教师书面纠正性反馈对中国高中生英语作文语言准确性的影响外国语言学与应用语言学专业论文.docxVIP

PAGE PAGE VI List of Abbreviations EFL English as a Foreign Language ESL English as a Second Language LDLTAL Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics TL Target language SLA Second Language Acquisition SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences df Degrees of freedom Contents 未找到目录项。 PAGE PAGE 1 Chapter One Introduction Research Background English writing, as an important productive skill, has been gaining increasing attention and emphasis in second language acquisition (SLA). It is commonly recognized that students make numerous errors in the process of writing, which is in accordance with the theory of interlanguage. However, no consensus has been reached on the effects of teacher written corrective feedback (CF) on language accuracy improvement despite the painstaking efforts made by teachers in practical teaching. The teachers complained that most of the students did not cast any glance at the teacher written corrective feedback at all. Their hard work just went down the drain. What’s more, some students also complained that the corrective feedbacks that their teacher provided them were too difficult for them to understand, let alone to correct errors in their writings. This is a great debate between the provision of teacher written corrective feedback and error correction of students in practical teaching and learning. The great debate also lies in the field of research on teacher written corrective feedback. In recent years, the effects of teacher written corrective feedback have provoked severely hot topics. Some researchers are not in favor of the active role of teacher written corrective feedback in students’ writing. For example, Truscott (1996, 2007) held the most intense point of view that teacher written corrective feedback should be avoided because it was not helpful to language accuracy and even harmful to learners’ writing. Ferris (1999), however, argued that Truscott’s (1996) claim was premature and overly strong a