인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
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.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
The present study investigated whether different types of comprehensive written corrective feedback helped EFL students’ grammatical accuracy development, and whether direct or indirect feedback was more effective for them. 64 students were divided into four groups and three received different types of written corrective feedback: direct feedback, coded feedback, and underlined feedback. The fourth group was a control group. A pre-test, five new writings and revisions, and a post-test were administered over a 15 week semester. An analysis of the pre- and post-test indicate that feedback in itself is beneficial to students, as the direct and underlined feedback groups’ improvement was statistically significant. The coded group showed a marginal significance, with the control group showing no improvement. An analysis of the post-tests show that none of the feedback groups outperformed the other nor did they outperform the control group. However, the results were marginally significant. This study supports the idea that students should receive written corrective feedback, regardless of the type.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2019-740-000986049
