2012, Vol.13, No.1

Modern English Education 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 1.55

pISSN : 1598-0782 / eISSN : 2586-6141
https://journal.kci.go.kr/meeso

In the field of teaching second language writing, it has been questioned whether written corrective feedback is effective or not. In responding to this contentious and ongoing question, this study was conducted to introduce a newly designed instructional strategy in writing and test its efficacy over both short and long periods of time. Intermediate level university students (N=85) received three different types of feedback, namely, blended, conventional, and control, and 425 writing samples were analyzed from the pretest, posttest 1, and posttest 2, respectively. The results indicate that there was no difference between the blended design and conventional feedback group in reducing the error rates over a short-term period. However, striking differences found between two groups over a long term period imply that the newly designed instructional strategy is much more effective than its counterparts (in the conventional and control groups) in reducing error rates and multiplying the effect of revision on the subsequent and new pieces of writing. Before jumping to any harsh conclusion, the researcher postulates that further research validating the findings of the result is highly desirable, and will deepen the understanding toward the nature of complex and context-sensitive second language writing.

This study examines the effectiveness of teaching Korean EFL learners L1 and L2 rhetorical difference for the National English Ability Test (NEAT) writing section. The participants of this study were 181 freshmen high school students in YongIn, Korea, who had been learning English essay writing from a bilingual teacher of English for six months. 110 students were assigned to the experimental group where they received instruction of rhetorical difference between English and Korean. 71 students were assigned to the control group where writing instruction was provided without instructing L1 and L2 rhetorical difference. Each participant composed a five-paragraph persuasive essay given by NEAT before and after the instruction. Data was analyzed by the given criteria composed of the following four domains in NEAT writing task: (1) task completion, (2) content, (3) organization, and (4) language use. Findings portray that learning rhetorical difference enhanced students' ability of L2 writing. This study suggests that EFL learners’ understanding of L1 and L2 rhetorical difference provides a rich foundation to the overall quality of L2 writing.

The study examined how genre-based instruction had an influence on Korean students’ development of expository writing in English. The participants of the study were nine college students who took a composition course in the spring semester, 2011. They were taught how to write exposition based on the genre-based pedagogy. The participants’ writings and their responses were collected and analyzed after the treatment. The data of writings were analyzed in terms of the length, text structure, theme development and grammatical features including modality, voice, and connectives. The results of analyses revealed that the genre-based instruction significantly contributed to the Korean learners’ development of writing expositions in terms of the growth of the text length, text structure and development, and appropriate use of grammatical devices. It was revealed, in particular, that the genre-based instruction helped the learners of lower writing ability improve their expositions. The findings of participants’ writings and responses suggested that genre-based instruction could be an effective approach to help Korean learners of English to improve their writing abilities.