Task repetition, synchronous written corrective feedback and the learning of Korean grammar: A classroom-based study

Abstract

Recently, there has been a shift in the perception of tasks. Tasks are no longer viewed as ‘one-off’ activities, and the importance of studying the role of task repetition has been increasingly addressed (Bygate, 2018). However, the way task repetition effects are mediated by other instructional conditions such as corrective feedback has not been widely researched. The current study examined the effects of task repetition and indirect synchronous written corrective feedback (WCF) during collaborative writing on the quality of students’ written task performance and the learning of Korean grammar. Fifty-four Korean as a foreign language learners completed a pretest, two collaborative writing tasks, and two posttests over 10 weeks. Their task performance was analysed in terms of complexity, accuracy and fluency, and the pretest and posttest results were scored for both suppliance and accuracy of the production of target grammatical features. The findings showed that task repetition improved writing fluency, and while synchronous WCF negatively impacted fluency during collaborative writing, it facilitated accuracy in students’ writing. In terms of the learning of target grammatical features, no significant benefit of synchronous WCF was found.

Learners' flow experience during peer revision in a virtual writing course during the global pandemic

“…These results contribute to the mounting evidence from task repetition research that task familiarity contributes positively to positive experiences during task completion ( Author , xxxx; Kim, 2013 ; Pinter, 2015 ). To the best of our knowledge, Kim et al (2020) are the first to examine the influence of task repetition, but with teacher-provided synchronous feedback, and reported that students’ stress decreased after having performed the task on multiple occasions. Furthermore, the modality-specific finding corroborates those of Author (xxxx) who examined the impact of two task repetition conditions (identical task repetition and procedural task repetition) on flow.…”

Models as written corrective feedback: Effects on young L2 learners’ fluency in digital writing from product and process perspectives

“…Young learners were examined in Cánovas , Lázaro-Ibarrola (2021) and Roothooft et al (2022). Chandler (2003), Ekanayaka and Ellis (2020) and Kim et al (2022) studied university students, while Martínez-Esteban and Roca de Larios (2010) investigated secondary-school students, and Sánchez (2019) examined both university and secondary-school students. Individual and collaborative writing were studied in Lázaro-Ibarrola (2021) as well as Martínez-Esteban and Roca de Larios (2010), while collaborative writing alone was analyzed in Cánovas and Kim et al (2022).…”

“…The remaining studies focused on individual writing. Chandler's (2003) first reported study resorted to indirect WCF, Ekanayaka and Ellis (2020) used direct, semi-focused WCF, synchronous indirect WCF was selected by Kim et al (2022), while Chandler's (2003) second study and Sánchez (2019) drew upon both direct and indirect WCF. Cánovas , Lázaro-Ibarrola ( 2021) and Martínez-Esteban and Roca de Larios (2010) used models, which were also employed by Roothooft et al (2022) together with direct WCF.…”

“…1. Only four works included control or comparison groups (study 1 in Chandler, 2003;Ekanayaka & Ellis, 2020;Kim et al, 2022;Sánchez, 2019). 2.…”

“…The sample sizes were generally small, ranging from five individual writers and six pairs in Martínez-Esteban and Roca de Larios (2010) to Ekanayaka and Ellis' ( 2020) thirty participants in one WCF group and thirty-one writers in both the control and the second WCF groups. Six studies reported inferential statistics (Chandler, 2003;Ekanayaka & Ellis, 2020;Kim et al, 2022;Lázaro-Ibarrola, 2021;Roothooft et al, 2022;Sánchez, 2019), whose results may not be stable due to the small samples that were used. 3.…”