导语

  

内容提要

  

    国内外相关学者在二语习得和二语写作领域对纠正性反馈问题进行了持续研究。然而，对于纠正性反馈的效应，迄今仍未形成一致性结论。纠正性反馈的参与主体具有“双元性”，即考虑到纠正性反馈的特性，有效的纠正反馈需要教学者和学习者的共同参与。这意味着参与双方的偏好、经验和积极性等个体特征对纠正性反馈的效果具有明显影响。显然，二语教学者和学习者对纠正性反馈的认知偏差实际上导致了纠正性反馈研究和实践的困境：一方面，纠正性反馈具有认知的同质性，所有参与者都认可其在写作精确度提高方面的积极作用；另一方面，纠正性反馈具有认知的异质性，不同参与者对其影响路径和程度的认知存在明显个体性；这一共性与个性的矛盾加剧了纠正性反馈研究的困难性。

    王昕，山东青岛人，2009年获青岛大学英语学士学位，2013年获美国北亚利桑那大学应用语言学和第二外语教学双硕士学位，2017年获美国北亚利桑那大学教育博士学位。于2007年被选为交换生公派赴美国密苏里州立大学交流学习。美国应用语言学，语料库语言学和二语写作协会成员。现为青岛大学外语学院助理教授。主要研究领域为应用语言学、语料库语言学、二语习得。长期跟踪应用语言学领域研究动态，具有扎实的研究基础和研究经验。公开发表国际学术期刊论文及会议论文10余篇，参与国内外人文社科项目5项。目前主要从事口译及学术论文写作的教学与研究工作。

Chapter 1 : Introduction
  1.1  Context Analysis
    1.1.1  EFL Context in China
    1.1.2  Context of the Study
  1.2  Outline of the Study
Chapter 2 : Literature Review
  2.l  Form-focused Instruction（FFI）in SLA
    2.1.1  Naturalistic Exposure vs.Formal Instruction
    2.1.2  Focus on Forms（FonFs） vs.Focus on Form（FonF）
    2.1.3  Explicit vs.Implicit Knowledge and Learning
    2.1.4  The Role of Grammar Instruction in Pedagogy
  2.2  Positive Evidence vs.Negative Evidence in SLA
  2.3  Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing
    2.3.1  Positions on Corrective Feedback in L2 Learning
      2.3.1.1  Arguments against Corrective Feedback
      2.3.1.2  Arguments for Corrective Feedback
      2.3.1.3  Types of Corrective Feedback
    2.3.2  Perceptions of Corrective Feedback in L2 Learning
      2.3.2.1  Negative Perceptions
      2.3.2.2  Positive Perceptions
    2.3.3  Factors in Relation to Corrective Feedback
      2.3.3.1  Prior Learning Experiences
      2.3.3.2  Proficiency Level
      2.3.3.3  Cultural Factor
  2.4  Next Step for Classroom Practice
    2.4.1  Challenges
Chapter 3 : Methodology
  3.1  Research Questions
  3.2  Participants
  3.3  Dependent and Independent Variables
  3.4  Data Collection and Analysis
  3.5  Research Question # 1
    3.5.1  Data Collection
    3.5.2  Data Analysis
  3.6  Research Question # 2 & # 3
    3.6.1  Questionnaires
      3.6.1.1  Data Collection
      3.6.1.2  Data Analysis
    3.6.2  Interview
      3.6.2.1  Data Collection
      3.6.2.2  Data Analysis
    3.6.3  Classroom Observation
Chapter 4: Quantitative Results: Pretest, Posttest and Delayed Posttest
  4.1  RQ1 : Overall Effectiveness of CF and the Type of CF in Relation to Students'Improvement in L2 Writing Accuracy
    4.1.1  Descriptive Statistics for Indirect Corrective Feedback （ Indirect CF） Group
    4.1.2  Descriptive Statistics for Feedback on Content （FC） Group
    4.1.3  Descriptive Statistics for Direct Corrective Feedback （Direct CF） Group
    4.1.4  Descriptive Statistics for Across Group Comparison
    4.1.5  Inferential Statistics for Within Group Comparisons on Overall Errors
    4.1.6  Inferential Statistics for Within Group Comparisons on Individual Errors
    4.1.7  Inferential Statistics for Across Group Comparisons on Overall Errors
    4.1.8  Inferential Statistics for Across Group Comparison on Individual Errors
Chapter 5 : Mixed Methods Results: Questionnaires
  5.1  Results for Questionnaire 1
    5.1.1  Responses from Indirect CF Group
    5.1.2  Responses from Content Feedback （FC）Group
    5.1.3  Responses from Direct CF Group
  5.1  .g  Comparison of Results Across The Three Groups
  5.2  Results for Questionnaire
    5.2.1  Responses from Indirect CF Group
    5.2.2  Responses from Content Feedback （FC） Group
    5.2.3  Responses from Direct CF Group
    5.2.4  Comparison of Results Across the Three Groups
  5.3  Student Responses to the Open-ended Questions in Questionnaire 1
    5.3.1  Indirect CF Group
    5.3.2  Content Feedback （FC） Group
    5.3.3  Direct CF Group
Chapter 6 : Qualitative Results: Interviews and Classroom Observation
  6.1  Responses to Student Interview
    6.1.1  Question 1
    6.1.2  Question 2
    6.1.3  Question 3
    6.1.4  Question 4
    6.1.5  Question 5
    6.1.6  Question 6
    6.1.7  Question 7
  6.2  Responses to Teacher Interview
  6.3  Report from Classroom Observation
Chapter 7 : Discussion
  7.1  Quantitative Results
    7.1.1  Time Effect of Feedback on Overall Errors for Each Group
    7.1.2  Time Effect of Feedback on Individual Error Types for Each Group
    7.1.3  Group Difference of Feedback on Overall Errors
    7.1.4  Group Difference of Feedback on Individual Error Types
    7.1.5  Conclusion
      7.1.5.1  Potential Factors and Reasons
  7.2  Mixed-methods Results
    7.7.1  Questionnaire 1
    7.2.2  Questionnaire 2
    7.2.3  Conclusion
  7.3  Qualitative Results
Chapter 8 :Implications, Recommendations and Conclusion
  8.1  Summary of Results
  8.2  Pedagogical Implications and Recommendation for EFL Teachers
    8.2.1  Considering Learner Factors
    8.2.2  Developing Self-correction Strategies
    8.2.3  Focused CF Instead of Comprehensive Correction
    8.2.4  Integrating Grammar Instruction
    8.2.5  Designing Appropriate Learning Materials in Class
  8.3  Strength
  8.4  Limitations
  8.5  Future Direction
  8.6  Conclusion
References
Appendix A  Grading Criteria for Linguistic Accuracy
Appendix B  Test Prompts
Appendix C  Questionnaires
Appendix D  Interview Questions in Chinese
Appendix E  Examples of Student Errors Across Pretest, Posttest, and Delayed Posttest in the Three Groups
Appendix F  Text Lengths
Appendix G  Examples of Students' Responses to the Open-ended Questions In Questionnaire One
Appendix H  Abbreviations