Lenguaje escrito, reformulación y precisión de la escritura de los estudiantes de inglés como lengua extranjera
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi40.23981Palabras clave:
lenguaje, reformulación, agudeza de escritura, idea sociocultural, mediaciónResumen
Esta investigación analizó el impacto del lenguaje y la revisión en la precisión de la de estudiantes universitarios a lo largo de una tarea de escritura de tres pasos. Para completar su EFL iraní B.A. requisitos, sesenta y seis estudiantes tuvieron que redactar un ensayo, comparar sus primeros manuscritos con comentarios reformulados y luego revisar sus trabajos originales. Los posibles beneficios de y el lenguaje para mejorar la corrección de la escritura se investigaron utilizando datos de rendimiento de estudiantes de composiciones, revisiones episodios de lenguaje escrito (LRE). Los hallazgos confirman investigaciones anteriores los beneficios tanto de la traducción como de la reformulación, mostrando una marcada disminución de errores los primeros borradores hasta las revisiones dentro los grupos exploratorios y entre el grupo de y los grupos experimentales, además de entre el de contraste y el grupo exploratorio. Hablaremos sobre las consecuencias teóricas y prácticas del papel que juegan la reformulación y la reformulación combinada con el lenguaje escrito para facilitar el crecimiento de los alumnos en la corrección de la escritura.
Descargas
Citas
Allwright, R. I., M. P. Woodley, and J. M. Allwright (1988). “Investigating reformulation as a practical strategy for the teaching of academic writing”. Applied Linguistics, 9, 236–256.
Antonek, J. L., McCormick, D. E., & Donato, R. (1997). The student teacher portfolio as autobiography: Developing a professional identity. The Modern Language Journal, 81(1), 15–27.
Brooks, L., Swain, M., Lapkin, S., & Knouzi, I. (2010). Mediating between scientific and spontaneous concepts through languaging. Language Awareness, 19(2), 89–110.
Chi, M. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 161–238). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chi, M., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.
Chi, M. T., Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self‐explanations improves understanding. Cognitive science, 18(3), 439–477.
Cohen, A. D. (1982). “Writing like a native: The process of reformulation”. ERIC ED 224 338.
Cohen, A. D. (1989). “Reformulation: A technique for providing advanced feedback in writing”. Guidelines: A Periodical for Classroom Language Teachers, 11, 1–9.
Craik, F., & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behaviour, 11, 671–684.
Cumming, A. (1990). Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written Communication, 7,482–511.
De Graaff, R. (1997). The experanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 249–276.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(3), 379–410.
Dicamilla, F. J., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). The linguistic analysis of private writing. Language Sciences, 16(3–4), 347–369.
Dicamilla, F. J. and M. Anton (2004). Private speech: a study of language for thought in the collaborative interaction of language learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 36–69.
Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, 1, 114–138.
Garcia Mayo, M. P. (2002). Interaction in advanced EFL pedagogy: A comparison of form-focused activities. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 323–341.
GraphPad Prism version 8.0.0 for Windows, GraphPad Software, San Diego, California USA, www.graphpad.com.
Lázaro-Ibarrola, Amparo. (2013). Reformulation and Self-correction: Insights into correction strategies for EFL writing in a school context. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 29–49.
Hedge, T. (1988). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ishikawa, M. (2013). Examining the effect of written languaging: the role of metanotes as a mediator of second language learning. Language Awareness, 22(3), 220–233.
Ishikawa, M. (2015). "Metanotes (written languaging) in a translation task: do L2 proficiency and task outcome matter?" Innovation in language learning and teaching 9(2), 115–129.
Ishikawa, M. (2018). "Written languaging, learners’ proficiency levels and L2 grammar learning." System 74, 50–61.
Källkvist, M. (2013). Languaging in translation tasks used in a university setting: Particular potential for student agency? The Modern Language Journal, 97(1), 217–238.
Kim, Y., & McDonough, K. (2008). The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 211–234.
Knouzi, I., Swain, M., Lapkin, S., & Brooks, L. (2010). Self‐scaffolding mediated by languaging: microgenetic analysis of high and low performers. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 23–49.
Lantolf, J. P., & Frawley, W. (1983). Second language performance and Vygotskyan psycholinguistics: Implications for L2 instruction. Paper presented at the The tenth LACUS forum.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lázaro-Ibarrola, Amparo. (2013). Reformulation and Self-correction: Insights into correction strategies for EFL writing in a school context. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 29–49.
Leeser, M. J. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55–81.
Long, M. H., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 357–371.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66.
Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing, and instructed second language learning. Applied linguistics, 27(3), 405–430.
Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338–356.
Mitchell, R. (2000). Anniversary article. Applied linguistics and evidence-based classroom practice: the case of foreign language grammar pedagogy. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 281–303.
Moradian, M. R., Miri, M., & Hossein Nasab, M. (2015). Contribution of written languaging to enhancing the efficiency of written corrective feedback. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 406–426.
Muranoi, H. (2000). Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, 50(4), 617–673.
Negueruela, E. (2008). Revolutionary pedagogies: Learning that leads (to) second language development. Sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages, 189–227.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Routledge.
Roebuck, R. (2000). Subjects speak out: How learners position themselves in a psycholinguistic task. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 79–95). Oxford University Press.
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). “The role of consciousness in second language learning”. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.
Schmidt, R. W. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed), Cognition and second language instruction (3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shehadeh, A. (2003). Learner output, hypothesis testing, and internalizing linguistic knowledge. System, 31(2), 155–171.
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.
Siegler, R. S. (2002). Microgenetic studies of self-explanations. In N. Garnott & J. Parziale (Eds.), Microdevelopment: Transition processes in development and learning (pp. 31–58). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Simard, D., French, L., & Fortier, V. (2007). Elicited metalinguistic reflection and second language learning: Is there a link? System, 35(4), 509–522.
Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 592–604.
Storch, N. (2001). Comparing ESL learners' attention to grammar on three different classroom tasks. RELCJournal, 32(2), 104–124.
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119–158.
Storch, N. (2008). Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness, 17(2), 95–114.
Storch, N. (2013). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Suzuki, W. (2009). Improving Japanese university students’ second language writing accuracy: Effects of languaging. Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 20, 81–90.
Suzuki, W. (2012). Written Languaging, Direct Correction, and Second Language Writing Revision. Language Learning, 62(4), 1110–1133. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00720.x
Suzuki, W., & Itagaki, N. (2007). Learner metalinguistic reflections following output-oriented and reflective activities. Language Awareness, 16(2), 131–146.
Suzuki, W., & Itagaki, N. (2009). Languaging in grammar exercises by Japanese EFL learners of differing proficiency. System, 37(2), 217–225.
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Swain, M. (2006). Languaging, agency, and collaboration in advanced second language proficiency. Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky, 95–108.
Swain, M. (2010). Talking it through: Languaging as a source of learning. Sociocognitive perspectives on second language learning and use, 112–130.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371–391.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 285–304.
Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Knouzi, I., Suzuki, W., & Brooks, L. (2009). Languaging: University students learn the grammatical concept of voice in French. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 5–29.
Thornbury, S. (1997). “Reformulation and reconstruction: tasks that promote ‘noticing’”. ELT Journal, 51, 326–335.
Tocalli-Beller, A., and M. Swain (2005). “Reformulation: The cognitive conflict and L2 learning it generates”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15, 5–28.
van Compernolle, R. A., & Williams, L. (2013). Sociocultural theory and second language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 17(3), 277–281.
Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
Wigglesworth, G. (2008). Task and Performance Based Assessment. In N. H. Hornberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education. (pp. 2251–2262) Boston: Springer.
Williams, J. (2001). The effect of spaontaneous attention to form. System, 29(3), 325–340.
Williams, J., & Evans, J. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms? In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 139–155). Cambridge University Press.
Williams, J. (2012). The role(s) of writing and writing instruction in L2 development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 321–331.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
- Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo al igual que licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License que permite a otros compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Los autores pueden establecer por separado acuerdos adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión de la obra publicada en la revista (por ejemplo, situarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir sus trabajos electrónicamente (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o en su propio sitio web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, ya que puede dar lugar a intercambios productivos, así como a una citación más temprana y mayor de los trabajos publicados (Véase The Effect of Open Access) (en inglés).
