Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

The role of peer feedback in oral communicative tasks for young adult learners

dc.contributor.advisorMaldonado Chacón, Pedro Pablo
dc.contributor.authorLeander Spies, Kai
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-14T16:39:31Z
dc.date.available2012-08-14T16:39:31Z
dc.date.created2012
dc.date.issued2012-08-14
dc.identifier.citationAno, K. 1998. A Study of the Output Hypothesis: Cognitive Processes of Speaking a Foreign Language. Journal of Japan – Korea Association of Applied Linguistics Volume 2, 175-204
dc.identifier.citationAuerbach, C. F. and Silverstein L. B. (2003). Qualitative data: an introduction to coding and analysis. New York, USA: NYU Press
dc.identifier.citationBandura, A. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
dc.identifier.citationBlack, P. and William, D. 1998. Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 80 and at https://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kbla9810.htm.
dc.identifier.citationBoud, D. 1990. Assessment and the promotion of academic values, Studies in Higher Education 15, 110-113.
dc.identifier.citationBrown, C. 1995. A question of action. In Riddell.
dc.identifier.citationBrown, H. D. 1998. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. White Plains: Pearson Education
dc.identifier.citationBoughey, C. 1997. Learning to write by writing to learn.: A group work approach. ELT Journal Volume 51/2 April 1997. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citationBurns, A. 1999. Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge Language Teaching Library.
dc.identifier.citationBygate, M. 1987. Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citationCarter, B. 2001. From awareness to counseling in learner autonomy. AILA Review, 15, 26-33
dc.identifier.citationCarr, W. and S. Kemmis. 1986. Becoming Critical: Knowing through Action Research. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University.
dc.identifier.citationCheng, W. and Warren, M. 1999. Peer and teacher assessment of the oral and written tasks of a group project. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 24, 3, 301 – 314.
dc.identifier.citationChia, C. 2005. Promoting Independent Learning through language learning and the use of IT. Educational Media International, Dec2005, Vol. 42 Issue 4, p317-332, 16p.
dc.identifier.citationCorbin, J. and Strauss, A. 2008. Basics of Qualitative Research 3e. Sage Publications.
dc.identifier.citationCotterall, S. 2000. Promoting learner autonomy through the curriculum: principles for designing language courses. ELT Journal Volume 54/2 April 2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citationEnright, D. S. and McCloskey and Savignon, S. J. 1988. Integrating English. Addison-Wesley
dc.identifier.citationFreed, B. 1995. What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In B. Freed (ed.) Second language acquisition in a Study abroad. Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
dc.identifier.citationFulcher, G. 1996. Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. Language Testing 13 (2), 208-238.
dc.identifier.citationGass, S. 2003. Input and interaction. In C. Doughty and M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224 – 255). Oxford: Blackwell.
dc.identifier.citationGass, S., Mackey, A., and Pica, T. 1998. The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition: Introduction to the special issue. Modern Language Journal., 82, 299-307.
dc.identifier.citationGass, S., and Varonis, E. 1994. Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283-302.
dc.identifier.citationGibbs, G. and Simpson, 2004. Conditions under which assessment supports students´ learning, Learning and Teaching In Higher Education, 1, 3-31
dc.identifier.citationGielen, S.; Tops, L.; Dochy, F.; Onghena, P.; Smeets, S; 2010. A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. ISSN 0141-1926 (print)/ISSN 1469-3518 (online), 2010 British Educational Research Association.
dc.identifier.citationHarmer, J. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education.
dc.identifier.citationHolec, H. 1981. Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon. (First published 1979, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.)
dc.identifier.citationHiggins, R. 2000. Be more critical!”: Rethinking assessment feedback. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, Cardiff University, Wales, 7 – 10 September.
dc.identifier.citationHounsell, D. 1987. Essay writing and the quality of feedback, in: J. Richardson, M. W. Eysenck and D. W. Piper (Eds) Student learning: research in education and cognitive psychology (Milton Keynes, Open University Press).
dc.identifier.citationHopkins, D. 1993. A teacher´s guide to classroom research. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
dc.identifier.citationLee, I. 2009. Feedback revolution: What gets in the way? ELT Journal Advance Access. April 2009
dc.identifier.citationLeung, D,Y,P,, and Kember, D. 2003, The relationship between approaches to learning and reflection upon practice, Educational Psychology, 2i(l),61-71.
dc.identifier.citationLewin, K. 1946. Action Research and minority problems. Journal of social issues, 2:34 - 46.
dc.identifier.citationLi, L., Liu, X. and Steckelberg, A. L. 2010. Assessor or assessee: How students learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology. Vol 41 No 3 2010.
dc.identifier.citationLiu, N. and Carless, D. 2006. Peer Feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 11 No. 3, July 2006, pages 279-290.
dc.identifier.citationLuoma, S. 2004. Assessing Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citationLobatón, J. C. 2010. Peer Interaction: A social perspective towards the development of foreign language learning. Retrieved from Profile. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencas Humanas, Departamento de Lenguas Extranjeras
dc.identifier.citationLong, M. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego: Academic Press.
dc.identifier.citationLuzzo, Darrell Anthony. 1996. Journal of Counseling and Development, Jan/Feb96, Vol. 74 Issue 3, p.
dc.identifier.citationMcKernan, J. 1996. Curriculum Action Research. A Handbook of Methods and Resources for the Reflective Practitioner. Second edition. London: Kogan Page.
dc.identifier.citationNassaji, H. 2009. Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning. Volume 59, Number 2, June 2009 , pp. 411-452(42). Publisher: Blackwell Publishing.
dc.identifier.citationNation, I.S.P and Newton, J. 2009. Teaching ESL and EFL Listening and Speaking. New York: Routledge.
dc.identifier.citationNicole, D. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. 2004. "Rethinking Formative Assessment in HE: a theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practice" http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assessment/ASS051D_SENLEF_model.doc
dc.identifier.citationNicol, D. and MacFarlane, D. 2006. Formative Assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principals of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education.
dc.identifier.citationNilson, Linda B..2003. College Teaching, Winter2003, Vol. 51 Issue 1, p34, 5p.
dc.identifier.citationNgar-Fun L.; Carless, D. Teaching in Higher Education, Jul2006, Vol. 11 Issue 3, p279-290, 12p, 2 Charts; DOI: 10.1080/13562510600680582
dc.identifier.citationNunan, D. 1989. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
dc.identifier.citationPica, T. 1994. Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527
dc.identifier.citationPica, T. 1996. Do second language learners need negotiation? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. 34, 1-21
dc.identifier.citationPhan, Huy P. 2010 Critical thinking as a self-regulatory process component in teaching and learning. . Psicothema, , Vol. 22 Issue 2, p284-292, 9p;
dc.identifier.citationRichards, C. R. and Rodgers, T. S. 2001. Approaches and Methods in language teaching. Cambrigde: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citationRollinson, P. 1998. Peer response and revision in an ESL writing group. Unpublished Phd thesis. Universidad Autonoma de Madrid
dc.identifier.citationRollinson, P. 2005. Using Peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT J (2005) 59(1): 23-30 doi:10.1093/elt/cci003
dc.identifier.citationSeliger, H. W.. Shohamy, E. G. 1990. Second Language Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford Univerity Press.
dc.identifier.citationSiewert, L. 2011. The effects of written teacher feedback on the academic achievements of fifth-grade students with learning challenges. Preventing School Failure. Vol. 55, Issue 1, page 17 – 27.
dc.identifier.citationSullivan K. and Hall, C. 1997. Introducing Students to Self-assessment, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22, 289 - 305
dc.identifier.citationStefani, L. A. J. 1994. Peer, self and tutor assessment: relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19, 1, 69 – 75.
dc.identifier.citationStern, H. 1983. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citationStrauss, A. 1991. The Chicago tradition´s ongoing theory of action/interaction. In Strauss (Ed.), Creating sociological awareness (pp. 3-32). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers
dc.identifier.citationTavakoli, P., and Skehan, P. 2005. Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language, (pp. 239-273). Philadelphia:John Benjamins
dc.identifier.citationTavakoli, P. 2011. Pausing Patterns: Differences between L2 learners and native speakers. ELT Journal Volume 65/1 January 2011; doi:10.1093/elt/ccq020.
dc.identifier.citationThornbury, S. 2005. How to teach Speaking. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
dc.identifier.citationTopping, K. J. 2003. Self- and peer assessment in school and university: reliability, validity and utility, in: M. Segers, F. Dochy and E. Cascallar (Eps) Otimizing new modes of assessment: in search of qualities and standards (Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic)
dc.identifier.citationVigil, N., and Oller, J. (1976). Rule fossilization: A tentative model. Language learning, 26, 281-295
dc.identifier.citationVivanco, Verónica.2009 Holistic Versus communicative approach in assessing oral production in English.
dc.identifier.citationWatson-Gegeo, K. A. 1988. Ethnography in ESL: defining the essentials. TESOL Quarterly, 22:575-92.
dc.identifier.citationWallace, M.J. 1998. Action Research for Language Teacher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
dc.identifier.citationWen, M. L. and Tsai, C. 2006. University Students´ perceptions of and attitudes towards (online) peer assessment. Higher Education (2006) 51: 27-44
dc.identifier.citationWood, 2001. In search of fluency: What is it and how can we teach it? Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 573-589
dc.identifier.citationYang, M., Badger, R. and Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese writing class, Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179-200
dc.identifier.citationZhang, S. 1995. “Re-examining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class”. Journal of Second Language Writing 4/3:209-22.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10818/3347
dc.description125 Páginas.
dc.description.abstractEste estudio investigó los efectos de la retroalimentación entre compañeros en la variedad léxica como parte de las habilidades comunicativas para jóvenes adultos aprendices de la lengua inglesa. Los 16 participantes trabajaron en una variedad de tareas comunicativas con rúbricas para la retroalimentación entre compañeros. Los datos se recolectaron mediante una encuesta, reflexiones de los estudiantes y grupos focales, y posteriormente se analizó la información teniendo en cuenta la Teoría Fundamentada en Datos (Grounded Theory). Los resultados indicaron que la auto-eficacia de los estudiantes y la efectividad de la retroalimentación entre compañeros están muy relacionadas. El proyecto demostró que la retroalimentación entre compañeros permitió a los estudiantes involucrarse activamente en las tareas comunicativas y ser más independientes en su proceso de aprendizaje.es_CO
dc.language.isoenges_CO
dc.publisherUniversidad de La Sabana
dc.sourceUniversidad de La Sabana
dc.sourceIntellectum Repositorio Universidad de La Sabana
dc.subjectInglés-Enseñanzaes_CO
dc.subjectInglés-Lexicologíaes_CO
dc.subjectInglés-Aprendizaje experimentales_CO
dc.titleThe role of peer feedback in oral communicative tasks for young adult learnerses_CO
dc.typemasterThesis
dc.publisher.programMaestría en Didáctica del Inglés con Énfasis en Ambientes de Aprendizaje Autónomo
dc.publisher.departmentDepartamento de Lenguas y Culturas Extranjeras
dc.identifier.local157711
dc.identifier.localTE05543
dc.type.localTesis de maestría
dc.type.hasVersionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccess
dc.creator.degreeMagíster en Didáctica del Inglés con Énfasis en Ambientes de Aprendizaje Autónomo


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre:
Kai_Leander_Spies (1).pdf
Tamaño:
3.207Mb
Formato:
PDF
Descripción:
Ver documento en PDF
Ver/

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem