Text Analysis

Student’s text: A Resumé of How The Sun Came To Be

How The Sun Came To Be

The story is about a young woman. The woman have has been promised to be married with a man. She was gone for a long time. [Student left out important part, which could have aided with further understanding of the following sentence] When she arrived to a camp was there no food and no water. There was no place to sleep (fractioning sentences). The woman was hungry, thirsty and she was tired but the young woman has not given up because she felt that she was strong. And the woman went back to her own people. Afterwards the woman and her people walked over to a camp, where they sat down and ate food and drank some water. The young woman made a campfire (fractioning sentences). She made the campfire, and after the build she made it even bigger, so the people could be warm. So (missing: she) used the whole day building the campfire, so all the people could (missing: be) warm (repetition). After she saw that her people was happy. Her people was very grateful for the warmth, so they called her campfire the sun (missing: full stop)

Made by B.

Gibbons grid:

  • General comments
  • Text type
  • Overall organization (none)
  • Cohesion
  • Vocabulary
  • Sentence grammar
  • Spelling and punctuation
  • Presentation (none)

 

Feedback:

  • Feedback would be provided on mainly spelling and punctuation, and sentence grammar, on the basis that mistakes (wrong hypothesis) under these two categories are the most prevalent.
  • But also quick a comment on the overall meaning of the text, which fails when she leaves out an important part of the story.
  • Feedback given would include first and foremost corrections followed by examples of correct or improved sentence structure.
  • Feedback on sentence grammar could also correlate into the student improving on the cohesive mistakes she’s making in the text.

Scaffolding:

  • Pre-task activity that introduces the specific requirements of a resume (genre).
Advertisements

Feedback on Errors (or Lack Thereof)

Reflections on Feedback (chapter 11, pp.131-140) from Fremmedsprog i gymnasiet: teori, praksis og udsyn by Susana Silvia Fernández

“(…) Man skal kun give feedback, som er overskuelig og systematisk, og som kan bearbejdes af eleven, så det fremmer læring” (p.131) Fernández begins her text about feedback by stating the current (consult milestone 3 beneath) view on correcting errors. The opinions on whether to correct mistakes has swung like a pendulum between two extremes. There has been 3 milestones (read: notions/view points) on correcting errors:

  1. “Correct everything straight away” which is a very behaviouristic view on learning, that perceives learning as a repetition of good models/tools for acquiring appropriate (good) habits.
  2. “Correcting doesn’t work” which is opposite to the ladder and inspired by Noam Chomsky’s theory on language acquisition; attributes repetition and imitation of “a good model”, correcting errors has much less importance, than the student’s interlanguage-development and treating different errors. A view which is very much aligned with the one of Krashen (discussed in the earlier reflection on Teaching Grammar).
  3. “Correcting supports the student’s’ hypothesis creation” is the current view, that corrections should not be exhausting, but are necessary when done at the right time in the right way.

The language hypothesis relies on the importance on interaction and output, in which the student through hypotheses can test themselves and continuously adapt their hypothesis as it is a process that changes as they learn something new (p.132). Errors then, are systematic incorrect hypotheses, that can happen for an inter- or intra linguistic reason, whereas mistakes are random mistake in the student’s output, that can often be self regulated (p.132). One way as a teacher to coach the student towards adapting their hypotheses, is through correcting errors i.e. corrective feedback, which is used as a tool for when the errors occur, because they indicate of the students interlanguage development, thus corrective feedback allows the student to adapt their hypotheses. Summative feedback is highly relevant in end-product situations like exams, but formative feedback is constantly relevant, as it further helps the student to become better in their weak arenas, thus helping them to become better (p.133). The formative feedback can be divided into impact and explicit. The explicit feedback directly points to the error and often the right answer, whereas implicit naturally is more subtle. Implicit feedback can be e.g., underlining errors, using abbreviations for different types of mistakes (WC=word choice, PP=prepositions), providing the right tense as a response when whilst communicating verbally, giving a metalinguistic explanation, etc…

Finally Fernández talks about collaborative language learning as a great tool for interlanguage development, where students receive feedback from their peers.

Literature:

Fernández et al. (2014): Fremmedsprog i gymnasiet: teori, praksis og udsyn. Samfundslitteratur