지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2017.3
- 수록면
- 1 - 33 (33page)
- DOI
- 10.37967/emh.2017.03.135.1
이용수
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)
- 이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
- 연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
- 이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The purpose of this article is to investigate writing student’s response to the comments provided by the teacher. This paper first categorizes the comments of the teacher into the two aspects: the focus and the mode, and then it attempts to classifies the student’s response to the teacher’s comments into two types: acceptance and rejection. In this article, the students’ responses of acceptance and rejection are analyzed in accordance with the teacher’s comments, which deal with either the focus or the mode.
First, the student’s acceptance of the teacher’s comments is as follows. As for the comment that emphasizes the focus, the students showed the acceptance rate of 62.64%. The students with the comment of in the focused area showed somewhat higher acceptance rate of 76.00% when the comment was shaped as the ‘command’. On the other hand, the teacher’s comments in ‘criticism’ yielded a somewhat lower acceptance rate of 54.69%. Those fact shows that, when the students react positively about the teacher’s comments dealing with the focus, they prefer the commentary which suggests a relatively straightforward and clear suggestions in the ‘command’. In addition, the comments asking for ‘correction’ was found to be effective way of helping students to revise, especially when the teacher uses the modes of ‘closed question,’ ‘correction,’ ‘command,’ and ‘criticism.’
On the other hand, the students acceptance of the comment regarding the mode, the acceptance rate when applying the style of ‘command’ was higher than that of the other modes. And there are symmetrical relationship among ‘closed question’, ‘open question’, ‘criticism’ and ‘qualified criticism’, which are the ways of asking for answers among the modes of commentary provided to writing students. When the teacher provides comments on ‘context’ or ‘organization,’ the student tends to easily take the comment regardless of the modes of ‘closed question’ or ‘criticism.’ Therefore, it is effective for the teacher to consider such a tendency when composing comments for students.
Secondly, the rejection of the comment provided by the teacher is analyzed as follows. In the rejection of the comment regarding what it focuses, the students showed the rejection rate of 17.94% against the teacher’s comments. The rejection of the comment regarding the focus did not show a biased rejection rate. However, the ‘correction’ as the modes of comment does not effectively induces the student’s participation, while the modes of ‘open question,’ ‘advice,’ and ‘qualified criticism’ showed the higher rejection rate. The acceptance and rejection as the students’ responses were partially symmetrical but not completely symmetrical.
In the rejection aspect of writing students with the comment on the mode, the method of ‘command’ showed a somewhat lower rejection rate. This signifies that the students are likely to reject to the comments in the mode of ‘criticism.’ The response of rejection shows a slight difference between ‘closed question’ and ‘open question,’ while it reveals smaller gaps among ‘closed question’ and ‘criticism’, ‘open question’ and ‘qualified criticism.’
First, the student’s acceptance of the teacher’s comments is as follows. As for the comment that emphasizes the focus, the students showed the acceptance rate of 62.64%. The students with the comment of in the focused area showed somewhat higher acceptance rate of 76.00% when the comment was shaped as the ‘command’. On the other hand, the teacher’s comments in ‘criticism’ yielded a somewhat lower acceptance rate of 54.69%. Those fact shows that, when the students react positively about the teacher’s comments dealing with the focus, they prefer the commentary which suggests a relatively straightforward and clear suggestions in the ‘command’. In addition, the comments asking for ‘correction’ was found to be effective way of helping students to revise, especially when the teacher uses the modes of ‘closed question,’ ‘correction,’ ‘command,’ and ‘criticism.’
On the other hand, the students acceptance of the comment regarding the mode, the acceptance rate when applying the style of ‘command’ was higher than that of the other modes. And there are symmetrical relationship among ‘closed question’, ‘open question’, ‘criticism’ and ‘qualified criticism’, which are the ways of asking for answers among the modes of commentary provided to writing students. When the teacher provides comments on ‘context’ or ‘organization,’ the student tends to easily take the comment regardless of the modes of ‘closed question’ or ‘criticism.’ Therefore, it is effective for the teacher to consider such a tendency when composing comments for students.
Secondly, the rejection of the comment provided by the teacher is analyzed as follows. In the rejection of the comment regarding what it focuses, the students showed the rejection rate of 17.94% against the teacher’s comments. The rejection of the comment regarding the focus did not show a biased rejection rate. However, the ‘correction’ as the modes of comment does not effectively induces the student’s participation, while the modes of ‘open question,’ ‘advice,’ and ‘qualified criticism’ showed the higher rejection rate. The acceptance and rejection as the students’ responses were partially symmetrical but not completely symmetrical.
In the rejection aspect of writing students with the comment on the mode, the method of ‘command’ showed a somewhat lower rejection rate. This signifies that the students are likely to reject to the comments in the mode of ‘criticism.’ The response of rejection shows a slight difference between ‘closed question’ and ‘open question,’ while it reveals smaller gaps among ‘closed question’ and ‘criticism’, ‘open question’ and ‘qualified criticism.’
목차
1. 들어가는 말
2. 연구 방법
3. 교수자 첨삭논평에 대한 글쓰기 학습자의 수용 양상
4. 교수자 첨삭논평에 대한 글쓰기 학습자의 거절 양상
5. 맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
동료 첨삭논평의 제공 양상 연구
인문연구
2022 .03
-
L2 Writers’ Engagement and Needs for Teacher Written Feedback: A Case of a Korean College English Composition Class
영어학
2021 .01
-
An analysis of oral peer feedback comments on EFL student writing
영어교육연구
2018 .01
-
쓰기의 첨삭피드백 연구에 관한 비판적 재고찰
어문학
2017 .12
-
A Comparison of Teacher’s and Senior Students’ Feedback: Student Attitudes and Their Writing Improvement
Journal of Asia TEFL
2018 .01
-
Speech Comments and Intertextuality: Evidence from Courtroom Discourse
영어학
2022 .01
-
‘한국천주교 해외선교 40년의 역사와 전망’에 대한 논평 2
한국그리스도사상
2015 .12
-
‘한국천주교 해외선교 40년의 역사와 전망’에 대한 논평 1
한국그리스도사상
2015 .12
-
Using Self-Mentions in Academic Writing: Acceptance, Rejection, and Negotiation
Journal of Asia TEFL
2021 .01
-
‘한국교회의 복음화에 대한 역사적 회고와 전망’에 대한 논평 1
한국그리스도사상
2015 .12
-
‘한국교회의 복음화에 대한 역사적 회고와 전망’에 대한 논평 2
한국그리스도사상
2015 .12
-
욕설댓글의 틀(frame) 분석을 통한 댓글 사용자의 의도성 범주화
사회언어학
2019 .01
-
Givers and Receivers of Peer Feedback: An Analysis of Korean EFL Students’ Writing
Studies in English Education
2022 .06
-
College Students' Revision Behaviors: Are they Motivated by the Inner-drive or Teacher Feedback?
외국학연구
2015 .01
-
〈기생충〉은 과연 중국에서도 성공할 수 있을까?
중국문화연구
2020 .11
-
스페인어 포괄적 언어에 대한 인식 조사: 유튜브 댓글을 활용한 감정분석 연구
스페인어문학
2024 .03
-
‘교도권의 가르침에 비추어 성찰해 보는 아시아 선교’에 대한 논평
한국그리스도사상
2015 .12
-
대학생들의 영어 쓰기 경험에 관한 연구: 유튜브 댓글작성을 중심으로
영어영문학
2020 .08
-
스페인 신문 사설에 대한 부정적 댓글 분석
스페인어문학
2024 .06
-
첨삭 기반 글쓰기 교육 모델 개발 연구 - 경운대학교 <소통과 글쓰기>를 중심으로 -
한국사상과 문화
2019 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2017-810-002416167