Analyzing the Feedback Preferences and Learning Styles of Second-Language Students in ESOL

229 Pages·2017·2.79 MB·English

by  Adam Sprague

ANALYZING THE FEEDBACK PREFERENCES AND LEARNING STYLES OF SECOND-
LANGUAGE STUDENTS IN ESOL WRITING COURSES AT BOWLING GREEN STATE
UNIVERSITY

Adam Sprague

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green
State University in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
May 2017
Committee:
Lee Nickoson, Advisor
Neal G. Jesse
Graduate Faculty Representative
Kristine Blair
Sheri Wells-Jensen
© 2017
Adam Sprague
All Rights Reserved
iii
ABSTRACT

Lee Nickoson, Advisor

My dissertation study fills current gaps in scholarship by analyzing the feedback
preferences of students enrolled in two sections of English for Speakers of Other Languages
(ESOL) 1010: Academic Composition II courses at Bowling Green State University during the
Fall 2015 semester and whether or not those preferences match the students' individual learning
styles as measured by a learning style inventory. Additionally, the study examines how providing
feedback in different modalities (audio, video, and written) impacts student comfort levels and
their perceptions of the writing classroom. Finally, the study examines the impact each feedback
modality had on the students' academic performance as measured by the grades students received
on essay assignments when utilizing the differing feedback modalities throughout the semester.
The learning style inventory and initial feedback preference survey were provided during week 1
of the semester, and a follow-up feedback preferences survey was given during week 15. A
grounded theory approach was used to analyze, code, and categorize the students' survey
responses. Through classroom observation, student surveys, and grade analyses, it was clear that
despite showing a preference for written feedback at the onset of the semester, the majority of
students identified as visual learners, preferred video feedback, and performed better academically
when they received video feedback.
iv

For Tonia
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost, this project would not have been possible without my research
participants who gave their valuable time to participate and complete my surveys. They were also
eager to experiment with something new in the interest of improving future educational practices
while willingly stepping out of their comfort zone. For that, I am truly thankful. Also, thank you
to my wife, Tonia, for your patience, humor, and continuous support. I simply could not have
completed this journey without you. This project would also not be possible without the support
of my entire dissertation committee. I would especially like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Lee
Nickoson, for her kind and caring approach to mentorship throughout the last four years. I would
also like to thank Dr. Kristine Blair, for not only regularly taking time out of her day to answer
my questions and provide feedback in regard to this project, but for specifically furthering my
understanding of the digital humanities.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER I. BEYOND BEST PRACTICES: (RE)PLACING VALUE ON
CULTURAL AND LINGUISTIC DIFFERENCE THROUGH THE USE OF
MULTIMODAL FEEDBACK AND LEARNING STYLE-BASED
EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES…….……………………… ............................................. 1
Literature Review………………………………………………………….…..……. 3
Why Focus on Writing Assessment and Feedback?………………………… 3
Teacher Feedback in the L1 and L2 Writing Classroom..…………………… 6
Audio and Video Feedback in the Writing Classroom……………………… 10
Learning Style Pedagogy and L2 Writers…………………………………… 17
Meeting Students' Learning Styles through Digital Audio and
Video Feedback—Continuing the Conversations…… ........... ……..……… 21
Overview of Study………………………………………………………….…..……. 22
Brief Rationale for Method Selection…………………..…………………… 23
Brief Rationale for Participant Selection…………….……………………… 23
Data Collection Procedures……………………………..…………………… 24
Data Analysis Procedures……………..…………….……………………… 25
Known Researcher Biases…………………………………………………… 25
Rationale for Feedback Technology Used………………..…………………. 26
Analysis of Research Questions, Data Required, and Data Collection……… 27
Chapter Abstracts………………..……………………………..……………………. 27
Chapter 2………………...……………..…………….………………………. 27
vii
Chapter 3…………………………….……………………………………….. 28
Chapter 4……………………………………………………………………. 28
Chapter 5…………………………………………………….……………… 28
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………… 28
CHAPTER II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: A GROUNDED THEORY
APPROACH TO TEACHER RESEARCH…...………… . ……………………………….. 31
Teacher Research in this Dissertation Study………………………………………… 31
Grounded Theory: A Brief Overview………………………………………………… 33
Introduction……………………….…………………………………………. 33
Grounded Theory and the Data Collection Process..………………………… 34
Coding and Data Analysis Processes……………..………………………… 37
The Use of Grounded Theory in this Dissertation Study.....………………………… 41
Introduction………………………………………..………………………… 41
Theory Formation: Substantive and Formal Theories..……………………… 43
Memoing…………………………………………...………………………… 43
Criteria for Grounded Theory Studies: Standards and Validity……………… 44
Objectivist vs. Constructivist Approaches to Grounded Theory...…………… 46
Limitations of Grounded Theory………………......………………………… 47
Rationale for Participant Selection………………...………………………… 47
Ethical Considerations……………………………..………………………… 48
Rationale for Feedback Technology Used………………..…………..……… 49
Instruments Used: The Learning Style Inventory and Opinion Surveys...…… 51
Data Entry..…………………………………………………………………… 53
viii
Conclusion..…………………………………………………...……………………… 54
CHAPTER III. FINDINGS, IDENTIFIED LEARNING STYLES AND STUDENT
PREFERENCES ON FEEDBACK…………………………………………………………. 56
Learning Style Survey Results: A Majority of Visual Learners……………………. 57
Age and Learning Styles……………………………………………………. 57
Gender and Learning Styles…………………………………………………. 58
Field of Study and Learning Styles…………………………………………. 59
Language Background and Learning Styles…………………………………. 60
Language Background and Visual Learning…………………………………. 61
Language Background and Auditory Learning……………..………………. 62
Language Background and Tactile Learning………………..………………. 63
Initial Overall Implications of Learning Style Findings…………………….. 63
The Week 1 Survey: Participants' Initial Perceptions on Feedback
Styles and Connections to Learning Style Inventory Outcomes . .................……… 68
Age and Predicted Feedback Preferences..…………………………………. 71
Gender and Predicted Feedback Preferences..………………………………. 77
Field of Study and Predicted Feedback Preferences..………………………. 81
Language Background and Predicted Feedback Preferences..……..………. 89
Participant Rationales for Week 1 Survey Responses………………………. 100
Final Reflections on the Week 1 Survey……………………………………. 103
The Week 15 Survey: Participants' Feedback Preferences, Connections to
Learning Style Inventory Outcomes, and a Change of Opinion.…… ............ ……. 105
ix
Participant Rationales for Week 15 Survey Responses…….………………. 107
Conclusion…………………………………………..………………………………. 115
CHAPTER IV. THE IMPACT OF PROVIDING LEARNING STYLE-BASED
FEEDBACK ON ACHIEVEMENT: A GROUNDED THEORY……… ...............……… 117
Academic Achievement: Student Expertise and the Importance of Video Feedback.. 118
The Usefulness of Video Feedback on Student Revision..…………………………. 125
Students as Self-Evaluator…………………………………..………………………. 128
Research Questions Revisited: Building Blocks for Theory………...……..………. 129
A Substantive Grounded Theory: A Multistyle Approach to Feedback
in the L2 Writing Classroom at Bowling Green State University………………… . 131
Conclusion…………………………………….……………………………………. 137
CHAPTER V. MEASURING VALIDITY, FUTURE RESEARCH, AND
REVITALIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHER-TO-STUDENT
COMMUNICATION……………..……………………………………………………........ 138
Contributions to the Field: The Overall Significance of the Study……………….... 138
Key Limitations of the Study…………………………….…………………………. 140
Curricular and Institutional Constraints of Enacting a Multistyle Approach to
Feedback…………………………………..………………………………………... 143
Meeting the Criteria of Grounded Theory………................................……..………. 145
Strauss and Corbin's (1990) Criteria for Grounded Theory Studies:
Standards and Validity………... ................................................................. 145
Criterion 1: Credibility…………………...…………………………………. 151
Criterion 2: Originality…………………...…………………………………. 151
x
Criterion 3: Resonance…………………...…………………………………. 152
Criterion 4: Usefulness…………………...…………………………………. 152
Instructor Conclusions: Additional, Personal Lessons Learned……………………. 153
Future Research……………………………………………….……………………. 155
The Future of Writing Assessment in the 21st Century: Teacher Feedback
Matters………………………………………………………………………………. 165
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………… 166
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………… 169
APPENDIX A. WEEK 1 STUDENT SURVEY…………………………………………… 185
APPENDIX B. WEEK 15 STUDENT SURVEY…………………………..……………… 189
APPENDIX C. HUMAN SUBJECT REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL DOCUMENTS..… 194
APPENDIX D. HSRB RECRUTMENT SCRIPT……………… . ………………………… 211
APPENDIX E. HSRB INFORMED CONSENT ............................................................... 212
APPENDIX F. HSRB EXEMPT STATUS CONFIRMATION LETTER ......................... 215