چکیده:
The purpose of this study was to explore the role of two multi-step oral-revision processes as feedback providing tools on Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative writing achievement. The participants taking part in this study were 45 Iranian EFL students who were randomly assigned into three groups. The participants of the groups were given three argumentative writing assignments, each assignment demanding three separate drafts. In the control group, the participants revised their essays in response to teacher's written feedback, while the participants of the two experimental groups experienced oral- revision talks with their teacher or a peer. Two sets of quantitative and qualitative data were collected: Argumentative essays written at the beginning and the end of the semester and interviews. The results of the quantitative aspect of the study revealed the significant outperformance of the two experimental groups. Moreover, the data provided through interviews revealed some differences in terms of the effectiveness of feedback between the two experimental groups. The participants of the peer-led group reported more awareness of the rhetorical structures and an ability to revise surface errors. While, the teacher-led group reported more global writing concerns like content, organization of ideas, and discourse. The obtained results point out that the mutual co-construction of participation roles and certain combinations of negotiation and scaffolding let the teacher provide a supportive conversational environment and assistance in1 Corresponding Author. Email: f.heidari51@yahoo.comaccordance with the proficiency of learners of the teacher-led group to promote greater learner participation.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Keywords: Multi-step Oral Revision, Negotiation, Scaffolding, Argumentative Writing A great concern for many EFL researchers and teachers has always been to create an ideal teaching/learning environment.
Recently, the construct of academic writing has begun to change in a way that allows students to demonstrate their ability as they engage fully in processes through brainstorming, drafting, and revising in response to teacher or peer feedback (Camp, 1993).
Oral conferences, as one form of feedback providing tools, allow us to form a learning partnership in which students and teachers can become collaborators, co-creating meaning in an ongoing dialogic process (Young & Miller, 2004).
This concept, also known as 'assisted performance' (Ohta, 2001), 'negotiated interaction' (Long, 1996), and 'guided participation' (Lave & Wenger,1991), encompasses the ways that the feedback delivered through the dialogue between teacher or fellow learner and student can enable the student to develop both his or her text and writing abilities (Williams, 2002).
Despite the fact that teacher and peer feedback, and required revision, is a common component of the process-approach in English as second language writing classroom, few empirical studies have investigated the effects of a collaborative oral revision-based method on a specific mode of writing in the foreign language context.
Interview The researcher randomly interviewed 10 participants, 5 participants of each of the experimental groups (teacher-led & peer-led group) to gain further insight into the effectiveness of these feedback providing tools and the most frequently revised aspects of language in their writing.