Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 2 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 3 |
Descriptor
Error Correction | 3 |
Language Laboratories | 3 |
Second Language Instruction | 3 |
Second Language Learning | 3 |
Feedback (Response) | 2 |
Foreign Countries | 2 |
Questionnaires | 2 |
Student Attitudes | 2 |
Teaching Methods | 2 |
Artificial Languages | 1 |
College Students | 1 |
More ▼ |
Author
Brosvic, Gary M. | 1 |
Cook, Michael J. | 1 |
Crosthwaite, Peter | 1 |
Dihoff, Roberta E. | 1 |
Epstein, Michael L. | 1 |
Robinson, Ian Michael | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 3 |
Reports - Research | 2 |
Tests/Questionnaires | 2 |
Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
Education Level
Higher Education | 2 |
Audience
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Robinson, Ian Michael – Language Learning in Higher Education, 2018
With the advent of web 2.0 and the ease of use of many hand-held devices, access to the internet has never been easier. This has been accompanied by a growing range of sites available for learning an L2. These sites offer lessons, explanations, exercises, corrections and feedback. It now becomes time once again to question whether physical bricks…
Descriptors: English (Second Language), Second Language Learning, Second Language Instruction, Web 2.0 Technologies
Crosthwaite, Peter – Computer Assisted Language Learning, 2017
An increasing number of studies have looked at the value of corpus-based data-driven learning (DDL) for second language (L2) written error correction, with generally positive results. However, a potential conundrum for language teachers involved in the process is how to provide feedback on students' written production for DDL. The study looks at…
Descriptors: Feedback (Response), Error Correction, Morphology (Languages), Syntax
Brosvic, Gary M.; Epstein, Michael L.; Dihoff, Roberta E.; Cook, Michael J. – Psychological Record, 2006
Participants completed 5 laboratory examinations during which the number of responses permitted (1 response, up to 4 responses) and the timing of feedback (no feedback control: Scantron form; delayed feedback: end-of-test, 24-hr delay; immediate feedback: assistant, response form) were manipulated. Participants completed a 100-item cumulative…
Descriptors: Language Laboratories, Feedback, Artificial Languages, Second Language Learning