Computer-mediated corrective feedback and language accuracy in telecollaborative exchanges

Language Learning and Technology

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 72-103

  Vinagre, Margarita ^a   Muñoz, Beatriz ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES EMDEN LEER   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79551523388     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10943501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Barker, T., & Kemp, F. (1990). Network theory: A postmodern pedagogy for the writing classroom. In C. Handa (Ed.), Computers and community: teaching composition in the twenty-first century (pp. 1-27). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
2. Bartram, M., & Walton, R. (1991). Correction: A positive approach to language mistakes. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
3. Brammerts, H. (1996). Language learning in tandem using the Internet. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Hawaii symposium (pp. 121-130). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
4. Chaudron, C. (1977). The role of error correction in second language teaching. In B. K. Das (Ed.), Patterns in classroom interaction in Southeast Asia (pp. 17-50). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
5. Chaudron, C. (1986). Teachers' priorities in correcting learners' errors in French immersion classes. In R. R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 64-84). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
6. Chavez, M. (2002). We say "culture" and students ask "what"?: University students' definitions of foreign language culture. Die Unterrichtspraxis, 35(2), 129-140.
7. Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.
8. Dussias, P. E. (2006). Morphological development in Spanish-American telecollaboration. In J. Belz & S. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education (pp. 121-146). Boston, MA: Thomson & Heinle.
9. Fernández, S. (1997). Interlengua y análisis de errores en el aprendizaje del español como lengua extranjera. Madrid: Edelsa.
10. Gaßdorf, A. (1998). Autonomes Lernen von Fremdsprachen im E-Mail Tandem: Kommunikation ohne Pannen, informeller und formeller Brief. Retrieved from http://www.slf.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/tandem/sk/index.html
11. Hyland, K. (1990). Providing productive feedback. ELT Journal, 44(4), 279-285.
12. James, C. (1998). Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis. Essex: Longman.
13. Kelm, O. (1996). The application of computer networking in foreign language education: Focusing on principles of second language acquisition. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 19-28). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
14. Kessler, G. (2009). Student-initiated attention to form in wiki-based collaborative writing. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 79-95. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num1/kessler.pdf
15. Kötter, M. (2002). Tandem learning on the Internet: Learner interactions in virtual online environments (MOOs). Frankfurt: Perter Lang.
16. Krashen, S. (1977). The monitor model for adult second language performance. In M. Burt, H. Dulay, & M. Finocchiaro (Eds.), Viewpoints on English as a second language (pp. 152-161). New York: Regents.
17. Krashen, S. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 45-77). London: Academic Press.
18. Lee, L. (2004). Learners' perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native speakers of Spanish in the U.S. Language Learning & Technology, 8(1), 83-100. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol8num1/lee/default.html
19. Lee, L. (2006). A study of native and nonnative speakers' feedback and responses in Spanish-American networked collaborative interaction. In J. Belz & S. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education (pp. 147-176). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
20. Lee, L. (2008). Focus on form through collaborative scaffolding in expert-to-novice online interaction. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 53-72. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol12num3/lee.pdf
21. Leeser, M. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 55-81.
22. Little, D. & Ushioda, E. (1998). Designing, implementing and evaluating a project in tandem language learning via e-mail. ReCALL 10(1), 95-101.
23. Little, D., Ushioda, E., Appel, M. C., Moran, J., O'Rourke, B., & Schwienhorst, K. (1999). Evaluating tandem learning by e-mail: Report on a bilateral project. CLCS Occasional Paper No 55. Dublin: Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
24. Long, M. H. (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 177-193.
25. Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In D. C. K. de Bot, C. Kramsch & R. Ginsburg (Eds.), Foreign language research in a cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
26. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment on second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
27. Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). New York: Cambridge University Press.
28. Lyster, R., Lightbown, M., & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott's "What's wrong with oral grammar correction". The Canadian Modern Language Review, 55 (4), 457-467.
29. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
30. Lyster, R. (2001). Negotiation of form, recasts and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 51(Suppl 1), 265-301. Retrieved from http://people. mcgill.ca/files/roy.lyster/Lyster2001_LL.pdf
31. Morris, F. (2002). Negotiation moves and recasts in relation to error types and learner repair in the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 35(4), 395-404.
32. Morris, F. (2005). Child-to-child interaction and corrective feedback in a computer mediated L2 class. Language Learning & Technology 9(1), 29-45. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num1/morris/default.html
33. Muñoz, B. (2008). Análisis y corrección de errores en un intercambio tandem español-alemán a través del correo electrónico. Unpublished dissertation. Universidad Nebrija: Madrid.
34. Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. TESL-EJ, 6(2), 1-20. Retrieved from http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/
35. Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9, 34-51.
36. O'Rourke, B. (2005). Form-focused interaction in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 433-466. Retrieved from https://www.calico.org/html/article_144.pdf
37. Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595.
38. Pellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: the role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). New York: Cambridge University Press.
39. Sauro, S. (2009). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 96-120. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num1/sauro.pdf
40. Schwienhorst, K. (1998). The "third place" - virtual reality applications for second language learning. ReCALL, 10(1), 118-126.
41. Sotillo, S. M. (2006). Using instant messaging for collaborative learning: A case study. Journal of Online Education, 2(3). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol2_issue3/Using_Instant_ Messaging_for_Collaborative_Learning-__A_Case_Study.pdf
42. Steveker, W. (2002). Arbeitsblatt zur Fehlergruppierung. Retrieved from http://www.wolfgangsteveker.de/didaktik/error1.pdf
43. Storch, N. (2001). Comparing ESL learners' attention to grammar on three different classroom tasks. RELC Journal, 32(2), 104-124.
44. Stryker, S. B. (1997). The Mexico experiment at the Foreign Service Institute. In S. B. Stryker & B. L. Leaver (Eds.), Content-based instruction in foreign language education: Models and methods (pp. 177-202). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
45. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
46. Vinagre, M. (2005). Fostering language learning via e-mail: An English-Spanish exchange. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(5), 369-388.
47. Vinagre, M., & Lera, M. (2008). The role of error correction in online exchanges. In F. Zhang & B. Barber (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Computer-Enhanced Language Acquisition and Learning (pp. 326-341). Hershey: IGI Publishing.
48. Vinagre, M., & Maíllo, C. (2007). Focus on form in on-line projects: Linguistic development in e-mail tandem exchanges. In C. Periñán, C. (Ed.), Revisiting Language Learning Resources (pp. 91-112). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
49. Ware, P. D., & O'Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43-63. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol12num1/pdf/wareodowd.pdf
50. Warschauer, M. (1996a). Computer-assisted language learning: An introduction. In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia language teaching (pp. 3-10). Tokyo: Logos International.
51. Warschauer, M. (Ed.) (1996b). Telecollaboration in foreign language learning. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
52. Williams, J. (1999). Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, 49(4), 583-625.
53. Woodin, J. (1997). Email tandem learning and the communicative curriculum. ReCALL, 9, 22-33.