Contributions of Mobile-Mediated Audio- vs. Text-Based Metalinguistic Corrective Feedback on L2 Writing Development: A Mixed-Methods Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of English Language and Literature, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

2 Department of English Language, Khazar Institute of Higher Education, Mahmoudabad, Iran

3 Department of English, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran

Abstract

The current study scrutinizes the effects of mobile-mediated audio-based and text-based metalinguistic corrective feedback (MCF) on the development of unreal conditional by Iranian EFL learners via a pretest-posttest design. Furthermore, it explores the 5 learners' perceptions towards the efficacy of mobile-mediated audio-based and text-based MCF through semi-structured interviews. On this ground, 60 intermediate level Iranian EFL learners were assigned to two groups of audio-based and text-based. The participants in both groups completed various written production tasks during their 3 treatment sessions and were given either text-based or audio-based MCF for their errors, depending on their specific treatment condition. The implementation of these feedback types was monitored throughout the study period to ensure consistency and adherence to the research protocols. The statistical test using ANCOVA was conducted to measure the comparative effectiveness of both feedback types. The results suggest that second language (L2) writing development can be achieved through both text-based and audio-based MCF, but the latter is more effective. The results of content analysis showed that students who received audio-based feedback had better perception and found it more beneficial in improving L2 writing development compared to those who received text-based feedback. These findings have implications for language teaching methodology and the integration of mobile technology in language learning environments.

Keywords

References

Ally, M. (2013). Mobile learning: From research to practice to impact education. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 10(2), 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.18538/lthe.v10.n2.140
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875
Bahari, A. (2021). Computer-mediated feedback for L2 learners: Challenges versus affordances. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(1), 24-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12481
Bingham, A. J., & Witkowsky, P. (2022). Deductive and inductive approaches to qualitative data analysis. In C. Vanover, P. Mihas, & J. Saldaña (Eds.), Analyzing and interpreting qualitative data: After an interview (pp. 133-146). SAGE Publications.
Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters.
Bryfonski, L., & Ma, X. (2020). Effects of implicit versus explicit corrective feedback on Mandarin tone acquisition in a SCMC learning environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 61-88. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000317
Bueno Alastuey, M. C. (2011). Perceived benefits and drawbacks of synchronous voice-based computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 419-432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.574639
Burston, J. (2014). MALL: The pedagogical challenges. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(4), 344-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.914539
Carroll, S. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. John Benjamins.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher's course. Newbury House.
Chinnery, M. G. (2006). Emerging technologies going to the MALL: Mobile assisted language learning. Language Learning and Technology, 10(1), 9-16. http://llt.msu.edu/vol10num1/emerging
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Dai, Y., & Wu, Z. (2021). Mobile-assisted pronunciation learning with feedback from peers and/or automatic speech recognition: A mixed-methods study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36, 861-884. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1952272
DeKeyser, R. M. (2015). Why less is eventually more in second language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(4), 454-458. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.5.4.02dek
Dornyei, Z. (2014). Researching complex dynamic systems: 'Retrodictive qualitative modeling in the language classroom. Language Teaching, 47(1), 80-91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000516
Egi, T. (2007). Interpreting recasts as linguistic evidence: The role of linguistic target, length, and degree of change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(4), 511-537. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263107070416
Ellis, R. (2008). Typology of written corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97-107. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023
Ferris, D. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490
Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.001
García Laborda, J., Magal Royo, T., Litzler, M. F., & Giménez López, J. L. (2014). Mobile phones for Spain's university entrance examination language test. Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 17-30.
Gass, S., & Lewis, K. (2007). Perceptions of interactional feedback: Differences between heritage language learners and non-heritage language learners. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 79-99). Oxford University Press.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 180-206). Routledge.
Hamidi, H., Azizi, D. B., & Kazemian, M. (2022). The effect of direct oral corrective feedback on motivation to speak and speaking accuracy of EFL learners. Education and Self Development, 17(3), 50-63. https://doi.org/10.26907/esd.17.3.05
Han, Y. (2017). Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and learner engagement with written corrective feedback. System, 69, 133-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.003
Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2019). Academic emotions in written corrective feedback situations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.003
Han, Y., & Xu, Y. (2019). Student feedback literacy and engagement with feedback: A case study of Chinese undergraduate students. Teaching in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1648410
Hashemi, M. R. (2012). Reflections on mixing methods in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 206-212. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams008
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2012). Students’ use of asynchronous voice discussion in a blended-learning environment: A study of two undergraduate classes. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 10(4), 360-367. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ986637.pdf
Hsu, L. (2013). English as a foreign language learners’ perception of mobile-assisted language learning: A cross-national study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 197-213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.649485
Hsu, L. (2016). Examining EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and the adoption of mobile-assisted language learning: A partial least square approach. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(8), 1287-1297. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1278024
Izumi, S., Bigelow, M., Fujiwara, M., & Fearnow, S. (1999). Testing the output hypothesis: Effects of output on noticing and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(3), 421-452. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199003034
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). Academic Press.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034
Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 405-430. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami051
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second-language learning. Edward Arnold.
McQuiggan, S., Kosturko, L., Sabourin, J., & McQuiggan, J. (2015). Mobile learning: A handbook for developers, educators, and learners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212-1222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501
Motallebzadeh, K., & Nematizadeh, S. (2011). Does gender play a role in the assessment of oral proficiency? English Language Teaching, 4(4), 165-172. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n4p165
Nassaji, H. (2015). The interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning: Linking theory, research, and practice. Bloomsbury.
Nassaji, H. (2020). Good qualitative research. Language Teaching Research, 24(4), 427-431. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820941288
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2017). Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications. Routledge.
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2021). The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in language learning and teaching. Cambridge University Press.
O’Bannon, B. W., & Thomas, K. (2014). Teacher perceptions of using mobile phones in the classroom: Age matters! Computers & Education, 74, 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.006
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage Publications.
Pettit, J., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2007). Going with the grain: Mobile devices in practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(1), 17-33. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1271
Qian, K., Owen, N., & Bax, S. (2018). Researching mobile-assisted Chinese-character learning strategies among adult distance learners. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 56-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2018.1418633
Rassaei, E. (2019). Computer-mediated text-based and audio-based corrective feedback, perceptual style and L2 development. System, 82, 97-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.03.004
Rassaei, E. (2022). Recasts during mobile-mediated audio and video interactions: Learners’ responses, their interpretations, and the development of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(1-2), 114-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1671461
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in language learning. In Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1-63). University of Hawai'i Press.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge University Press.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301-322). Oxford University Press.
Shintani, N. (2016). The effects of computer-mediated synchronous and asynchronous direct corrective feedback on writing: A case study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3), 517-538. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.993400
Shintani, N., Ellis, R., & Suzuki, W. (2014). Effects of written feedback and revision on learners' accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language Learning, 64(1), 103-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12029
Suzuki, W., Nassaji, H., & Sato, K. (2019). The effects of feedback explicitness and type of target structure on accuracy in revision and new pieces of writing. System, 81, 135-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.12.017
Swain, M., & Suzuki, W. (2008). Interaction, output, and communicative language learning. In Handbook of educational linguistics (pp. 70-555). Blackwell.
Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 568-575. https://doi.org/10.2190/V0LB-1M37-RNR8-Y2U1
Wistner, B., Sakai, H., & Abe, M. (2009). An analysis of the Oxford Placement Test and the Michigan English Placement Test as L2 proficiency tests. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters, Hosei University, 58, 33-44.
Xu, Q., & Peng, H. (2017). Investigating mobile-assisted oral feedback in teaching Chinese as a second language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(3-4), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1297836
Yilmaz, Y. (2012). The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes. Language Learning, 62(4), 1134-1169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00726.x
Zarei, R., Heidari Darani, L., & Ameri-Golestan, A. (2017). Effect of Telegram application on Iranian advanced EFL learners' vocabulary knowledge and attitude. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 5(20), 96-109.
Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2018). Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37, 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001
Zheng, Y., Yu, S., & Liu, Z. (2020). Understanding individual differences in lower-proficiency students’ engagement with teacher written corrective feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1806225
 
Ally, M. (2013). Mobile learning: From research to practice to impact education. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 10(2), 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.18538/lthe.v10.n2.140
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875
Bahari, A. (2021). Computer-mediated feedback for L2 learners: Challenges versus affordances. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(1), 24-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12481
Bingham, A. J., & Witkowsky, P. (2022). Deductive and inductive approaches to qualitative data analysis. In C. Vanover, P. Mihas, & J. Saldaña (Eds.), Analyzing and interpreting qualitative data: After an interview (pp. 133-146). SAGE Publications.
Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters.
Bryfonski, L., & Ma, X. (2020). Effects of implicit versus explicit corrective feedback on Mandarin tone acquisition in a SCMC learning environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 61-88. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000317
Bueno Alastuey, M. C. (2011). Perceived benefits and drawbacks of synchronous voice-based computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 419-432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.574639
Burston, J. (2014). MALL: The pedagogical challenges. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(4), 344-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.914539
Carroll, S. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. John Benjamins.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher's course. Newbury House.
Chinnery, M. G. (2006). Emerging technologies going to the MALL: Mobile assisted language learning. Language Learning and Technology, 10(1), 9-16. http://llt.msu.edu/vol10num1/emerging
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Dai, Y., & Wu, Z. (2021). Mobile-assisted pronunciation learning with feedback from peers and/or automatic speech recognition: A mixed-methods study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36, 861-884. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1952272
DeKeyser, R. M. (2015). Why less is eventually more in second language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(4), 454-458. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.5.4.02dek
Dornyei, Z. (2014). Researching complex dynamic systems: 'Retrodictive qualitative modeling in the language classroom. Language Teaching, 47(1), 80-91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000516
Egi, T. (2007). Interpreting recasts as linguistic evidence: The role of linguistic target, length, and degree of change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(4), 511-537. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263107070416
Ellis, R. (2008). Typology of written corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97-107. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023
Ferris, D. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490
Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.001
García Laborda, J., Magal Royo, T., Litzler, M. F., & Giménez López, J. L. (2014). Mobile phones for Spain's university entrance examination language test. Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 17-30.
Gass, S., & Lewis, K. (2007). Perceptions of interactional feedback: Differences between heritage language learners and non-heritage language learners. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 79-99). Oxford University Press.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 180-206). Routledge.
Hamidi, H., Azizi, D. B., & Kazemian, M. (2022). The effect of direct oral corrective feedback on motivation to speak and speaking accuracy of EFL learners. Education and Self Development, 17(3), 50-63. https://doi.org/10.26907/esd.17.3.05
Han, Y. (2017). Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and learner engagement with written corrective feedback. System, 69, 133-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.003
Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2019). Academic emotions in written corrective feedback situations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.003
Han, Y., & Xu, Y. (2019). Student feedback literacy and engagement with feedback: A case study of Chinese undergraduate students. Teaching in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1648410
Hashemi, M. R. (2012). Reflections on mixing methods in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 206-212. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams008
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2012). Students’ use of asynchronous voice discussion in a blended-learning environment: A study of two undergraduate classes. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 10(4), 360-367. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ986637.pdf
Hsu, L. (2013). English as a foreign language learners’ perception of mobile-assisted language learning: A cross-national study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 197-213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.649485
Hsu, L. (2016). Examining EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and the adoption of mobile-assisted language learning: A partial least square approach. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(8), 1287-1297. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1278024
Izumi, S., Bigelow, M., Fujiwara, M., & Fearnow, S. (1999). Testing the output hypothesis: Effects of output on noticing and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(3), 421-452. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199003034
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). Academic Press.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034
Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 405-430. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami051
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second-language learning. Edward Arnold.
McQuiggan, S., Kosturko, L., Sabourin, J., & McQuiggan, J. (2015). Mobile learning: A handbook for developers, educators, and learners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212-1222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501
Motallebzadeh, K., & Nematizadeh, S. (2011). Does gender play a role in the assessment of oral proficiency? English Language Teaching, 4(4), 165-172. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n4p165
Nassaji, H. (2015). The interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning: Linking theory, research, and practice. Bloomsbury.
Nassaji, H. (2020). Good qualitative research. Language Teaching Research, 24(4), 427-431. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820941288
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2017). Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications. Routledge.
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2021). The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in language learning and teaching. Cambridge University Press.
O’Bannon, B. W., & Thomas, K. (2014). Teacher perceptions of using mobile phones in the classroom: Age matters! Computers & Education, 74, 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.006
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage Publications.
Pettit, J., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2007). Going with the grain: Mobile devices in practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(1), 17-33. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1271
Qian, K., Owen, N., & Bax, S. (2018). Researching mobile-assisted Chinese-character learning strategies among adult distance learners. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 56-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2018.1418633
Rassaei, E. (2019). Computer-mediated text-based and audio-based corrective feedback, perceptual style and L2 development. System, 82, 97-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.03.004
Rassaei, E. (2022). Recasts during mobile-mediated audio and video interactions: Learners’ responses, their interpretations, and the development of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(1-2), 114-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1671461
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in language learning. In Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1-63). University of Hawai'i Press.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge University Press.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301-322). Oxford University Press.
Shintani, N. (2016). The effects of computer-mediated synchronous and asynchronous direct corrective feedback on writing: A case study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3), 517-538. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.993400
Shintani, N., Ellis, R., & Suzuki, W. (2014). Effects of written feedback and revision on learners' accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language Learning, 64(1), 103-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12029
Suzuki, W., Nassaji, H., & Sato, K. (2019). The effects of feedback explicitness and type of target structure on accuracy in revision and new pieces of writing. System, 81, 135-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.12.017
Swain, M., & Suzuki, W. (2008). Interaction, output, and communicative language learning. In Handbook of educational linguistics (pp. 70-555). Blackwell.
Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 568-575. https://doi.org/10.2190/V0LB-1M37-RNR8-Y2U1
Wistner, B., Sakai, H., & Abe, M. (2009). An analysis of the Oxford Placement Test and the Michigan English Placement Test as L2 proficiency tests. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters, Hosei University, 58, 33-44.
Xu, Q., & Peng, H. (2017). Investigating mobile-assisted oral feedback in teaching Chinese as a second language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(3-4), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1297836
Yilmaz, Y. (2012). The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes. Language Learning, 62(4), 1134-1169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00726.x
Zarei, R., Heidari Darani, L., & Ameri-Golestan, A. (2017). Effect of Telegram application on Iranian advanced EFL learners' vocabulary knowledge and attitude. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 5(20), 96-109.
Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2018). Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37, 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001
Zheng, Y., Yu, S., & Liu, Z. (2020). Understanding individual differences in lower-proficiency students’ engagement with teacher written corrective feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1806225

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 11 September 2024
  • Revise Date: 25 October 2024
  • Accept Date: 01 November 2024
  • First Publish Date: 03 November 2024
  • Publish Date: 03 November 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics