비고츠스키(Vygosky)의 사회문화 이론은 특히 제2외국어 학습에 있어서 중요한 의미를 갖는다. 학생들은 협동적인 학습 활동을 하면서 영어를 더 잘 배우고 성장하며 발전한다. 게다가 쓰기단계는 사회적 상호작용을 통해 복잡한 인식과정을 거쳐 향상되고 발전한다. 본 논문은 쓰기 수업을 하는 학생들로부터 피드백을 도출하기 위해 구글 독스(Google Docs)를 이용하여 사회문화이론이 쓰기수업에 어떻게 적용되었는지를 설명하고자 한다. 본 연구는 한국 모 대학의 영어수업에서 진행되었고, 참가자는 영어교육과 학생 11명이다. 연구자는 반성적 실천(Reflective Practice), 비계설정(Scaffolding), 동료 피드백 촉진(Peer Feedback Facilitation) 등의 과정을 통해 강사가 학생들이 한 문장에서 시작하여 단락까지 씀으로써 결국은 영어로 에세이를 쓸 수 있게 효과적으로 준비할 수 있었다. 이 연구에서 다섯 단락 정도의 에세이를 쓸 수 있을 만큼 학생들의 작문실 력은 향상되었고, 격려를 통해 서로 성장하고 발전할 수 있었다. 또한 이 과정에서 학생들의 사회적 기술과 공감능력이 향상되었고 수업 분위기도 개선되었다. 이러한 기술적인 동료 피드백은 동기부여를 위한 효율적인 방식이며, 학생들에게는 영어쓰기학습에서 자신감을 주는 것으로 나타난다. 사회문화이론의 적용을 통해 학생들은 제2외국어에 대한 지식을 습득 하고 더 발전시킬 수 있으며, 낮은 단계의 이해에서 더 높은 수준의 지식 으로 나아가게 하는 상호작용의 시너지를 만들어 낸다.

The purpose of this study is to investigate error patterns in EFL college students’ English writing as well as their change over time, based on the teacher’s feedback. In order to accomplish this purpose, two research questions were constructed; first, what are the characteristics of Korean EFL students’ writing based on the maturity of English sentence by the T-unit analysis? Second, what types of error patterns are produced in Korean EFL students’ writing? Also, how do the error patterns change based on the teacher’s feedback over time? The participants were four Korean EFL college students, and they were asked to pre-write, draft, revise and edit until they completed their final draft. The results of pre- and post-writing test were also analyzed. The major findings are as follows: 1) The mean number of T-unit among participants was 42.25 units, and the mean number of words per T-unit was 10.95 words. 2) The most frequently committed errors were found out as lexical and morphological errors. Moreover, the rate of lexical and sentence structure errors has been dropped, whereas the rate of punctuation errors has increased as the teacher’s feedback progressed over time. Pedagogical and practical suggestions are also made on the effective teaching of English writing in Korean classroom settings.

Task-based language instruction has been increasingly promoted in second language (L2) classrooms under the assumption that it can provide an ultimate condition for L2 learning when combined with form-focused interventions such as teacher corrective feedback (CF). The present research investigated the amount, type, and learner uptake of teacher CF in relation to the following task-related variables: (1) task vs. nontask work, (2) focused vs. unfocused tasks, and (3) open vs. closed tasks. Data were collected from 8 intermediate adult EFL classrooms. It was found that the amount of teacher CF provided during tasks versus nontasks and focused versus unfocused tasks was not significantly different. However, the teachers used different strategies depending on the focus of tasks. The study did not relate the matter of open versus closed tasks to the amount and types of teacher CF. When considering learner uptake, the study found that the teachers tended to offer more uptake opportunities during relatively form-oriented activities, and the learners’ uptake was more successful when they were working in relatively form-oriented activities compared to the cases where they were in meaning-based activities. Learner uptake was not associated with whether or not tasks were open and closed.

This study examines what role English writing instructors need to play in peer revision activities. Students participating in the study were asked to go through multiple draft writing process in which they wrote three drafts on each writing assignment and review their peers’ essays in both a written comment sheet and an oral discussion. Overall, the results show that the peer comments played little role in improving the students’ essays from the first to second drafts. However, great improvement is observed from the second to final drafts. Specifically, little effect of the feedback on the improvement of non-linguistic features of the essays is identified. Regarding the linguistic features, improvement was made from the second to final drafts. However, it is achieved by both the peer and teacher comments. Therefore, it is concluded in the study that the teacher comments played a role in helping the students produce the linguistically improved final drafts. The study recommends the instructor’s explicit, detailed feedback to the errors caused from students’ insufficient writing and English competence.

This study investigates the relationship between a native English-speaking teacher and EFL students in the response-and-revision process. The data consisted of drafts and revisions produced by three students in response to teacher comments and interviews with students. In order to examine how EFL students react to the feedback, teachers’ written feedback on the papers was evaluated by calculating frequency counts on the same types of feedback. We then examined the extent to which students made use of teacher feedback in their revisions. In addition, we supplemented our interpretations by extracting aspects of the students’ views through analysis of the interview data. All three students believe that only native speakers can correct language errors in their writing. Furthermore, the students prefer or indeed demand native English-speaking teachers as writing teachers. In fact, dissimilar student reactions to native English-speaking teacher feedback probably arise from whether and how they positioned themselves as a writer in the EFL writing classroom.

While the professional literature abounds with the values of feedback on L2 language writings, few researchers have investigated the differential effects of types of feedback on the writing improvements in terms of proficiency levels. The purpose of the study was three-fold: to examine (1) the effects of three types of feedback, teacher, peer, and self-review on sixteen Korean college students" writing improvements; (2) the relationships between feedback types and proficiency levels; and (3) students" opinions on the feedback types such as preferences and reasons. The results showed that all types of feedback helped students improve their writings through revisions, but the effects of feedback differ from feedback type to type. The effects of teacher and peer review were significantly beneficial for students" writing, while the self-review was the least effective. In addition, the more advanced writers benefit from the peer or self-review, while the less proficient writers improved their writing from the teacher feedback, even though most of the students prefer the teacher feedback to the other types of feedback, peer and self-review. The theoretical background and pedagogical implications are discussed.

A traditional assumption has been that written work in foreign language classes must be corrected carefully. If they were not corrected, errors would be deeply ingrained, and it would be difficult for learners to use the language correctly. Feedback has been viewed as a facilitator of learning and provides various kinds of information to the learner. In foreign language learning, this information consists primarily of modifications and upgrade their inter language grammar. Teachers" written feedback is a topic of continuing interest in foreign language teaching. But most experienced writing teachers know that responding to the students" writing can be the most frustrating, difficult and time consuming part of the job. Providing written feedback on student papers is the teachers‘ most crucial task. And it plays an important role in motivating and encouraging students. But in spite of corrections, teachers have found that students continue to repeat the same mistakes. Moreover the return of papers covered with red marks causes disappointment and discouragement on student"s faces. The teacher wonder if lerner"s errors should be corrected. If so, when should learner"s errors be corrected and which error should be corrected? How should learner"s errors be corrected? Who should correct learner"s errors? To this end, this paper will review the researches about these questions. And this paper will discuss and try to find the conclusion on these questions.

이 연구는 배움의 공동체를 경험한 교사들의 피드백 발화의 유형과 특징을 분석하였다. 이를 위해 초･중등 7개 수업을 녹화하여 전사하였다. 교사의 피드백 발화는 Kim(2014)의 분석틀을 이용하여 유형을 분류하고 특징을 분석하였다. 분석결과 12개의 피드백 유형 중 ‘수용하기’와 ‘초점화하기’ 유형이 가장 많이 나타났다. ‘수용하기’는 학습자와의 긍정적인 관계형성과 학습촉 진을 모두 의도하는 피드백 유형이며, ‘초점화하기’는 학습자들이 개념에 대한 의미를 구성하고 문제해결 촉진을 의도하는 피드백 유형이다. 특히 ‘초점화하기’는 일반 수업에서 피드백을 분석 한 선행연구에 비해 높게 나타난 유형으로 배움의 공동체 수업에서 핵심으로 생각하는 ‘점프과 제’ 및 ‘연결 짓기’와 높은 관련이 있는 것으로 판단된다. 이와 달리 학습 동기부여를 위한 칭 찬하기와 격려하기는 가장 낮은 빈도를 보여 이에 대한 개선이 필요한 것으로 나타났다. 이와 같은 분석결과를 통해 얻을 수 있는 시사점을 논의하였다.

대화일지 쓰기는 학습자와 교사 간에 자연스럽게 의사소통을 할 수 있는 장이다. 대화일지를 통해 학습자는 부담감 없고 자유롭게 자기 생각을 표현하고 교사는 학습자의 글을 피드백해 줄 수 있다. 본고에서는 대화일지 쓰기를 통해 교사의 피드백 유형이 학습자의 쓰기 능력에 어느 정도 효과가 있는지 살펴보고 대화일지가 학습자의 쓰기 학습에 대한 자신감, 불안감, 부담감에 어떤 영향을 주었는지를 실험을 통해 밝혀 보고자 하였다. 실험은 8주 동안 중급과정에서 한국어를 배운 15명을 대상으로 하였다. 그 결과 대화일지 쓰기를 통한 교사의 피드백이 학습자의 쓰기 능력과 불안감 감소에 어느 정도 효과가 있었음을 알 수 있었다. 이 중 쓰기 능력에서는 대화일지를 통한 형태 중심․의미 중심의 피드백이 기존의 직접적인 피드백보다 담화 구성 능력 향상에 긍정적인 영향을 주었음을 알 수 있었다.