CALL Models for SLA Feedback Research

1
CALL Models for SLA Feedback Research

• Doe-Hyung Kim
• University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

2
Overview

• Problems of feedback and CALL feedback research
  for informing SLA
• Examples of CALL models for delivering feedback
• Future CALL feedback considerations for SLA

3
Problems of Feedback

• Passive students and less proficient learners do
  not receive enough opportunities for output
  following feedback
• Feedback from teachers are inconsistent and
  unpredictable
• Teachers fail to realize the full range of
  feedback types
• Teachers may be unwilling to encourage learner
  output during feedback due to time constraints
  and students embarrassment and,
• The difficulty of documenting the extent to which
  students receive feedback and their output.
• (Van den
  Branden, 1997)

4
Advantages of CALL Feedback

• CALL offers opportunities for promoting SLA
  behavior that enhances learning (Beatty, 2003
  Chapelle, 2005)
• CALL feedback can be more consistent than
  classroom feedback responses that are sometimes
  only applicable to an individual (Tsutsui, 2004)
• Natural language processors can generate
  comprehensive linguistic feedback (Coniam, 2004
  Nagata, 2002)
• CALL feedback can save face by the absence of
  psychological anxiety in face-to-face feedback
  (Torlakovic Deugo, 2004) and,
• Behavior tracking through screen capture programs
  or logs allow the researchers to examine the
  learning processes in detail. (Beaudoin, 2004
  Chapelle, 2003 Cowan, Choi, Kim, 2003
  Glendinning Howard, 2003)

5
(1) Pre-packaged Feedback

• Feedback for predetermined responses
• Mechanism for handling unexpected responses
  (Hubbard, 1996)
• Offers opportunities for a variety of feedback
  types (Brandl, 1995)
• Recorded input, output, feedback e.g., process
  data (Chapelle, 2003) can inform SLA

6
ESL Tutor (Cowan, Choi, Kim, 2003)

• Designed for advanced learners to enhance
  grammatical accuracy in writing
• Based on corpus analysis of persistent errors in
  ESL writing
• Empirical studies showed significant increase in
  the ability to find correct errors, and this
  skill was retained.

7
ESL Tutor Find Correct Errors
8
Feedback Try again!

• Prompt Although we have had a lot of success
  with this program, it is hard to know how long it
  will be lasted.
• Student highlights be lasted
• Portion to correct will be lasted
• Attempt 1 will lasted
• Feedback Sorry, your answer is wrong. Check your
  spelling, and make sure your correction follows
  what you've learned in the previous sections. Try
  again. (Try Again Feedback)
• Attempt 2 will last

9
Feedback Expected Generic

• Prompt It is ridiculous that most women in
  developing countries are suffered from poverty.
• Student highlighted are suffered
• Portion to correct are suffered
• Attempt 1 suffered
• Feedback sufferED? (Expected Feedback)
• Attempt 2 are suffer
• Feedback That's not right, either, Jung-soo.
  Let's try once more. Hint Can you say ARE
  SUFFERED? (Generic Feedback)
• Attempt 3 suffer

10
Post-hoc Study of Feedback

• Students were able to enter a correct response
  most frequently after they received the
  expected type of feedback (Kim, 2005).

11
Van der Linden, 1993

• Examined students preference of CALL feedback
• Hypothesized feedback flood as optimal learning
  method
• Two significant behaviors
• (1) Utilized optimal method more proficient
  learners
• (2) Just the answers, please! less proficient
  learners
• Feedback too long ignored

12
(2) Intelligent Feedback

• Nagata (1993) compared traditional feedback
  (T-CALI) and intelligent feedback (I-CALI)
• Intelligent feedback better for learning complex
  grammar knowledge such as Japanese morphemes

13
Traditional CALI

• (Nagata Swisher, 1995)

14
Intelligent CALI

• (Nagata Swisher, 1995)

15
(3) Active Student Modeling

• Replicate some aspects of pedagogical decision
  making
• German Tutor (Heift, 2002 Heift Schulze, 2003)
• NLP Learner model adjust the explicitness of
  feedback as learner progresses
• Ability to provide the most salient feedback when
  multiple errors arise
• Ability to determine false errors

16
Discussion and Future Study

• Both explicit and implicit feedback available to
  be tested for different level of learners and
  different linguistic complexities, thus informing
  SLA feedback studies
• More ways to enhance noticing externally
  observable behavior (Long Robinson, 1998)
• Rehearsal tasks for long-term memory (Robinson,
  2003)

17
References

• Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching
  computer-assisted language learning. London, UK
  Pearson Education.
• Beaudoin, M. (2004). Educational use of databases
  in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
  17(5), 497-516.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English language learning
  and technology. Amsterdam John Benjamins.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2005). Interactionist SLA theory
  in CALL research. In J. Egbert G. M. Petrie
  (Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 53-64).
  Mahwah, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Coniam, D. (2004). Using language engineering
  programs to raise awareness of future CALL
  potential. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
  17, 149-175.
• Cowan, R., Choi, H. E., Kim, D. H. (2003). Four
  questions for error diagnosis and correction in
  CALL. CALICO Journal, 20, 451-463.
• Glendinning, E., Howard, R. (2003). Lotus
  ScreenCam as an aid to investigating student
  writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16,
  31-46.
• Heift, T. (2002). Learner control and error
  correction in ICALL. CALICO Journal, 19, 295-313.
• Heift, T., Schulze, M. (2003). Student modeling
  and ab initio language learning. System, 31,
  519-535.
• Hubbard, P. L. (1996). Elements of CALL
  methodology Development, evaluation, and
  implementation. In M. C. Pennington (Ed.), The
  power of CALL (pp. 15-32). Houston, TX
  Athelstan.
• Kim, D.-H. (2005). Finding feedback An effective
  computer-assisted language learning model for
  second language acquisition. Unpublished Master's
  Thesis, University of Illinois at
  Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL.
• Long, M. H., Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on
  form Theory, research, and practice. In C.
  Doughty J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in
  classroom second language acquisition. New York
  Cambridge University Press.
• Nagata, N. (1993). Intelligent computer feedback
  for second language instruction. The Modern
  Language Journal, 77, 330-339.
• Nagata, N. (2002). BANZAI An application of
  natural language processing to web-based language
  learning. CALICO Journal, 19, 583-599.
• Nagata, N., Swisher, M. V. (1995). A study of
  consciousness-raising by computer The effect of
  metalinguistic feedback on second language
  learning. Foreign Language Annals, 28(3),
  337-347.
• Robinson, P. (2003). Attention and memory. In C.
  J. Doughty M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of
  second language acquisition (pp. 631-678).
  Malden, MA Blackwell.
• Torlakovic, E., Deugo, D. (2004). Application
  of a CALL system in the acquisition of adverbs in
  English. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
  17(2), 203-235.
• Tsutsui, M. (2004). Multimedia as a means to
  enhance feedback. Computer Assisted Language
  Learning, 17(3), 377-402.
• Van den Branden, K. (1997). Effects of
  negotiation on language learners' output.
  Language Learning, 47, 589-636.

18
Thank you!!!

• Doe-Hyung Kim
• dkim12_at_uiuc.edu