Korean Job Discussion Forums

[withnail]

It's time for me to start to get a research project together for the dissertation part of my MATESOL. I'm very new to research and still learning about the variety of research methodologies available.

I currently teach Korean elementary and middle school kids in a hagwon and I'd like to do some kind of action research. I'm interested in error correction methods. It seems as though a lot has been done in this area so I'm looking for an angle, particularly in the Korean context.

Just throwing this out there to see if anyone has any good ideas? Yes of course I need to read up much more on this and am doing so as much as I can but any ideas will be gratefully received! I think the main problem will be choosing an appropriate methodology and justifying that as an appropriate one.

Anyone fancy a bite at this?

[icnelly]

Rod Ellis has done considerable (recent) work on error correction: lexical recasting and certain ways of staggering activity types to reinforce learning/openness to correction. Anyways, he touches a little on it in this video, and this one hits the nail on the head: Rod Ellis on Corrective Feedback. The .asf didn't seem to load, so maybe get in touch with Ddeubel personally or check EFLclassroom for it. Here's an abstract: A Typology of Written Corrective Feedback Types.

I have a couple of .pdf articles floating around somewhere too (Ellis also, I think). PM me if you want those.

[ddeubel]

icnelly,

Thanks for bringing that to the fore! A very accessible but "deep" discussion on this. The .asf takes time to load, that's the drawback with the high quality video that .asf is. Just wait 20-30 seconds, it works. Esnips at the beginning used to convert the .asf but eventually they stopped doing that....pluses and minues to that.

I"ll upload into the player on EFl classroom's prof.development page -- this one got lost in the shuffle/creation.

Withnail --lots of room in this area for research. One area might be a descriptive study on how the students actually feel about being corrected. Take a survey pre and post. It would be interesting to challenge the assumption/hypothesis that students get motivated and like it when corrected during say, speaking / fluency activities. Or you could do as Ellis suggested and metalinguistically error correct and compare this against teacher suggestion/echoing (but that would be a hard study to do). Lots of other comparative avenues between different classes and more experimental style action research that could be done.

DD
http://eflclassroom.ning.com

[HapKi]

I did my MA dissertation on error correction in conversation practice. Specifically "Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake in Communicative Based Small Group Language Lessons."

Error correction is a big subject, with several aspects. Lyster and Ranta (1996) identify 6 different types. Explicit correction, recasts, clarification request, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition (with stress). All of these are used to some extent in the average speaking class. Almost always used most is the recast, where the teacher simply repeats the student's error, but correctly. A lot of research has investigated this, and the student's ability (or inability) to notice that what they said was wrong (and what the teacher said was correct). Uptake is what students do with this correction (repeat it, ignore it, not even notice it, etc.)

In most research, taped student-teacher interaction is required, and then transcripts are made to analyze. Along with Lyster and Ranta, Rod Ellis, Oliver (1995), Sheen Y.H. (2004), and Doughty C.J. (1994) are places to begin your research. Good luck!

[Thiuda]

I would think that an Action Research project is not suitable for a dissertation, given that it serves more as a professional development tool than as a method of scientific inquiry per se.

As an alternative to a dissertation rooted in educational theories, you could also base your dissertation on linguistic theory. Generative approaches to SLA have become popular in recent years and have been helpful in shedding light on a variety of phenomena previously unaccounted for, for example; why students fossilize; how, and why, L2 syntax differs from that of native speakers; and what SLA tells us about UG.

Consider looking into parameter setting in SLA. You could compare how Korean students acquire linguistic features instantiated in their L1, like adpositions, to others which are not, like determiners. Do students acquire one feature more quickly than the other? Why? What does this tell us about UG? What pedagogical implications might this have?

I strongly suggest doing quantitative research, because it sets you apart from all the other MATESOLs/MAALs who completed their research component by observing classes, coding a home-made observational matrix, asking for opinions and coming up with their very own hypothesis why something is the way it is. Doing quantitative research is no more difficult than qualitative research, but looks better when you're applying for a PhD a few years down the line.

Just my two Won.

If you're interested check out:

Hawkins, R. (2001). Second Language Syntax: A Generative Introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Hawkins, R., & Chan, C. (1997). The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: the �failed functional features hypothesis�. Second Language Research, Vol. 13, No. 3, 187-226 (1997) (Available through ERIC and SAGEPUB.)

Franceschina, F. (2003). Parameterized Functional Features and SLA. In Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2002), ed. Juana M. Liceras et al., 97-105. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.

Sauter, K. (2002). Transfer and access to universal grammar in adult second language acquisition. Groningen: University Library Groningen.

[Hotpants]

I'd disagree that action research cannot be the basis of your research approach. There are a lot of educational research papers out there based on the evaluations of action research projects.

My first MA module (out of 3 modules) was a 1 year course on educational research. It was a compulsory module, and although I expected it to be 'obvious' in its account, it was actually really eye-opening and useful. I've noticed that a lot of MA courses are including components in research. It is a shame that conducting research hasn't been part of your course.

Some 'straightforward' ideas that spring to mind:
1) You could investigate the sequences of error correction, comparing a western English teacher vs a Korean English teacher. Eg, does one teacher allow a student to offer alternative answers or do they tend to just give the answers. Which tends to offer longer-lasting results?
2) The exploration of peer correction. Does explicit teaching of peer correction show better results?
3) What types of errors tend to be dominant in a Korean English classroom and why this might be/what techniques would help overcome them.
4) Do learning aides such as electronic dictionaries help to correct errors?

Again, I would also disagree at dismissing the qualitative options of observing classes and recording material etc. Usually, the assessors of your research project are looking at how well you understand research conventions and your recognition of the limitations/scope that your research methods have in your findings. In any case, qualitative data such as observation is often used in quantitative counting of certain frequencies of a particular event, for example, so observation and recording would be the obvious way to go.

My first research project will be of quite a different topic (top secret!), but I am also going to conduct observations and undertake discourse analysis to assess findings.

Good luck.

[Thiuda]

[The Hammer]

If you decide to do a survey try this site:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/

[icnelly]

[withnail]

Thank you very much for these replies - I'm extremely grateful for all comments. I especially like Ddeubl's suggestion:

[losing_touch]

Sheen Y.H. (2004) <~~ She was one of my professors.

[Hotpants]