Sauro's (2009) paper "Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar" is regarded as one of the representatives in the growing body of research illustrating the potential that intercultural telecollaborative exchanges entail for language development through the use of corrective feedback from collaborating partners (Vinagre & Muñoz, 2011). The study reported in the article examined the relative effectiveness of two different types of computer-mediated corrective feedback on the immediate and sustained development of L2 target form knowledge. Despite the significant immediate gains of the matalinguistic group compared with the control condition, which conformed more or less to our preconceived ideas towards the effects of feedback based on positive results found on corrective feedbacks in traditional face-to-face interaction, the study showed no significant advantage for either feedback type on immediate or sustained gains in target form knowledge, which led to the author's suggestion for future studies.
Besides the language issue discussed about, this article has also made me think of the challenges and merits of academic studies. It is never easy to find significant results, and it is even more difficult to claim causality. However, it is the researchers' responsibility to report a study as it is. By doing this, they are making no less contribution than those who are fortunate enough to get more "desirable" results; and by doing this, they are demonstrating to us more vividly the beauty of scientific research-- we never know what we would end up with.
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
Vinagre, M., & Muñoz, B. (2011). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and language accuracy in telecollaborative exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 96–120. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2011/vinagremunoz.pdf
2 comments:
Hey Rong,
Great post. I guess the reason why we conduct research and the reason research never gets old is that we can never truly determine how and why people act the way they do. I do think it is helpful to report nonsignificant findings so that other researchers can learn from the study and do not waste time repeating a study that's already been done. Thanks for the summary of the article :)
Rong, that's an interesting article on feedback. Immediate and sustained gains of knowledge of L2 might depend also on the learner and how often they practice the L2. For example Dr. Chun mentioned how merely coming across a new vocabulary word does not mean that the new word has been learned. Whether feedback contributes to immediate or sustained gains in knowledge could also be dependent upon other factors.
Post a Comment