EFL business writing behaviors in differing feedback environments

Language Learning

Volumn 50, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 573-616

  Warden, Clyde A ^a  

^a CHAOYANG UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034356450     PISSN: 00238333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/0023-8333.00141     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317-332.
2. Beason, L. (1993). Feedback and revision in writing across the curriculum classes. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 395-421.
3. Bozdogan, H. (1987). Model selection and Akaike's information criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika, 52, 345-370.
4. Brannon, L., & Knoblauch, C. H. (1982). On students' rights to their own texts: A model of teacher response. College Composition and Communication, 33, 157-166.
5. Brock, M. N. (1990). Customizing a computerized text analyzer for ESL writers: Cost versus gain. CALICO Journal, 8, 51-60.
6. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445-455.
7. Butler, J. (1980). Remedial writers: The teacher's job as corrector of papers. College Composition and Communication, 31, 270-277.
8. Cardelle, M., & Corno, L. (1981). Effects on second language learning of variations in written feedback on homework assignments. TESOL Quarterly, 15, 251-261.
9. Chen, J. (1997). Computer generated error feedback and writing process: A link. TESL-EJ [On-line], 2 (3). Available: http://www-writing. berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ/ej07/a1.html
10. Connors, R., & Lunsford, A. (1993). Teachers' rhetorical comments on student papers. College Composition and Communication, 44, 200-223.
11. Faigley, L., & Witte, S. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32, 400-414.
12. Fathman, A., & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178-190). New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. Modern Language Journal, 75, 305-313.
14. Kirn, E., & Hartmann, P. (1990). Interactions I: A writing skills book. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
15. Lalande, J., II. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66, 140-149.
16. Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 57-68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Linhart, H., & Zucchini, W. (1986). Model selection. New York: Wiley.
18. Liou, H. (1993). Investigation of using text-critiquing programs in a process-oriented writing class. CALICO Journal, 10 (4), 17-38.
19. Microsoft Word 97 [Computer software]. (1996). Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.
20. Raimes, A. (1987). Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: A study of ESL college student writers. Language Learning, 37, 439-468.
21. Reference Software International [Computer software manual]. (1992). Grammatik 5, user's guide. San Francisco: Reference Software International.
22. Retherford, R. D., & Choe, M. K. (1993). Statistical models for causal analysis (pp. 93-118). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
23. Semke, H. D. (1984). Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195-202.
24. Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103-110.
25. Sirkin, M. R. (1995). Statistics for the social sciences (pp. 436-442). London: Sage Publications.
26. Sommers, N. (1980). Revision strategies of student writers and experienced adult writers. College Composition and Communication, 31, 378-388.
27. Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 148-156.
28. Sperling, M. (1994). Constructing the perspective of teacher-as-reader: A framework for studying response to student writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 28, 175-207.
29. SPSS Amos 3.61 [Computer software]. (1997). Chicago: Small Waters Corporation.
30. SPSS 8.0 [Computer software]. (1997). Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
31. Stallard, C. K. (1974). An analysis of the writing behavior of good student writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 8, 206-218.
32. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
33. Warden, C. (1995). Expert system impact on writing errors in Taiwanese business English classes. CAELL Journal, 6 (2), 22-29.
34. Yao, Y., & Warden, C. (1996). Process writing and computer correction: Happy wedding or shotgun marriage? CALL Electronic Journal [On-line], 1 (1). Available at http://www.lerc.ritsumei.ac.jp/callej/1-1/Warden1.html
35. Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 165-187.
36. Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 79-102.