Reading Comprehension Reading Comprehension Exercises Online: The Exercises Online: The Effects of Feedback, Effects of Feedback,

Proficiency and Proficiency and InteractionInteraction

N97C0025 JudithN97C0025 Judith

＊＊ IntroductionIntroduction1. Two goals of the current course:1. Two goals of the current course: ▲ ▲ To provide students with the choice of an alteTo provide students with the choice of an alte

rnative and principled mode online study.rnative and principled mode online study. ▲ ▲ To promote learner autonomy (Benson, 2001).To promote learner autonomy (Benson, 2001).2. Noticing a problem ‘pushes’ the learner to m2. Noticing a problem ‘pushes’ the learner to m

odify his/her output (Swain & Lapkin, 1995).odify his/her output (Swain & Lapkin, 1995).3. It’s useful to promote reading proficiency thro3. It’s useful to promote reading proficiency thro

ugh interaction (Grabe & Stoller, 2002).ugh interaction (Grabe & Stoller, 2002).Key words:Key words:● ● Elaborative feedbackElaborative feedback● ● Knowledge of Correct Response (KCR)Knowledge of Correct Response (KCR)

＊ ＊ Research QuestionResearch Question

1. What kind of interaction is 1. What kind of interaction is generated through pair work as a generated through pair work as a result of Elaborative feedback?result of Elaborative feedback?

2. Whether the interaction is 2. Whether the interaction is sufficient to promote sufficient to promote comprehension?comprehension?

＊ ＊ HypothesisHypothesis1.1. Elaborative feedbackElaborative feedback will be more effective for will be more effective for

promoting comprehension of the reading text than KCR promoting comprehension of the reading text than KCR feedback.feedback.

2.2. Pair workPair work will be more effective for promoting will be more effective for promoting comprehension of the reading text than individual work.comprehension of the reading text than individual work.

3.3. Students with a Students with a higher level of English proficiencyhigher level of English proficiency will will demonstrate higher levels of comprehension of the reading demonstrate higher levels of comprehension of the reading text than those with a lower level.text than those with a lower level.

4.4. Students studying Students studying in pairs and receiving Elaborative in pairs and receiving Elaborative feedbackfeedback will demonstrate higher levels of comprehension will demonstrate higher levels of comprehension of the reading text than other students.of the reading text than other students.

5.5. Students with Students with higher proficiency receiving higher proficiency receiving Elaborative feedbackElaborative feedback will demonstrate higher levels of will demonstrate higher levels of comprehension of the reading text than other students.comprehension of the reading text than other students.

6.6. Students with Students with higher proficiency studying in pairshigher proficiency studying in pairs will will demonstrate higher levels of comprehension of the reading demonstrate higher levels of comprehension of the reading text than other students.text than other students.

7.7. Students with Students with higher proficiency studying in pairs and higher proficiency studying in pairs and receiving Elaborative feedbackreceiving Elaborative feedback will demonstrate higher will demonstrate higher levels of comprehension of the reading text than other levels of comprehension of the reading text than other students. students.

＊ ＊ MethodMethod

Quan→qualQuan→qual◆ ◆ ParticipantsParticipants 407 First-Year English majors at university in Japan407 First-Year English majors at university in Japan 162 for pilot study162 for pilot study 14 absent or late14 absent or late 231 231 to be the test 6 100% correct to be the test 6 100% correct 225225 for data analysis for data analysis 6 pairs were video taped 6 pairs were video taped ◆ ◆ MaterialsMaterials 1. Reading materials1. Reading materials 2. Feedback treatment 2. Feedback treatment

◆ ◆ ProcedureProcedure 1. Students were divided into 2 levels. (upper and lower)1. Students were divided into 2 levels. (upper and lower) 2. Students were randomly chosen to work either indivi2. Students were randomly chosen to work either indivi

dually ordually or in pairs.in pairs. 3. Give the students either KCR feedback or Elaborative 3. Give the students either KCR feedback or Elaborative feedback.feedback. 4. After these different treatments on the comprehensi4. After these different treatments on the comprehensi

on of theon of the text during the first comprehension exercise, all studtext during the first comprehension exercise, all stud

ents were ents were given 20 minutes to complete a second exercise.given 20 minutes to complete a second exercise. 〈 〈 There are three independent variables and one dependent variable.There are three independent variables and one dependent variable. 〉〉

5. 6 pairs were video taped and the transcripts were writ5. 6 pairs were video taped and the transcripts were written by ten by

the students and checked by researcher.the students and checked by researcher.

＊ ＊ ResultsResults ◆ ◆ Quantitative ResultsQuantitative Results ( Three-way ( Three-way ANOVAANOVA)) 1. The results are obtained for : (1) the main effect of1. The results are obtained for : (1) the main effect of English proficiency level (2) and the interaction English proficiency level (2) and the interaction between Manner of study and Type of feedback. between Manner of study and Type of feedback. 2. There are no significant results for Hypothesis 1, 2, 2. There are no significant results for Hypothesis 1, 2, 5 , 6 & 7, but there are significant results for 5 , 6 & 7, but there are significant results for Hypothesis 3 & 4.Hypothesis 3 & 4. 3. The interaction between Type of feedback and 3. The interaction between Type of feedback and Manner of study was statistically significant; studenManner of study was statistically significant; studen

ts ts performed best on a follow-up comprehension performed best on a follow-up comprehension exercise when in pairs with Elaborative feedback.exercise when in pairs with Elaborative feedback.

◆ ◆ Qualitative ResultsQualitative Results 1. All students working in pairs were seen interacting wit1. All students working in pairs were seen interacting wit

h their h their partners.partners. 2. 2. Quality interactionQuality interaction was observed on numerous occasio was observed on numerous occasio

ns ns regardless of English proficiency level.regardless of English proficiency level. 3. All students interact in English3. All students interact in English..

Quality interactionQuality interaction includesincludes :: (a) initial interaction following the feedback,(a) initial interaction following the feedback, (b) discuss the feedback by trying to identify their errors, (b) discuss the feedback by trying to identify their errors, (c) respond to the feedback by selecting different answer(c) respond to the feedback by selecting different answer

s and s and then clicking to check them again, then clicking to check them again, (d) receive further feedback following the changes which (d) receive further feedback following the changes which stimulates further interactionstimulates further interaction..

＊＊ DiscussionDiscussion1.1. Although there was no significant advantage Although there was no significant advantage

of Elaborative over KCR feedback, the of Elaborative over KCR feedback, the results also suggest that higher proficiency results also suggest that higher proficiency students do better work alone whereas students do better work alone whereas lower proficiency students do better in pairs.lower proficiency students do better in pairs.

2.2. The combination of The combination of pair work and pair work and Elaborative feedbackElaborative feedback is more desirable is more desirable because of the opportunities afford the because of the opportunities afford the students in developing not only the reading students in developing not only the reading comprehension but also their language comprehension but also their language skills.skills.

3.3. Pair work and Elaborative feedbackPair work and Elaborative feedback is a is a preferable form of computer-mediated preferable form of computer-mediated feedback in online multiple-choice reading feedback in online multiple-choice reading comprehension exercises. comprehension exercises.

＊＊ ImplicationImplication Students should be encouraged to work in pairs Students should be encouraged to work in pairs

with Elaborative feedback.with Elaborative feedback. Future Research:Future Research: 1. same feedback V.S different students1. same feedback V.S different students different amounts of timedifferent amounts of time 2. same feedback V.S different manner of study2. same feedback V.S different manner of study enough time (pair or individual)enough time (pair or individual) 3. How does Elaborative feedback affect 3. How does Elaborative feedback affect

students’ students’ motivation?motivation? 4. How much students actually interact with 4. How much students actually interact with

their partners?their partners?

＊＊ ConclusionConclusion The traditional answer paper (KCR The traditional answer paper (KCR

feedback) may not always the optimal feedback) may not always the optimal too for learning from mistakes.too for learning from mistakes.

Certain combinations of factors Certain combinations of factors (Manner of study and Type of (Manner of study and Type of feedback) can have significant feedback) can have significant beneficial effects on students’ beneficial effects on students’ learning outcomes.learning outcomes.