APPRAISAL as a framework for understanding multimodal electronic feedback: Positioning and purpose in screencast video and text feedback in ESL writing

IF 0.3 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Writing & Pedagogy Pub Date : 2018-01-26 DOI:10.1558/WAP.31736
Kelly J. Cunningham
{"title":"APPRAISAL as a framework for understanding multimodal electronic feedback: Positioning and purpose in screencast video and text feedback in ESL writing","authors":"Kelly J. Cunningham","doi":"10.1558/WAP.31736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given the multimodal nature of new modes of electronic feedback, such as screencasting, there is a need for the application of robust, theoretically grounded frameworks to capture linguistic and functional differences in feedback across modes. The present study argues that the appraisal framework, an outgrowth of systemic functional linguistics (SFL) that focuses on evaluative language and interpersonal meaning, can provide understanding of and discernment between technology-mediated modes of feedback. The study demonstrates this potential through an appraisal analysis of a small corpus of 16 screencast video and 16 text (MS Word comment) feedback files given to eight students over four assignments in an intermediate ESL writing class. The results suggest possible variation between the video and text feedback in reviewer positioning and feedback purpose. Specifically, video seems to position the reviewer as one of many possible perspectives with feedback focused on possibility and suggestion, while the text feedback seems to position the reviewer as authority with feedback focused on correctness. The findings suggest that appraisal can aid in the understanding of multimodal feedback and identifying differences between feedback modes.","PeriodicalId":42573,"journal":{"name":"Writing & Pedagogy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Writing & Pedagogy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1558/WAP.31736","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Given the multimodal nature of new modes of electronic feedback, such as screencasting, there is a need for the application of robust, theoretically grounded frameworks to capture linguistic and functional differences in feedback across modes. The present study argues that the appraisal framework, an outgrowth of systemic functional linguistics (SFL) that focuses on evaluative language and interpersonal meaning, can provide understanding of and discernment between technology-mediated modes of feedback. The study demonstrates this potential through an appraisal analysis of a small corpus of 16 screencast video and 16 text (MS Word comment) feedback files given to eight students over four assignments in an intermediate ESL writing class. The results suggest possible variation between the video and text feedback in reviewer positioning and feedback purpose. Specifically, video seems to position the reviewer as one of many possible perspectives with feedback focused on possibility and suggestion, while the text feedback seems to position the reviewer as authority with feedback focused on correctness. The findings suggest that appraisal can aid in the understanding of multimodal feedback and identifying differences between feedback modes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评价作为理解多模态电子反馈的框架:在ESL写作中视频和文本反馈的定位和目的
鉴于电子反馈新模式的多模态性质,如屏幕播放,有必要应用强大的、有理论基础的框架来捕捉不同模式反馈中的语言和功能差异。本研究认为,评价框架是系统功能语言学(SFL)的产物,它关注评价语言和人际意义,可以提供对技术介导的反馈模式的理解和区分。该研究通过对16个屏幕视频和16个文本(MS Word评论)反馈文件的小语料库进行评估分析,证明了这种潜力,这些文件给了8名学生在中级ESL写作课上的四项作业。结果表明,视频反馈和文字反馈在审稿人定位和反馈目的上可能存在差异。具体来说,视频似乎将审稿人定位为许多可能的观点之一,反馈侧重于可能性和建议,而文本反馈似乎将审稿人定位为权威,反馈侧重于正确性。研究结果表明,评价有助于理解多模态反馈和识别反馈模式之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Writing & Pedagogy
Writing & Pedagogy EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
33.30%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Writing and identity: Promoting critical discourse amidst double consciousness Writing as resistance in an age of demagoguery Making sense of resistance in an afterschool tutoring program: Learning from volunteer writing tutors Stray dogs: Interviews with working-class writers, edited by Daniel M. Mendoza Schools, sexual violence, and safety: Adolescent girls and writing resistance at an afterschool program in suburban Mumbai
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1