Exploring multilingual writers' preference between audio and written feedback, and the impact of feedback format on their revision process in a u.s.composition class

Exploring multilingual writers' preference between audio and written feedback, and the impact of feedback format on their revision process in a u.s.composition class. (2019). Exploring multilingual writers' preference between audio and written feedback, and the impact of feedback format on their revision process in a u.s.composition class.

Download PDF

Metadata

MODS Metadata


Title	Exploring multilingual writers' preference between audio and written feedback, and the impact of feedback format on their revision process in a u.s.composition class
Abstract	This study fills the existing gap in the research, which indicates that few researchers have examined multilingual writers' preference between audio and written feedback, and the impact of feedback format on their revision process. However, this dissertation has five interrelated purposes: 1. To understand the expectations of multilingual writers from instructors' feedback, 2. to understand multilingual writers' perceptions regarding the advantages and disadvantages of audio and written feedback, 3. to learn about their perceptions of the effectiveness of audio and written feedback on their revision process, 4. to examine the distinguishable impacts of audio and written feedback on multilingual writers' revision process, and 5. to explore multilingual writers' preferred form of feedback between audio and written feedback. To fulfill these purposes, eight multilingual writers were interviewed, and their first drafts and revised drafts of the final research paper on which they received audio and written feedback were compared using the "Compare" option in Microsoft Word. In addition to these, an early semester participatory survey and a reflection survey were conducted among the multilingual writers of a composition course. Results indicated that multilingual writers expected directive explicit feedback from their instructors. They pointed out that audio feedback was better for global commentary, and written feedback was better for local commentary. Their perceptions regarding the effectivities of audio and written feedback on their revision process varied depending on their own self-efficacy. There was no significant impact of the feedback format on their revision process. A positive correlation was discovered between their preferred form of feedback and their self-perceived English listening proficiency. Those who were confident about their English listening proficiency preferred audio feedback over written feedback. The results of this dissertation have immediate implications for L2 writing instructors. This study suggests that L2 writing instructors should adopt the system of providing a combined form of feedback of both audio and written in order to enhance multilingual writers' overall writing skills. It also suggests that L2 writing instructors should consider giving some relevant grammar lessons for their students. Finally, the author recommends to further investigate the potential of audio feedback in creating student-teacher connections, particularly in online composition courses.
Date	2019

Details

Title: Exploring multilingual writers' preference between audio and written feedback, and the impact of feedback format on their revision process in a u.s.composition class
Personal Name(s): Roy, Sukanto
Vetter, Matthew A.
Corporate Name(s): Indiana University of Pennsylvania
English.
Note: Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
Advisors: Vetter, Matthew A. Committee members: Dana Driscoll; Mary Stewart.
Topical Subject(s): Language arts
English as a Second Language
Educational evaluation
Higher education