Abstract
The question of whether grammar learning and correction is effective for second language writing development depends on students’ needs and tendency to study grammar. While the extent of the influence of grammar learning, grammar correction, and learner beliefs on second language writing for English as a second language settings and learners has been heavily debated, little of the research has considered the backgrounds and beliefs of English as a foreign language (EFL) learners. To explore factors that have influenced EFL students’ writing, the current study investigated beliefs regarding grammar learning and correction of 306 EFL students studying at universities of science and technology. An exploratory factor analysis was performed on questionnaire data gathered from the Taiwanese EFL student writers. The analysis uncovered four significant factors including (1) emphasis on the connection between grammar learning and writing, (2) positive attitude towards analyses of grammar rules, (3) positive attitude towards written correction, and (4) negative attitude towards oral correction. Qualitative data gathered through ten open-ended questions further indicated that EFL student writers welcomed teachers’ written correction of grammar errors especially when grammar correction was received for writing produced during writing tasks tailored to students’ future work-related needs. Pedagogical implications and future materials development for university of science and technology EFL student writers were discussed.
Funding statement: This work was supported by Universidade de Macau, Funder Id: https://doi.org/10.13039/501100004733, Grant Number: MYRG2018-00008-FED, Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, Funder Id: https://doi.org/10.13039/501100004663 , Grant Number: MOST 107-2410-H-263-008-MY2.
References
Ahmad, I, M. S. Hussain & N. R. Radzuan. 2017. Teachers’ beliefs versus learners’ beliefs in grammar teaching: Harmonizing teaching and learning for adult learners’ improved proficiency in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature 6(7). 130–142.10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.7p.130Search in Google Scholar
Bitchener, J. 2008. Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 17. 102–118.10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004Search in Google Scholar
Bitchener, J. & U. Knoch. 2008. The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research 12. 406–431.10.1177/1362168808089924Search in Google Scholar
Bitchener, J., S. Young & D. Cameron. 2005. The effect of different types of feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 14. 191–205. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001.Search in Google Scholar
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New-York: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Calhoun, C. C. & A. V. Finch. 1982. Vocational education: Concepts and operations. Ohio: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Search in Google Scholar
Callahan-Caudill, K. E. (2015, April 24). Feedback: Perspectives from and implications for the advanced L2 writing classroom. Paper presented at KFLC 2015: The Languages, Literatures, and Cultures Conference, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA.Search in Google Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M. 2001. Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd edition). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publisher.Search in Google Scholar
Corder, S. P. 1967. The significance of learner’s errors. IRAL 4. 161–170.10.1515/iral.1967.5.1-4.161Search in Google Scholar
Deng, F. & Y. Lin. 2016. A comparative study on beliefs of grammar teaching between high school English teachers and students in China. English Language Teaching 9(8). 1–10.10.5539/elt.v9n8p1Search in Google Scholar
DeVellis, R. F. 2003. Scale development: Theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. 2005. The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, R. 2003. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Y. Sheen, M. Murakami & H. Takashima. 2008. The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System 36. 353–371. doi:10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001.Search in Google Scholar
Ferris, D. 1999. The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott. Journal of Second Language Writing 8. 1–11.10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6Search in Google Scholar
Ferris, D. 2010. Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32. 181–210.10.1017/S0272263109990490Search in Google Scholar
Field, A. P. 2005. Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd edition). London: Sage.Search in Google Scholar
Hedgcock, J. & N. Lefkowitz. 1994. Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 3. 141–163.10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4Search in Google Scholar
Hsu, J. Y. (2006). The last required course before graduation from college: Business English Writing. Caves English Teaching, Retrieved June, 2, 2011, from http://www.cavesbooks.com.tw/e_magazine/e_magazine_article.aspx?sn=181&language1=0#1 Search in Google Scholar
Hsu, W. H. 2015. Transitioning to a communication-oriented pedagogy: Taiwanese university freshmen’s views on class participation. System 49. 61–72.10.1016/j.system.2014.12.002Search in Google Scholar
Ismail, S. A. A. 2010. ESP students’ views of ESL grammar learning. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies 10(3). 143–156.Search in Google Scholar
Kaiser, H. F. 1974. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39. 31–36.10.1007/BF02291575Search in Google Scholar
Kang, D. 2017. EFL learner and teacher beliefs about grammar learning in Korea. English Teaching 72(2). 51–69.10.15858/engtea.72.2.201706.51Search in Google Scholar
Kao, C.-W. 2007. High and low achievers’ learning strategies in business writing classroom. In Lillian M. Huang (ed.), English education and inter-discipline learning, 52–75. Taipei: Crane Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Kao, C.-W. 2009. Learning strategies and persuasive writings among technological university students. Studies in English Language and Literature 23. 77–94.Search in Google Scholar
Kao, C.-W. 2010. An investigation into technological college student writers’ English writing strategy uses. Journal of Applied Foreign Languages 13. 49–70.Search in Google Scholar
Kao, C.-W. & B. L. Reynolds. 2017. A study on the relationship among Taiwanese college students’ EFL writing strategy use, writing ability and writing difficulty. English Teaching & Learning 41(4). 31–64. doi:10.6330/ETL.2017.41.4.02.Search in Google Scholar
Kao, C.-W. & D. Wible. 2014. A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of grammar correction in second language writing. English Teaching & Learning 38. 29–69. doi:10.6330/ETL.2014.38.3.02.Search in Google Scholar
Kao, C.-W. & S. P. Yang. 2011. Second language proficiency levels and learning strategy uses in persuasive writing tasks. Providence Forum: Language and Humanities 5. 89–124.Search in Google Scholar
Kayaoglu, M. N. 2012. Gender-basd differences in language learning strategies of science students. Journal of Turkish Science Education 9(2). 12–24.Search in Google Scholar
Krashen, S. 1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd edition). New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Liao, M.-C. & H.-C. Wang. 2009. Perception differences of EFL teachers and students in grammar instruction and error correction. English Teaching & Learning 33(1). 101–146.Search in Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. & N. Spada. 1990. Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12. 429–448. doi:10.1017/S0272263100009517.Search in Google Scholar
Loewen, S., S. Li, F. Fei, A. Thompson, K. Nakatsukasa, S. Ahn & X. Chen. 2009. Second language learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. The Modern Language Journal 93. 91–104.10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00830.xSearch in Google Scholar
Lyster, R. & K. Saito. 2010. Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32. 265–302.10.1017/S0272263109990520Search in Google Scholar
Mackey, A. & J. Goo. 2007. Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies, 407–452. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Martínez, J. 2013. An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Columbian Applied Linguistics Journal 15(2). 265–278.10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08Search in Google Scholar
Miles, M. B., A. M. Huberman & J. Saldaña. 2014. Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, 3rd edn. London: Sage.Search in Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. 2009. Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203891643Search in Google Scholar
Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric theory, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Search in Google Scholar
Reynolds, B. L. 2013. A web-based EFL writing environment as a bridge between academic advisers and junior researchers: A pilot study. British Journal of Educational Technology 44(3). E77–E80. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01344.x.Search in Google Scholar
Reynolds, B. L. 2015. Helping Taiwanese graduate students help themselves: Applying corpora to industrial management English as a foreign language academic reading and writing. Computers in the Schools 32(3–4). 300–317. doi:10.1080/07380569.2015.1096643.Search in Google Scholar
Reynolds, B. L. 2016. Action research: Applying a bilingual parallel corpus collocational concordancer to Taiwanese medical school EFL academic writing. RELC Journal: A Journal of Language Teaching and Research 47(2). 213–227. doi:10.1177/0033688215619518.Search in Google Scholar
Reynolds, B. L. & T. A. F. Anderson. 2015. Extra-dimensional in-class communications: Action research exploring text chat support of face-to-face writing. Computers and Composition 35. 52–64. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2014.12.002.Search in Google Scholar
Reynolds, B. L. & C.-W. Kao. 2016. More than a response to Andrew Sampson’s (2012) “coded and uncoded error feedback: Effects on error frequencies in adult Colombian EFL learners’ writing”: A call for replication. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education 1(15). 1–6. doi:10.1186/s40862-016-0020-9.Search in Google Scholar
Ritz, J. M. 2009. A new generation of goals for technology education. Journal of Technology Education 20(2). 50–64.10.21061/jte.v20i2.a.4Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11. 129–158.10.1093/applin/11.2.129Search in Google Scholar
Sheen, Y. 2004. Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research 8. 263–300.10.1191/1362168804lr146oaSearch in Google Scholar
Sheen, Y. 2007. The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 41. 255–283.10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.xSearch in Google Scholar
Shintani, N. & R. Ellis. 2013. The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal of Second Language Writing 22. 286–306. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.011.Search in Google Scholar
Song, S. Y. (2001). The effects of reasoning skills on vocational educational students’ English writing. Unpublished master’s thesis, Yunlin County, Taiwan, R.O.C: National Yunlin University of Science and Technology.Search in Google Scholar
Swain, M. 1993. The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren’t enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review 50. 158–164.10.3138/cmlr.50.1.158Search in Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B. G. & L. S. Fidell. 2007. Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar
Teng, F. 2016. Immediate and delayed effects of embedded metacognitive instruction on Chinese EFL students’ English writing and regulation of cognition. Thinking Skills & Creativity 22. 289–302.10.1016/j.tsc.2016.06.005Search in Google Scholar
Teng, F. 2019. Tertiary-level students’ English writing performance and metacognitive awareness: A group metacognitive support perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. doi:10.1080/00313831.2019.1595712.Search in Google Scholar
Tompkins, G. E. 2004. Teaching writing: Balancing process and product. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Search in Google Scholar
Truscott, J. 1996. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 46. 327–369.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.xSearch in Google Scholar
Truscott, J. 1998. Noticing in second language acquisition: A critical review. Second Language Research 14. 103–135.10.1191/026765898674803209Search in Google Scholar
Truscott, J. 2004. Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing 13. 337–343.10.1016/j.jslw.2004.05.002Search in Google Scholar
Truscott, J. 2007. The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing 16. 255–272.10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003Search in Google Scholar
Viriya, C. & S. Sapsirin. 2014. Gender differences in language learning style and language learning strategies. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics 3(2). 77–88.10.17509/ijal.v3i2.270Search in Google Scholar
Wang, B. J. 2002. SPSS and behavioral sciences research. Taipei: Psychological Publishing Company.Search in Google Scholar
Wible, D. 2008. Multiword expressions and the digital turn. In F. Meunier & S. Granger (eds.), Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching, 163–180. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/z.138.13wibSearch in Google Scholar
Wu, S. J. (2003). A Comparison of Learners’ Beliefs about Writing in Their First and Second Language: Taiwanese Junior College Business-major Students Studying English. Unpublished Dissertation, Texas, United States: The University of Texas at Austin.Search in Google Scholar
Yao, S. S. (2000). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: EFL college learners’ attitudes toward error correction. Unpublished Ph.D., United States: State University of New York at Buffalo.Search in Google Scholar
Yu, C. L. & Y. S. Cheng. 2017. The effect of focused direct written corrective feedback with metalinguistic explanations on EFL learners’ accurate use of English articles. English Teaching & Learning 41. 31–64.Search in Google Scholar
Zhang, L. J. & M. Rahimi. 2014. EFL learners’ anxiety level and their beliefs about corrective feedback in oral communication classes. System 42. 429–439.10.1016/j.system.2014.01.012Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
