The Relationship Between Cognitive Styles and Young Adult Learners’ Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback

Article Sidebar

PDF HTML
Published: Jul 11, 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.19183/how.24.2.338
Keywords:
Cognitive style, English as a foreign language, error type, written corrective feedback, young adult learners of English

Main Article Content

Negar Moslemi
English Language Department, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran
Adel Dastgoshadeh
English Language Department, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between learners’ cognitive styles and their preferences for different types and frequencies of written corrective feedback and for different types of errors to be corrected. Data were collected from 60 English as a foreign language learners at intermediate and upper-intermediate levels. The instruments included the Ehrman and Leaver Learning Styles Questionnaire, and a questionnaire constructed by Amrhein and Nassaji (2010). The results indicated that there is a strong relationship between learners’ cognitive styles and their preferences for a particular type of written corrective feedback and for different types of errors to be corrected; but there is no significant relationship between cognitive styles and learners’ preferences for frequencies of written corrective feedback.

Article Details

How to Cite
Moslemi, N., & Dastgoshadeh, A. (2017). The Relationship Between Cognitive Styles and Young Adult Learners’ Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback. HOW, 24(2), 11–34. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.24.2.338
Issue
Vol. 24 No. 2: (July/December 2017)
Section
Research Reports

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The authors of the manuscripts accepted for publication in HOW journal are required to sign a nonexclusive license agreement allowing ASOCOPI to reproduce the full text on the Internet or in any other available source. Authors retain copyright of their manuscripts with the following restrictions: first publication is granted to ASOCOPI; nonexclusive agreements with third parties can be established as long as the original publication in the HOW journal is properly acknowledged.

Author Biographies

Negar Moslemi, English Language Department, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran

Negar Moslemi has received her MA in TEFL from Azad University, Sanandaj Branch. She has been teaching English language in different institutes for more than three years.

Adel Dastgoshadeh, English Language Department, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran

Adel Dastgoshadeh holds a PhD in TEFL. He is an assistant professor at Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj Branch. His research interests include sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and teacher education.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

Amrhein, H. R., & Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers prefer and why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13, 95-127.

Boughey, C. (1997). Learning to write by writing to learn: a group-work approach. ELT Journal, 51(2), 126-134. http://doi.org/10.1093/elt/51.2.126.

Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). New York, US: Addison Wesley Longman.

Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (3rd ed.). White Plains, US: Pearson Education.

Curry, L. (1983). An organization of learning styles theory and constructs. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED235185)

Darabad, A. M. (2013). Does language aptitude make a difference? An investigation of the effect on oral accuracy through corrective feedback. International Journal of Linguistics, 5(4), 225-244. http://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v5i4.4199.

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, US: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ehrman, M., & Leaver, B. L. (2003). Cognitive styles in the service of language learning. System, 31(3), 393-415. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00050-2.

Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. English Language Teaching Journal, 63(2), 97-107. http://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023.

Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell. http://doi.org/10.1002/9781118271643.

Ferris, D. R. (1995) Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 33-53. http://doi.org/10.2307/3587804.

Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6.

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

Ferris, D. R. (2004). The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime...?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 49-62. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005.

Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2),181-201. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490.

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(3), 161-184. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X.

Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(2), 141-163. http://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4.

Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 255-286. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90017-0.

Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 305-315. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05359.x.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. New York, US: Longman.

Lee, I. (1997). ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for college- level teaching. System, 25(4), 465-477. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00045-6.

Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classroom: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285-312. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001.

Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203-218. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x.

Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford, UK: Oxford University 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. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034.

Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A., & Tatsumi, T. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 181-210). Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins. http://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.12mac.

Maftoon, P., & Rezaie, G. (2011). Cognitive style, awareness, and learners’ intake and production of grammatical structures. Journal of Language and Translation, 3(3), 1-15.

Rahimi, M. (2009). The role of teacher’s corrective feedback in improving Iranian EFL learners’ writing accuracy over time: Is learners’ mother tongue relevant? Reading and Writing, 22(2), 219-243. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9139-5.

Rahimi, M. (2015). The role of individual differences in learners’ retention of written corrective feedback. Journal of Response to Writing, 1(1), 19-48.

Riding, R. J., & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive styles: an overview and integration. Educational Psychology, 11(3-4), 193-215. http://doi.org/10.1080/0144341910110301.

Roberts, B. (1999). Can error logs raise more than consciousness? The effects of error logs and grammar feedback on ESL students’ final drafts (Unpublished Master’s thesis). California State University, Sacramento, USA.

Robinson, P. (2002). Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins. http://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.

Saito, H. (1994). Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46-70. http://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633.

Semke, H. D. (1984). Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17(3), 195-202. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x.

Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103-110. http://doi.org/10.1177/003368829202300107.

Shojaei, F., & Kapfo, K. (2015). A study of cognitive styles effect on ESL students’ general writing ability. International Journal of Research, 2(9), 94-99.

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x.

Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111-122. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6.

Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective feedback types. Language Awareness, 17(1), 78-93.http://doi.org/10.2167/la429.0.

Zacharias, N. T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 38(1), 38-52. http://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206076157.