Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:50:26.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Replication studies in language learning and teaching: Questions and answers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2008

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Language Teaching Review Panel

Type
Language Teaching Review Panel
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 1 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adams, R. 2003. L2 output, reformulation and noticing: Implications for IL development. Language Teaching Research 7.3, 347–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, D., Varghese, S. & Mei, W. S. 1999. Local coherence and its limits: A second look at second sentences. Journal of Second Language Writing 8.1, 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashwell, T. 2000. Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing 9.3, 227–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bitchener, J., Young, S. & Cameron, D. 2005. The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 12.3, 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, M. 2003. The effects of textual input enhancement on language learning: An online/offline study of fourth-semester Spanish students. In Kempchinsky, P. & Piñeros, C. E. (eds.), Theory, practice, and acquisition: The 6th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium and the 5th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 395–411.Google Scholar
Brumfit, C. 2005. Teacher professionalism and research. In Cook, G. & Seidlhofer, B. (eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 27–42.Google Scholar
Carver, R. P. 1978. The case against statistical significance testing. Harvard Educational Review 48, 378–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, J. 2003. The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 12, 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobb, T. 2003. Analyzing late interlanguage with learner corpora: Quebec replications of three European studies. The Canadian Modern Language Review 59.3, 393–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist 45, 1304–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S. M. & Goldstein, L. M. 1999. ESL student revision after teacher-written comments: Text, contexts, and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing 8.2, 147–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devenney, R. 1989. How ESL teachers and peers evaluate and respond to student writing. RELC Journal 20.1, 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., Loewen, S. & Erlam, R. 2006. Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28, 339–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fathman, A. K. & Whalley, E. 1990. Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In Kroll, B. (ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 178–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazio, J. L. 2001. The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority- and majority-language students. Journal of Second Language Writing 10, 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. 2004. The ‘grammar correction’ debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime . . . ?). Journal of Second Language Writing 13.1, 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R., Pezone, S., Tade, C. R. & Tinti, S. 1997. Teacher commentary on student writing: Descriptions and implications. Journal of Second Language Writing 6.2, 155–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. & Roberts, B. 2001. Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing 10.3, 161–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firestone, W. A. 1993. Alternative arguments for generalizing from data as applied to qualitative research. Educational Researcher 22, 16–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gascoigne, C. 2004. Examining the effect of feedback in beginning L2 composition. Foreign Language Annals 37.1, 71–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A. & Ross-Feldman, L. 2005. Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings. Language Learning 55.4, 575–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. J. 1998. Research in psychology: Methods and design (2nd edn.). New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
Hendrik, C. 1991. Replications, strict replications, and conceptual replications: Are they important? In Neuliep, J. W. (ed.), Replication research in the social sciences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 41–49.Google Scholar
Hyland, F. 2003. Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System 31.2, 217–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kepner, C. G. 1991. An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. The Modern Language Journal 75.3, 305–313.Google Scholar
Lalande, J. F. 1982. Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal 66, 140–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, I. 1997. ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for teaching. System 25.4, 465–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leow, R. P. 1999. The role of attention in second/foreign language classroom research: Methodological issues. In Gutiérrez-Rexach, F. M-G. J. (ed.), Advances in Hispanic linguistics: The 2nd Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla, 60–71.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. & Gass, S. 2005. Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Gass, S. & McDonough, K. 2000. How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22.4, 471–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, J. & McDonough, S. 1997. Research methods for English language teachers. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Neale, J. M. & Liebert, R. M. 1986. Science and behavior: An introduction to methods of research (3rd edn.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Polio, C. & Gass, S. 1997. Replication and reporting: A commentary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robb, T., Ross, S. & Shortreed, I. 1986. Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly 20.1, 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosnow, R. L. & Rosenthal, R. 1989. Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science. American Psychologist 44, 1276–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semke, H. D. 1984. Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals 17.3, 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, K. 1992. Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal 23.1, 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, B. 1992. Two and one-half decades of leadership in measurement and evaluation. Journal of Counseling and Development 70, 434–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, B. 1994. The pivotal role of replication in psychological research: Empirically evaluating the replicability of sample results. Journal of Personality 62, 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titscher, S., Meyer, C., Wodak, R. & Vetter, E. 2000. Methods of text and discourse analysis. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truscott, J. 1996. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 46.2, 327–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valdman, A. 1993. Replication study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15, 505.Google Scholar
Van Der Veer, R., van IJzendoorn, M. & Valsiner, J. 1994. General introduction. In van der Veer, R., van IJzendoorn, M. & Valsiner, J. (eds.), Reconstructing the mind: Replicability in research on human development. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1–9.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. 1990. Attending to form and content in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12, 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, W. 2001. Modality and attention to meaning and form in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23.3, 345–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, R. & Kenkel, J. 2002. Responding to sentence-level errors in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 1, 29–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar