A., & Silva, T. (2008). A synthesis of research on second language writing. London: Routledge.
29
Maclellan, E. (2001) Assessment for learning: The differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 307-318.
30
Mahfoodh, O. H. A., & Pandian, A. (2011). A qualitative case study of EFL students’ affective reactions to and perceptions of their teachers’ written feedback. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 14-24.
31
Mancuso-Murphy, J. (2007). Distance education in nursing: An integrated review of online nursing students’ experience with technology-delivered education. Journal of Nursing Education, 46(6), 253-260.
32
Mhunpiew, N. (2013). A supervisor’s roles for successful thesis and dissertation. US-China Education Review, 3(2), 119-122.
33
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34
Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
35
Peterson, S. S. (2010). Feedback as a teaching tool for improving student writing. What works? Research into practice. Toronto, ON: Ontario Ministry of Education.
36
Phelps, R., Fisher, K., & Ellis, A. (2007). Organizing and managing your research: A practical guide for postgraduates. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37
Rahimi, M. (2011). EFL students’ perceptions and preferences for teachers’ written feedback: Do students’ ideas reflect teacher’s practice? Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 2, 151-171.
38
Rahimi, M. (2013). Is training peer reviewers worth its while? The effect of training peer reviewers on the quality of their feedback and writing. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 67-89.
39
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
40
Richards, J. C., &Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (4th ed.). London: Longman (Pearson Education).
41
Sampsize (2005). Available online: http://sampsize.sourceforge.net/iface/s3.html
42
Sandelowski, M. (2003). Tables of tableaux? The challenges of writing and reading mixed methods studies. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 321-350). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43
Surry, D. W., Stefurak, T., & Kowch, E. G. (2010). Technology in higher education: Asking the right questions. In D. Surry, T. Stefurak, & R. Gray (Eds.), Technology in higher education: Social and organizational aspects (pp. 1-12). Harrisburg, PA: IGI Global.
44
Swales, J., & Freak, C. B. (1994). Writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan.
45
Tardy, C. (2006). Appropriation, ownership, and agency: Negotiating teacher feedback in academic settings. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 60-78). New York: Cambridge University Press.
46
Weaver, M. R. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31, 379-394.
47
Williamson, K., Bernath, V., Wright, S., & Sullivan, J. (2007). Research students in the electronic age: Impacts of changing information behavior on information literacy needs. Communications in Information Literacy, 1(2), 47-63.
48
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2013). Understanding supervisors’ commentary practices in doctoral research proposal writing: A Hong Kong study. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 473-483.
49
Zacharias, N. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC, 38(1), 38-52.
50
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Metadiscourse in Applied Linguistics and Chemistry Research Article Introductions
This study examined disciplinary rhetoric in research articles, focusing on different traditions in structuring text discourses from a metadiscourse-move analytic approach. The corpus consisted of 72 research article Introductions (RAIs): 36 in applied linguistics and 36 in chemistry. Swales’ CARS model (1990, 2004) and Hyland’s interpersonal model of metadiscourse (2005) were used as analytical frameworks for move and metadiscourse analyses, respectively. Both frequency and functional analyses showed that there were considerable differences between the 2 disciplines in terms of how the writers used metadiscourse in the RAIs and how the metadiscourse markers were mapped to fulfill the rhetorical purposes of Introduction moves. Such discrepancies reflect the susceptibility of metadiscursive features to the sociorhetorical cultures conditioned by the discipline to which the writers belong. Findings have implications for teaching novices, especially nonnative speakers of English, to write research articles and help them create a convincing research space and make appropriate use of metadiscourse.
https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_13793_d1771be6b66f810888e957e7add7ca9d.pdf
2018-11-01
47
73
10.22055/rals.2018.13793
Disciplinary Community
Genre
Metadiscourse
Move
Research Article Introductions (RAIs)
Mohsen
Khedri
mkhedri@soharuni.edu.om
1
Faculty of Language Studies, Sohar University, Sohar, Sultanate of Oman
LEAD_AUTHOR
Konstantinos
Kritsis
kkritsis@soharuni.edu.om
2
Faculty of Language Studies, Sohar University, Sohar, Sultanate of Oman
AUTHOR
Abdi, R. (2002). Interpersonal metadiscourse as an indicator of interaction and identity. Discourse Studies, 4, 139-145.
1
Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2
Aguilar, M. (2008). Metadiscourse in academic speech: A relevance-theoretic approach. Bern: Peter Lang.
3
Anthony, L. (1999). Writing research article introductions in software engineering: How accurate is a standard model? IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 4, 38-46.
4
Árvay, A., & Tankó, G. (2004). A contrastive analysis of English and Hungarian theoretical research article introductions. IRAL, 42, 71-100.
5
Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual inquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
6
Biber, D, Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7
Biber, Douglas, Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
8
Blakemore, D. (2002). Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9
Brett, P. (1994). A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles. English for Specific Purposes, 13(1), 47-59.
10
Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in Ph.D. theses. English for Specific Purposes, 18, S41-S56.
11
Cao, F., & Hu, G. (2014). Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 15-31.
12
Coates, J. (1995). The expression of root and epistemic modality in English. In B. Aarts & C. F. Meyer (Eds.), The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description (pp. 145-156). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13
Cortes, V. (2013). The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 33-43.
14
Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. S. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication, 10(1), 39-71.
15
D. Salas, M. (2015). Reflexive metadiscourse in research articles in Spanish: Variation across three disciplines (linguistics, economics, and medicine). Journal of Pragmatics, 77, 20-40.
16
Dahl, T. (2004). Textual metadiscourse in research articles: A marker of national culture or of academic discipline? Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1807-1825.
17
del Saz-Rubio, M. M. (2011). A pragmatic approach to the macrostructure and metadiscoursal features of research article introductions in the field of agricultural sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 30, 258-271.
18
Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.
19
Harwood, N. (2005). “Nowhere has anyone attempted . . . In this article I aim to do just that”: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four discipline. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1207-1231.
20
Hirano, E. (2009). Research article introductions in English for specific purposes: A comparison between Brazilian Portuguese and English. English for Specific Purposes, 28(4), 240-250.
21
Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 321-337.
22
Hu, G., & Cao. F. (2011). Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2795-2809.
23
Hu, G., & Wang, G. (2014). Disciplinary and ethnolinguistic influences on citation in research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 14-28.
24
Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.
25
Hyland, K. (1999). Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20, 341-367.
26
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourse: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman
27
Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mentions in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 207-226.
28
Hyland, K. (2002a). Activity and evaluation: Reporting practices in academic writing. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 115-130). Harlow: Longman.
29
Hyland, K. (2002b). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1091-1112.
30
Hyland, K. (2002c). Directives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 215-239.
31
Hyland, K. (2003). Self-citation and self-reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(3), 251-259.
32
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.
33
Hyland, K. (2007). Applying a gloss: Exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 266-285.
34
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156-177.
35
Ifantidou, E. (2005). The semantics and pragmatics of metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1325-1353.
36
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 269-292.
37
Khedri, M. (2016). Are we visible? An interdisciplinary data-based study of self-mention in research articles. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 52(3), 403-430.
38
Khedri, M., Swee Heng, C., & Ebrahimi, S. F. (2013). An exploration of interactive metadiscourse markers in academic research article abstracts in two disciplines. Discourse Studies, 15(3), 319-331.
39
Loi, C. K., & Lim, J. M-H. (2013). Metadiscourse in English and Chinese research article introductions. Discourse Studies, 15(2), 129-146.
40
Loi, C. K., & Evans, M. S. (2010). Cultural differences in the organization of research article introductions from the field of educational psychology: English and Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2814-2825.
41
Martínez, I. A. (2001). Impersonality in the research article as revealed by analysis of contrastive structure. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 227-247.
42
Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 3-22.
43
McGrath, L., & Kuteeva, M. (2012). Stance and engagement in pure mathematics research articles: Linking discourse features to disciplinary practices. English for Specific Purposes, 31, 161-173.
44
Molino, A. (2010). Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian Linguistics research articles. Journal of English for academic Purposes, 9, 86-101.
45
Murillo, S. (2004). A relevance reassessment of reformulation markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 2059-2068.
46
Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10, 1-35.
47
Nwogu, K. N. (1997). The medical research paper: Structure and functions. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 119-138.
48
Ozturk, I. (2007). The textual organization of research article introductions in applied linguistics: Variability within a single discipline. English for Specific Purposes, 26(1), 25-38.
49
Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variation across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 1-17.
50
Scott, M. (2004). WordSmith tools. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51
Shehzad, W. (2008). Move two: Establishing a niche. Ibérica, 15, 25-50.
52
Sheldon, E. (2009). From one I to another: Discursive construction of self-representation in English and Castilian Spanish research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 28, 251-267.
53
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis. English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
55
Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 58-78.
56
Thompson, G., & Thetela, P. (1995). The sound of one hand clapping: The management of interaction in written discourse. Text, 15, 103-127.
57
Thompson, G., & Ye, Y. (1991). Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics, 12(4), 365-382.
58
Tse, P., & Hyland, K. (2008). Robot kung fu: Gender and professional identity in biology and philosophy reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 1232-1248.
59
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36, 82-93.
60
White, H. D. (2011). Relevance theory and citations. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3345-3361.
61
Williams, I. A. (1999). Results sections of medical research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(4), 347-366.
62
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Investigating Researcher Identity in Qualitative Research Articles in Applied Linguistics Journals Through the Lens of CDA
Recently, constructing professional identity has received an increasing attention. By adopting and adapting analytical tools of critical discourse analysis (CDA), this study explored the ways through which identities of the qualitative researchers had been projected in 4 applied linguistics articles. This study intended to find out whether the authors of qualitative research articles in applied linguistics tended to prioritize particular linguistic elements in representing their identities. Detailed descriptive analyses based on 4 CDA and discourse analysis taxonomies revealed that the qualitative researchers had a particular pattern to show human and nonhuman social actors in their writings. Human social actors (teachers and learners) were preferred to nonhuman social actors (textbooks), and teachers were the focus of attention more frequently than learners. Also, human social actors were considered as individuals, rather than groups in the majority of cases. In addition, mental processes were found to be employed more than material processes in order to contribute to the subjective interpretation and greater visibility for the researchers. Although the linguistic devices which help human social actors to be seen more vividly like inclusion and activation were used more than other devices, elements like transition, self-mentions, hedges, and code glosses were also employed. Findings may be considered useful for teachers and educators and may help them become more self-conscious about identity issues embedded in research articles.
https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_13794_44a22675f6f0edc1dbbeec00610a540b.pdf
2018-11-01
74
100
10.22055/rals.2018.13794
Applied Linguistics Research Articles
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
Qualitative Researchers
Researcher Identity
Teacher Education
Sepideh
Rahimpour
sepidehrahimpour@gmail.com
1
Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Elaheh
Sotoudehnama
esotoude@alzahra.ac.ir
2
Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Farhad
Sasani
fsasani49@yahoo.com
3
Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Literature, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Adler, P. S. (1982). Beyond cultural identity: Reflections on cultural and multicultural man. In L. Samovar & R. Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (pp. 389-408). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishers.
1
Anthony, L. (2013). A critical look at software tools in corpus linguistics. Linguistic Research, 30(2), 141-161.
2
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 107-128.
3
Block, D. (2006a). Multilingual identities in a global city: London stories. London: Palgrave.
4
Block, D. (2006b). Identity in applied linguistics: Where are we? In T. Omoniyi & G. White (Eds.), The sociolinguistics of identity (pp. 34-49). London: Continuum.
5
Breivega, K. R., Dahl, T., & Fløttum, K. (2002). Traces of self and others in research articles. A comparative pilot study of English, French and Norwegian research articles in medicine, economics, and linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(2), 218-239.
6
Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in Ph.D. theses. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 41-56.
7
Charles, M., Pecorari, D., & Hunston, S. (2009). Academic writing: At the interface of corpus and discourse. London: Continuum.
8
Coldron, J., & Smith, R. (1999). Active location in teachers’ construction of their professional identities. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(6), 711-726.
9
de Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke M., & van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46, 6-28.
10
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11
Duff, P. A., & Uchida, Y. (1997). The negotiation of teachers’ sociocultural identities and practices in postsecondary EFL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 31(3), 451-86.
12
Farhady, H., Jafarpour, A., & Birjandi, P. (1994). Testing language skills: From theory to practice. Tehran: SAMT.
13
Foster, M. (1992). Sociolinguistics and African-American community: Implications for literacy. Theory into Practice, 31(4), 303-311.
14
Gao, Y., & Wen, Q. (2009). Corresponsibility in the dialogical coconstruction of academic discourse. TESOL Quarterly, 43(4), 700-703.
15
Gee, J. P. (1992). The social mind: Language, ideology, and social practice. New York: Bergin & Garvey.
16
Gee, J. P. (2000). Teenagers in new times: A new literacy studies perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 412-420.
17
Gee, J. P. (2014). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
18
Geijsel, F., & Meijers, F. (2005). Identity learning: The core process of educational change. Educational Studies, 31(4), 419-430.
19
Gwet, K. L. (2010). Handbook of interrater reliability: The definitive guide to measuring the extent of agreement among raters (2nd ed.). Gaithersburg: Advanced Analytics, LLC.
20
Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs ‘identity’? In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (pp. 3-17). London: Sage.
21
Halliday, M.A.K. (1989). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
23
Hamilton, M., Barton, D., & Ivanič, R. (1994). Worlds of literacy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
24
Hooti, N., & Mahmoudi, Y. (2013). Identity discordianism under the trepidation and duplicity of human essence: A trenchant investigation on Luigi Pirandello’s War. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(7), 1209-1213.
25
Hyland, K. (1996). Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, 17(4), 433-454.
26
Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27
Hyland, K. (1999). Disciplinary discourses: Writer stance in research articles. In C. N. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: Texts, processes, and practices (pp. 99-121). London: Longman.
28
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interaction in academic writing. London: Longman.
29
Hyland, K. (2001a). Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic writing. Written Communication, 18, 549-574.
30
Hyland, K. (2001b). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 207-226.
31
Hyland, K. (2002a). What do they mean? Questions in academic writing. Text, 22, 529-557.
32
Hyland, K. (2002b). Directives: Power and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 23, 215-239.
33
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interaction: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 133-151.
34
Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173-191.
35
Hyland, K. (2010). Community and individuality: Performing identity in Applied Linguistics. Written Communication, 27, 159-188.
36
Hyland, K. (2011). Projecting an academic identity in some reflective genres. Ibérica, 21, 9-30.
37
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
38
Jackson, J. (2008). Language, identity and study abroad: Sociocultural perspectives. London: Equinox.
39
Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40
Kanno, Y. (2003). Negotiating bilingual and bicultural identities: Japanese returnees betwixt two worlds. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41
Kaplan, A., & Flum, H. (2012). Identity formation in educational settings: A critical focus for education in the 21st century. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 171-175.
42
Karahan, P. (2013). Self-mention in scientific articles written by Turkish and non-Turkish authors. Procedia, 70, 305-322.
43
Liamas, C., & Watt, D. (2010). Language and identities. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
44
Lillis, T. (2011). Legitimizing dialogue as textual and ideological goal in academic writing for assessment and publication. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 10(4), 401-432.
45
Lafuente Millán, E. (2010). ‘Extending this claim, we propose . . .’: The writer’s presence in research articles from different disciplines. Ibérica, 20, 35-56.
46
Malmakjar, K. (Ed.). (2004). The linguistic encyclopedia. London: Routledge.
47
Molino, A. (2010). Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 86-101.
48
Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity, and educational change. Harlow: Pearson Education.
49
Norton, B., & Early, M. (2011). Researcher identity, narrative inquiry, and language teaching research. TESOL Quarterly, 45(3), 415-439.
50
Omoniyi, T., & White, G. (2006). The sociolinguistics of identity. London: Continuum.
51
Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of English as an international language. London: Longman.
52
Pope, C., & Mays, N. (1995). Qualitative research: Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: An introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. British Medical Journal, 311, 42-45.
53
Riley, P. (2007). Language, society, and identity. London: Continuum.
54
Rogers, R. (Ed.). (2004). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
55
Rosaldo, M. (1984). Toward an anthropology of self and feeling. In R. Shweder & R. LeVine (Eds.), Culture theory (pp. 137-157). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56
Sahragard, R., & Davatgarzadeh, G. (2010). The representation of social actors in interchange third edition series: A critical discourse analysis. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 2(3), 67-89.
57
Smeby, J. C. (2007). Connecting to professional knowledge. Studies in Higher Education, 32(2), 207-224.
58
Tang, R., & John, S. (1999). The “I” in identity: Exploring identity in student academic writing through the first person pronoun. English for Specific Purposes, 18(Supplement 1), S23-S39.
59
Tse, P., & Hyland, K. (2010). Claiming a territory: Relative clauses in journal descriptions. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 1880-1889.
60
Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22, 58-78.
61
van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors in discourse. In C. R. Caldas Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Text and practices: Reading in critical discourse analysis (pp. 32-70). London and New York: Routledge.
62
van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63
Virkkula, T., & Nikula, T. (2010). Identity construction in EFL contexts: A case study of Finnish engineering students working in Germany. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(2), 251-273.
64
Yen, Y. (2000). Identity issues in EFL and ESL textbooks: A sociocultural perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Ohio, U.S.A.
65
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Answerability, Dialogized Heteroglossia, and Context Multiplicity: A Post-Bakhtinian Study of Novelistic Discourse
In light of the Bakhtinian heteroglossia and authorial hybrid construction, the present study sets out to argue how the assimilation of alien stylistics into the realm of social and ideological discourse may transcend the limits of the centralizing logos prevalent in the orthodox poetics. In so doing, first, an analysis of the Bakhtinian concepts is provided to renegotiate his argument on the aesthetic and rhetorical capacities of the prose fiction vis-à-vis the totalitarian poetic discourse. Accordingly, as an innovation, this study suggests that the subversive potentiality of a text stems from both its carnivalesque interrelatedness with a dominant culture and its capability to transcend the limits of the said culture and to revitalize its synchronic and diachronic affiliations to other cultures. To confirm this, a good array of examples is drawn from novelistic texts. In Gunter Grass’s The Tin Drum, the protagonist’s mocking attitude towards centripetal fatherhood and his going ahead of clock strokes and hence weaving here-and-now to there-and-then so as to claim possession of his once-beloved woman is a significant case in point. Thus, not only can the marginalized utterances deal with patriarchies of the dominant culture, but also they can restructure their independent sphere based on their internal and external exigencies.
https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_13795_b45e20559c0abf27cf04428d086cdf56.pdf
2018-11-01
101
117
10.22055/rals.2018.13795
Answerability
Context Multiplicity
Dialogism
Heteroglossia
Novelistic Utterances
Sayyed Rahim
Moosavinia
moosavinia@scu.ac.ir
1
Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mojtaba
Kharrasi
m.kharrasi@yahoo.com
2
Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
AUTHOR
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays, Austin: University of Texas Press.
1
Bakhtin, M. M. (1984). Rabelais and his world. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
2
Barthes, R. (1977). The death of the author: Image, music, and text. London: Fontana Press.
3
Calvino, I. (1979). If on a winter’s night, a traveler, trans. Torino: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Incorporation.
4
Carroll, J. (2013). Correcting for The corrections: A Darwinian critique of a Foucauldian novel. Style, 47, 79-112.
5
Daram, M., & Kharrasi, M. (2014). Narrative vagueness in Gunter Grass’s The Tin Drum: A text-centric model of narration to reveal dialogized heteroglossia. RALs, 5(2), 175-184.
6
Dentith, S. (1996). Bakhtinian thought: An introductory reader. London: Routledge Publications.
7
Derrida, J. (2008). The gift of death (2nd ed.), trans. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
8
Grass, G. (1959). The tin drum. trans. Breon Mitchell (2009). New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publications.
9
Lane, R. J. (2006). Fifty key literary theorists. New York: Routledge Publications.
10
Lodge, D. (2000). Modern criticism and theory: A reader (2nd ed.). New York: Longman Pearson Education.
11
Žižek, S. (2006). The parallax view. Cambridge and London: MIT Press.
12
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effects of Conceptions of Intelligence and Ambiguity Tolerance on Teacher Burnout: A Case of Iranian EFL Teachers
This study investigated teachers’ conceptions of intelligence (TCoI) and ambiguity tolerance in the burnout levels of 202 Iranian EFL teachers. To this end, 3 inventories were utilized: Language Teachers’ Conceptions of Intelligence Scale (LTCI-S), Multiple Stimulus Types Ambiguity Tolerance Scale-II (MSTAT-II), and Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Pearson multiple correlation coefficients and path analysis were employed for the data analysis. Results exhibited significant relationships among TCoI, ambiguity tolerance, and teacher burnout. Moreover, the results indicated that increasibility and applied ELT subscales of TCoI were negative significant predictors of emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment dimensions of teacher burnout. Additionally, ambiguity tolerance was found to be a negative significant predictor of all teacher burnout dimensions. Finally, the results are discussed and implications are provided in the context of education.
https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_13796_a86454fc518eef9dd8d1e1729af41de9.pdf
2018-11-01
118
140
10.22055/rals.2018.13796
Ambiguity Tolerance
Path analysis
teacher burnout
Teachers’ Conceptions of Intelligence (TCoI)
Kiyana
Zhaleh
kiyanazhaleh@gmail.com
1
Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Behzad
Ghonsooly
ghonsooly@um.ac.ir
2
Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Reza
Pishghadam
pishghadam@um.ac.ir
3
Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Bardi, A., Guerra, V. M., Sharadeh, G., & Ramdeny, D. (2009). Openness and ambiguity intolerance: Their differential relations to wellbeing in the context of an academic life transition. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 219-223.
1
Berlak, A., & Berlak, H. (1981). Dilemmas of schooling: Teaching and social change. New York: Methuen.
2
Bibou-Nakou, I., Stoqiannidou, A., & Kiosseoqlou, G. (1999). The relation between teacher burnout and teachers’ attributions and practices regarding school behavior problems. School Psychology International, 20, 209-217.
3
Bisini, P. S., & Musthafa, M. A. M. N. (2015). Irrational beliefs and tolerance for ambiguity among prospective teachers. International Journal of Current Research, 7(4), 15392-15395.
4
Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29-50.
5
Chappelle, C. A., & Roberts, C. (1986). Ambiguity tolerance and field independence as predictors of proficiency in English as a second language. Language Learning, 36(1), 27-45.
6
Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (Eds.). (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students (Vol. II). Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
7
Cooke, G. P. E., Doust, J. A., & Steele, M. C. (2013). A survey of resilience, burnout, and tolerance of uncertainty in Australian general practice registrars. BMC Medical Education, 13(2), 1-6.
8
Deary, I. J., Strand, S., Smith, P., & Fernandes, C. (2007). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence, 35, 13-21.
9
Dupeyrat, C., & Mariné, C. (2005). Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement: A test of Dweck’s model with returning to school adults. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 43-59.
10
Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
11
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256-273.
12
Dworkin, A. G. (1986). Teacher burnout in the public schools: Structural causes and consequences for children. New York: State University of New York Press.
13
Evers, W., Tomic, W., & Browers, A. (2005). Constructive thinking and burnout among secondary school teachers. Social Psychology in Education, 8, 425-439.
14
Frenkel-Brunswick, E. (1948). Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. Journal of Personality, 18, 108-123.
15
Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1951). Personality theory and perception. In R. Blake & G. Ramsey (Eds.), Perception: An approach to personality (pp. 356-419). New York: Oxford University Press.
16
Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff burnout. Journal of Social Issues, 30, 159-65.
17
Friedman, I. A. (1991). High- and low-burnout schools: School culture aspects of teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 325-333.
18
Frone, M. R. (1990). Intolerance of ambiguity as a moderator of the occupational role stress-strain relationship: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 309-320.
19
Furnham, A., & Marks, J. (2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the recent literature. Psychology, 4(9), 717-728.
20
Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. (2001). Learning difficulties and foreign language learning: A review of research and instruction. Language Teaching, 34, 79-98.
21
García-Cepero, M. C., & McCoach, D. B. (2009). Educators’ implicit theories of intelligence and beliefs about the identification of gifted students. Universitas Psychologica, 8(2), 295-310.
22
Gavrilyuk, O. A., Loginova, I. O., & Buzovkina, N. Y. (2013). Relations of perceived autonomy and burnout syndrome in university teachers. International Journal of Applied Psychology, 3(3), 52-62.
23
Geving, A. M. (2007). Identifying the types of student and teacher behaviors associated with teacher stress. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 23(5), 624-640.
24
Grossman, P., & Stodolsky, S. (1994). Considerations of content and the circumstances of secondary school teaching. Review of Research in Education, 20, 179-221.
25
Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of Management, 30, 859-879.
26
Hammond, J. D., Hancock, J., Martin, M. S., Jamieson, S., & Mellor, D. J. (2017). Development of a new scale to measure ambiguity tolerance in veterinary students. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 44(1), 38-49.
27
Hanushek, E. A. (2007). The single salary schedule and other issues of teacher pay. Peabody Journal of Education, 82(4), 574-586.
28
Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultures’ consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria vs. new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
30
Iannello, P., Mottini, A., Tirelli, S., Riva, S., & Antonietti, A. (2017). Ambiguity and uncertainty tolerance, need for cognition, and their association with stress. A study among Italian practicing physicians. Medical Education Online, 22(1), 1-10.
31
Jdaitawi, M., Saleh, A. A., Ishak, N. A., Abo-Safyah, L., Musallam, F. (2013). The moderating role of tolerance ambiguity in the stressors strain relationship: An empirical study among university lecturers in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(28), 178-188.
32
Jonsson, A. C., Beach, D., Korp, H., & Erlandson, P. (2012). Teachers’ implicit theories of intelligence: Influences from different disciplines and scientific theories. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4), 387-400.
33
Khani, R., & Mirzaee, A. (2014). How do self-efficacy, contextual variables, and stressors affect teacher burnout in an EFL context? An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 35(1), 93-109.
34
Koc, M. (2013). Student teachers’ conceptions of technology: A metaphor analysis. Computers & Education, 68, 1-8.
35
Kuhn, G., Goldberg, R., & Compton, S. (2009). Tolerance for uncertainty, burnout, and satisfaction with the career of emergency medicine. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 54(1), 106-113.
36
Laidra, K., Pullmann, H., & Allik, J. (2007). Personality and intelligence as predictors of academic achievement: A cross-sectional study from elementary to secondary school. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 441-451.
37
Lee, K. (1996). A study of teacher responses based on their conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 31, 1-12.
38
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2000). Burnout and health. In A. Baum, T. Revenson, & J. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of health psychology (pp. 415-426). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39
Leroy, N., Bressoux, P., Sarrazin, P., & Trouilloud, D. (2007). Impact of teachers’ implicit theories and perceived pressures on the establishment of an autonomy supportive climate. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22(4), 529-545.
40
Lynott, D. J., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1994). Teachers’ implicit theories of intelligence and their educational goals. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27(4), 253-264.
41
MacDonald, A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 26, 791-798.
42
Maslach, C., & Goldberg, J. (1998). Prevention of burnout: New perspectives. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 7, 63-74.
43
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99-113.
44
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry, 15, 103-11.
45
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.
46
McCarthy, C., Lambert, R., O’Donnell, M., & Melendres, L. (2009). The relation of elementary teachers’ experience, stress, and coping resources to burnout symptoms. The Elementary School Journal, 109, 1-19.
47
McLain, D. L. (1993). The MSTAT-I: A new measure of an individual’s tolerance for ambiguity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 183-189.
48
McLain, D. L. (2009). Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure: The multiple stimulus types ambiguity tolerance scale-II. Psychological Reports, 105, 975-988.
49
McLain, D. L., Kefallonitis, E., & Armani, K. (2015). Ambiguity tolerance in organizations: Definitional clarification and perspectives on future research. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-7.
50
Merrotsky, P. (2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A trait of the creative personality? Creativity Research Journal, 25, 232-237.
51
Monrouxe, L., & Mattick, K. (2006). When I first came here, I thought medicine was black and white: Making sense of medical students’ way of knowing. Social Science & Medicine, 63, 1084-1096.
52
Naghipoor, M., & Abedini, F. (2013). The effect of personality factors on learners’ view about translation. International Journal of Applied Linguistic Studies, 2(3), 60-64.
53
Nichols, J. G., Patashnick, M., & Mettetal, G. (1986). Conceptions of ability and intelligence. Child Development, 57(3), 636-645.
54
Norton, R. W. (1975). Measure of ambiguity tolerance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 39, 607-619.
55
Peterson, U., Demerouti, E., Bergström, G., Samuelsson, M., Asberg, M., & Nygren, A. (2008). Burnout and physical and mental health among Swedish healthcare workers.JADV Nurse, 62(1), 84-95.
56
Pishghadam, R. (2011). Introducing applied ELT as a new approach in second/foreign language studies. Iranian EFL Journal, 7(2), 8-14.
57
Pishghadam, R. (2014). Social conceptions of intelligence and their influence on English language teacher care. Paper presented at the 2014 Annual International Conference on LSP and Specialized Translation Skills Training.
58
Pishghadam, R., Adamson, B., Shayesteh, S., & Kan, F. L. F. (2013). Conceptions of assessment and teacher burnout. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 21, 34-51.
59
Pishghadam, R., Naji Meidani, E., & Khajavy, G. (2015). Language teachers’ conceptions of intelligence and their roles in teacher care and teacher feedback. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1), 60-82.
60
Pishghadam, R., & Sahebjam, S. (2012). Personality and emotional intelligence in teacher burnout. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15(1), 227-236.
61
Pishghadam, R., Zabihi, R., & Norouz Kermanshahi, P. (2012) Educational language teaching: A new movement beyond reflective/critical teaching. Life Science Journal, 9(1), 892-97.
62
Pishghadam, R., Zabihi, R., & Shayesteh, S. (2013). The perception-practicum interface revisited: Life-wise language teaching perceptions and teacher burnout. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(2), 287-297.
63
Rodriguez, E. (2006). An exploration of factors contributing to stress and burnout in male Hispanic middle school teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Huston,Huston, TX.
64
Rydell, S. T., & Rosen, E. (1966). Measurement and some correlates of need-cognition. Psychological Reports, 19, 139-165.
65
Schaufeli, W. B., & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study and practice: A critical analysis. London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
66
Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied Psychology, 57, 152-171.
67
Shukla, A., & Trivedi, T. (2008). Burnout in Indian teachers. Asia-Pacific Ocean Review, 9, 320-334.
68
Slate, J. R., Jones, C. H., & Charlesworth, J. R. (1990). Relationship of conceptions of intelligence to preferred teaching behaviors. Action in Teacher Education, 12(1), 25-29.
69
Soares, D. L., Lemos, G. C., Primi. R., & Almeida. L. S. (2015). The relationship between intelligence and academic achievement throughout middle school: The role of students' prior academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 41, 73-78.
70
Sparks, R., & Artzer, M. (2000). Foreign language learning, hyperlexia, and early word recognition. Annals of Dyslexia, 50, 189-211.
71
Sternberg, R. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
72
Stoeber, J., & Rennert, D. (2008). Perfectionism in school teachers: Relations with stress appraisals, coping styles, and burnout. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 21, 37-53.
73
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effects of Metalinguistic Feedback on Grammatical Accuracy of Iranian Field (In)dependent L2 Learners’ Writing Ability
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.
https://rals.scu.ac.ir/article_13797_d87e64912a4a4d6fbe3f96636ee65f2e.pdf
2018-11-01
141
161
10.22055/rals.2018.13797
Corrective Feedback
Field (In)dependent
Metalinguistic Feedback
Grammatical Accuracy
Writing Ability
Mahmood
Hashemian
hashemian-m@sku.ac.ir
1
English Department, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Maryam
Farhang-Ju
farhang.mariam@gmail.com
2
English Department, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran
AUTHOR
Allen, L. (2004). The Oxford placement test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
1
Ausubel, D. P. (1964). Creativity, general creative abilities, and the creative individuals. Psychology in the Schools, 1, 344-347.
2
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.
3
Bitchener, J. (2012). A reflection on ‘the language learning potential’ of written CF. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 348-363.
4
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12, 409-431.
5
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A 10-month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31, 193-214.
6
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.
7
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.
8
Carroll, S. E. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
9
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.
10
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499-533.
11
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.
12
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.
13
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141-172.
14
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63, 97-107.
15
Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
16
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.
17
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.
18
Goo, J. (2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 445-474.
19
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.
20
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.
21
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.
22
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.
23
Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 255-286.
24
Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4, 33-54.
25
Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31, 217-230.
26
Jones, S. (1993). Cognitive learning styles: Does awareness help? A review of selected literature. Language Awareness, 2(4), 195-207.
27
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.
28
Kunnath, M. L. A. (2000). Cognitive issues for learning and performance from multimedia interfaces: Implications for design. Interaction, 9(2), 151-168.
29
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365.
30
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.
31
Lyster, R., & Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts vs. recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59, 453-498.
32
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Corrective feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265-302.
33
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528.
34
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.
35
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 573-95.
36
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.
37
Rassaei, E. (2014). Recasts, field (in)dependence cognitive style, and L2 development. Language Teaching Research, 19(4), 499-518.
38
Rassaei, E. (2015a). Oral corrective feedback, foreign language anxiety, and L2 development. System 49, 98-109.
39
Rassaei, E. (2015b). Journal writing as a means of enhancing L2 learners’ awareness and effectiveness of recasts. Linguistics and Education, 32, 118-130.
40
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.
41
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.
42
Richards, J., & Renandya, W. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43
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.
44
Salmani-Nodoushan, M. A. (2007). Is field dependence or independence a predictor of EFL reading performance? TESL Canada Journal, 24(2), 82-108.
45
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.
46
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
47
Schwartz, B. (1993). On explicit and negative data effecting and affecting competence and linguistic behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 147-163.
48
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.
49
Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences, and second language learning. New York: Springer.
50
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.
51
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.
52
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.
53
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.
54
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 285-304.
55
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.
56
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.
57
Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Rastkin, E., & Karp, S. A. (1971). Group Embedded Figures Test manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
58
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.
59
Yarahmadi, M., (2011). Field (in)dependence and ownership writing differences. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 1(12), 2734-2735.
60
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.
61