TY - JOUR
T1 - Heritage, second and third language learner processing of written corrective feedback
T2 - Evidence from think-alouds
AU - Gastañaga, Kacie
AU - Bowles, Melissa A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, Adam Mickiewicz University Press. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - This study compares the processing of three different types of written corrective feedback (WCF) by heritage language (HL), second language (L2), and third language (L3) learners who wrote and revised three short essays and received a different type of WCF for each essay (i.e., direct, coding, or under-lining). Comparison of pre-and post-feedback texts and analysis of think-alouds served as the basis for determining whether one type of feedback pro-moted higher depth of processing (DoP) and whether this processing was mediated by error type and language background. The findings indicate that feedback type did interact with DoP, and that this interaction was in some ways mediated by learner background and error type. This research serves as a first step toward understanding how these three learner groups are im-pacted by these commonly used feedback types and is therefore important to drive evidence-based pedagogical decisions.
AB - This study compares the processing of three different types of written corrective feedback (WCF) by heritage language (HL), second language (L2), and third language (L3) learners who wrote and revised three short essays and received a different type of WCF for each essay (i.e., direct, coding, or under-lining). Comparison of pre-and post-feedback texts and analysis of think-alouds served as the basis for determining whether one type of feedback pro-moted higher depth of processing (DoP) and whether this processing was mediated by error type and language background. The findings indicate that feedback type did interact with DoP, and that this interaction was in some ways mediated by learner background and error type. This research serves as a first step toward understanding how these three learner groups are im-pacted by these commonly used feedback types and is therefore important to drive evidence-based pedagogical decisions.
KW - depth of processing
KW - heritage language learners
KW - think-alouds
KW - third language learners
KW - written corrective feedback
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144910995&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85144910995&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.4.7
DO - 10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.4.7
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85144910995
SN - 2083-5205
VL - 12
SP - 675
EP - 696
JO - Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching
JF - Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching
IS - 4
ER -