本文選題：中國英語學習者 + 同伴書面和口頭反饋��； 參考：《山東大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：同伴反饋在提高二語寫作質量,增強讀者意識,促進學生合作互動等方面的優(yōu)勢已得到廣泛認可。成功的實施同伴反饋,需要選擇恰當?shù)耐榉答伔绞?如同伴書面和/或口頭反饋。盡管國內(nèi)外對同伴反饋的研究眾多,但同伴反饋的不同方式對寫作的影響尚未得到足夠的關注。因此,本研究嘗試探討同伴書面和口頭反饋方式對中國英語學習者英語寫作的影響,重點研究不同反饋方式下學生反饋側重點的差別,兩種反饋引發(fā)的注意對修改的作用,以及學生對同伴反饋方式的態(tài)度。二十位英語專業(yè)的學生各完成了兩篇托福作文,分別采用書面和口頭反饋的方式互評,之后對自己的作文進行修改,并在問卷和訪談中分享有關同伴反饋的經(jīng)歷及看法。通過分析文本、口頭反饋錄音、問卷及訪談等,研究發(fā)現(xiàn)兩種同伴反饋方式都對受試者的英語寫作產(chǎn)生了積極影響。在反饋側重點方面,兩種反饋方式下的反饋都集中在語法和內(nèi)容方面,詞匯、技巧和結構方面的反饋較少;兩種反饋方式下受試者給出的反饋絕大多數(shù)為負面反饋,書面反饋方式下負面反饋比例更高;此外,兩種反饋方式的準確度都較高,其中口頭反饋的準確率更高。在注意引發(fā)的修改方面,受試者對書面反饋的接受率更高,但由口頭反饋引發(fā)的修改比例更高,兩者引發(fā)的修改都有較高正確率,且使受試者文章的整體分數(shù)和語法、內(nèi)容、詞匯等方面的分數(shù)有所提高。學生對同伴反饋的態(tài)度方面,受試者認可同伴反饋和口頭反饋的作用;大多數(shù)受試者以前只有書面同伴反饋的經(jīng)歷,希望能同時得到同伴書面和口頭反饋;受試者普遍表現(xiàn)出對自己英語水平和寫作水平信心不足�；谝陨习l(fā)現(xiàn),本研究認為同伴書面和口頭反饋對中國英語學習者英語寫作有積極影響,且學生對此持積極態(tài)度,因此,應在教學中靈活使用這兩種反饋方式。再者,為有效實施同伴反饋,英語寫作教師應當進行充分的準備,對學生進行足夠的培訓,使學生給出的反饋更加全面準確。最后,在實施同伴互評時,應充分發(fā)揮好引導和監(jiān)督作用,通過恰當?shù)墓膭詈头e極反饋,增強學生的自信心。
[Abstract]:Peer feedback has been widely recognized for its advantages in improving the quality of L2 writing, enhancing readers' awareness and promoting students' cooperative interaction. Successful implementation of peer feedback requires the selection of appropriate peer feedback methods, such as peer written and / or oral feedback. Although there are many researches on peer feedback at home and abroad, the influence of different ways of peer feedback on writing has not been paid enough attention. Therefore, the present study attempts to explore the effects of peer written and oral feedback on Chinese EFL learners' English writing, focusing on the differences in the emphasis of students' feedback under different feedback modes, and the effect of the attention caused by the two types of feedback on the revision. And the students' attitude towards peer feedback. Twenty English majors each completed two TOEFL compositions, which were evaluated by written and oral feedback, and then their compositions were revised, and their experiences and opinions about peer feedback were shared in questionnaires and interviews. By analyzing the texts, oral feedback recordings, questionnaires and interviews, it is found that both peer feedback methods have a positive effect on the subjects' English writing. In terms of feedback focus, the feedback in both ways is mainly in grammar and content, but there is less feedback in vocabulary, technique and structure, and the feedback given by the subjects is mostly negative feedback. In addition, the accuracy of the two feedback methods is higher, and the accuracy of oral feedback is higher. In the aspect of attention to the revision, the acceptance rate of written feedback was higher, but the proportion of revision caused by oral feedback was higher. Both of them had higher correct rate, and the overall score, grammar and content of the article were also improved. Scores on vocabulary have improved. In terms of students' attitude towards peer feedback, the subjects recognized the role of peer feedback and oral feedback; most of the subjects had only written peer feedback experience before, hoping to get both written and oral peer feedback. The subjects generally showed a lack of confidence in their English and writing skills. Based on the above findings, the present study suggests that peer written and oral feedback has a positive effect on Chinese EFL learners' English writing, and students have a positive attitude towards it. Therefore, we should use these two feedback methods flexibly in teaching. Furthermore, in order to effectively implement peer feedback, English writing teachers should make adequate preparations and provide adequate training to students so that the feedback from students can be more comprehensive and accurate. Finally, in the implementation of peer evaluation, we should give full play to the role of guidance and supervision, through appropriate encouragement and positive feedback to enhance students' self-confidence.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：H319.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 金曉宏;;非英語專業(yè)大學生對不同形式英語寫作評改反饋的接受程度研究[J];外語研究;2016年05期

2 文秋芳;;“師生合作評價”:“產(chǎn)出導向法”創(chuàng)設的新評價形式[J];外語界;2016年05期

3 張麗敏;于書林;;探究教師書面反饋的言語功能:靜態(tài)文本還是動態(tài)話語?[J];外語教學理論與實踐;2015年02期

4 董家麗;曲衛(wèi)國;;英文寫作元認知與同伴互評書面評語的關聯(lián)性研究[J];外語教學理論與實踐;2015年02期

5 劉永厚;;英語專業(yè)寫作小組同伴反饋和教師反饋效果研究[J];外語界;2015年01期

6 孫鑫;李秋菊;;基礎英語寫作教學中自我、同伴及教師評估對比研究[J];中國外語;2015年01期

7 邢加新;代尊峰;;《第二語言習得與寫作中的書面修正性反饋》介評[J];現(xiàn)代外語;2014年01期

8 王穎;;維果茨基最近發(fā)展區(qū)理論及其應用研究[J];山東社會科學;2013年12期

9 周一書;;大學英語寫作反饋方式的對比研究[J];外語界;2013年03期

10 周一書;;論同伴反饋在大學英語寫作課堂中的有效性[J];江蘇教育學院學報(社會科學);2013年02期

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 王宇紅;反饋、注意與二語發(fā)展[D];上海外國語大學;2009年

，

本文編號：2019422