Structure and Engagement in Teacher–Student Chats in ESL Writing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.22452Keywords:
chat, ESL writing, feedback, move, synchronous CMCAbstract
Teacher-moderated online chats are a common option for conducting writing conferences with students. The efficacy of chat sessions is impacted by the expectations for and structure of these sessions. This corpus-based study used a move analysis to determine the purposes and organization of 129 chats between 3 experienced teachers and 106 students of primarily Chinese and Arabic origin in 9 freshman English as a second language (ESL) writing courses. Chats occurred after a draft of an essay assignment had been returned with written teacher feedback, in order to provide opportunities for students to receive individualized input. Findings show that chats are structured to serve three functions: opening and closing social moves (greetings, conversational pleasantries) meant to establish rapport; management moves that serve to structure and orient the chat; and instructional moves in which the teachers and students confer and additional feedback is provided. However, chats were not as effective at engaging participants as they could be due to a lack of intentionality and reciprocity. With prior research showing chats are a useful addition to other forms of teacher electronic feedback, we offer suggestions for improving the use of instructional chats in freshman ESL writing classes, in order to better engage students.
References
Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465–483. https://doi.org/10.2307/328585
Amundrud, T. (2015). Individual feedback consultations in Japanese tertiary EFL: A systemic semiotic exploration. English Australia Journal, 30(2), 40–64. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.164104708286698
Askehave, I., & Swales, J. M. (2001). Genre identification and communicative purpose: A problem and a possible solution. Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.2.195
Awada, G. M., & Diab, N. M. (2021). Effect of online peer review versus face-to-face peer review on argumentative writing achievement of EFL learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(1–2), 238–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1912104
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28
Carrio-Pastor, M. L. (2019). Authorial engagement in business emails: A cross-cultural analysis of attitude and engagement markers. In C. S. Guinda (Ed.), Engagement in professional genres (pp. 47–65). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.301
Chen, H. I. (2013). Identity practices of multilingual writers in social networking spaces. Language Learning & Technology, 17(2), 143–170. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/44328/1/17_02_chen.pdf
Crawford, W., McDonough, K., & Brun-Mercer, N. (2019). Identifying linguistic markers of collaboration in second language peer interaction: A lexico-grammatical approach. TESOL Quarterly, 53(1), 180–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.477
Ducate, L., & Arnold, D. (2012). Computer-mediated feedback: Effectiveness and students’ perceptions of screen-casting software vs the comment function. In G. Kessler, A. Oskoz, & Elola, I. (Eds.), Technology across writing contexts and tasks (pp. 31–55). CALICO Monograph Series (vol. 10). San Marcos: Texas State University.
Ellis, R. (2010). A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335–349. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990544
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2016). Supporting second language writing using multimodal feedback. Foreign Language Annals, 49(1), 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12183
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2017). Writing with 21st century social tools in the L2 classroom: New literacies, genres, and writing practices. Journal of Second Language Writing, 36, 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.04.002
Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2014). Learner uptake of electronic teacher feedback in ESL composition. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 46, 80–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.011
Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2018). Synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback and learner uptake in ESL composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.05.005
Gilliland, B. (2019). Trends in SLW: Electronic forms of response. TESOL blog, January 4. Retrieved on 10 October 2023 from http://blog.tesol.org/trends-in-slw-electronic-forms-of-response
González-Lloret, M. (2011). Conversation analysis of computer-mediated communication. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 308–325. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.28.2.308-325
Hines, R., & Pearl, C. (2004). Increasing interaction in web-based instruction: Using synchronous chats and asynchronous discussions. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 23(2), 33–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687050402300206
Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31(2), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00021-6
Hyland, K. (2013). Faculty feedback: Perceptions and practices in L2 disciplinary writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.003
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing: An introduction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 1–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742
Lantolf, J. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 67–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060037
Lee, I. (2014). Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.153
Lee, J. J., Vahabi, F., & Bikowski, D. (2018). Second language teachers’ written response practices: An in-house inquiry and response. Journal of Response to Writing, 4(1), 34–69. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/journalrw/vol4/iss1/3/
Lee, L. (2002). Enhancing learners’ communication skills through synchronous electronic interaction and task-based instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 35(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2002.tb01829.x
Lee, L. (2008). Focus-on-form through collaborative scaffolding in expert-to-novice online interaction. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 53–72. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44155
Liu, J., & Sadler, R. W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(3), 193–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00025-0
Mahboob, A. (2015). Understanding and providing “cohesive” and “coherent” feedback on writing. Writing and Pedagogy, 7(2–3), 355–376. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v7i2-3.26461
Martin-Beltrán, M., & Chen, P. J. (2013). From monologue to dialogue: A case study on mediated feedback in a transnational asynchronous online writing tutorial. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 17(1), 145–150.
Nassaji, H. (2016). Anniversary article. Interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 535–562. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816644940
Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskyian perspective on corrective feed-back in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9(1), 34–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410008667135
Negretti, R. (1999). Web-based activities and SLA: A conversation analysis research approach. Language Learning and Technology, 3(1), 75–87. http://dx.doi.org/10125/25057
Pham, H. T. P. (2022). Computer-mediated and face-to-face peer feedback: Student feedback and revision in EFL writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(9), 2112–2147. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1868530
Sauro, S. (2011). SCMC for SLA: A research synthesis. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 369–391. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.28.2.369-391
Shintani, N. (2015). The effects of computer-mediated synchronous and asynchronous direct corrective feedback on writing: A case study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3), 517–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.993400
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827
Tian, L., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Learner engagement with automated feedback, peer feedback and teacher feedback in an online EFL writing context. System, 91, 102247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102247
Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and Composition, 21(2), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2004.02.003
Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2012). Feedback and writing development through collaboration: A socio-cultural approach. In R. Manch (Ed.), L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives (pp. 69–97). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781934078303.69
Yang, Y. F. (2017). New language knowledge construction through indirect feedback in web-based collaborative writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(4), 459–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1414852
Yeh, C. C. (2016). EFL college students’ experiences and attitudes towards teacher-student writing conferences. Journal of Response to Writing, 2(2), 37–65. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/journalrw/vol2/iss2/3
Zhang, V. Z., & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004
Zou, H., & Hyland, K. (2020). Managing evaluation: Criticism in two academic review genres. English for Specific Purposes, 60, 98–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.03.004
