190 likes | 312 Vues
This study explores the use of Groanska, a Swedish grammar checker, to support second language learners in their writing practices. We focus on how computer-aided tools can enhance the revision process for writers who are proficient in their native language but learning Swedish as a second language. We investigate user interactions, feedback on language errors, and the tool's effectiveness in improving writing quality. Our preliminary findings suggest that tailored feedback and correction proposals significantly aid learners' writing development, providing insights for future language tool design.
E N D
Computer support for second language learners’ free text production-Initial Studies- O. Knutsson, T. Cerratto Pargman & K. Severinson Eklundh Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm - Sweden
Outline • Introduction • Background • Theoretical Framework • User Study • The computer program : Granska • Research questions • Data collection and methods • Preliminary findings • Discussion
Introduction • Interest in the use of computer support for learning Swedish as a second language • Focus on the use of computer-language tools for writers who can fluently write and speak in their mother tongue • Goals : • to study how writers develop their writing practices in the context of learning Swedish as a second language • to contribute to improving the design of existing language tools for writing in learning contexts
Writing in the acquisition of second language • Writing turns speech and language into objects of reflection and analysis (Vygotsky, 1962; Luria, 1976) • Far from transcribing speech, writing creates the categories in terms of which we become conscious of speech (Olson, 1995)
Language tools for second language writers • Computer language programs supporting free text production available in Swedish have been developed for native speakers: • the grammar checker in Microsoft Word (Lingsoft) • the research prototype Scarrie (Uppsala University) • the prototype GRANSKA (Royal Institute of Technology) • Most of the computer aided language learning programs available on the market rarely analyze learners’ written or spoken productions
Second-language learning processes • The acquisition and development of a second language is regarded as a complex processes requiring the interplay of motivation, identity, context, culture, intellectual competence (Sjögren, 1996) • Second-language learning is viewedas a combination ofspontaneous, inductive learning with systematic, deductive learning strategies (Laurillard, 1993)
A developmental perspective on the use of language tools • Language tools are viewed as artifacts that become instruments through the writer’s activity (Rabardel, 1995) • Language errors are a source for the understanding of how writers make sense and construct a new symbolic system (Scott, 2001) • Written feedback is an important resource for the writers’ language understanding and construction of a new symbolic system (Cohen and Cavalcanti, 1990)
Pilot study on the use of Granska in second-language writing environments Aims : • to study how the grammar checker, Granska, should be adapted to second language writers’ needs • to develop a method for assessing the use of Granska in a naturalistic environment
Granska - a Swedish Grammar Checker • It provides different functions such as grammar checking and proofreading, linguistic editing functions, language rules and help system • It supports detection, diagnosis and correction of language errors in the writer’s revision process • It combines statistical and rule-based methods
Research questions • Does Granska support second language writers’ revision process? • What parts of Granska are most important to improve and develop further? • Which are the research methods suitable for studying second language writers’ free text production?
Method • Focus on free text production during the revision process • Instructions to the users : • ”Use Granska whenever you want and when you think it will help you” • ”Save the original text and the final version revised with Granska” • Analysis of users’ judgment of Granska’s alarms, detections, diagnoses and correction proposals • Analysis of interviews with second language teachers
Example : two versions of the same text for the study of users’ actions Version 1 : • Hon skulle komma hit och träffas oss för att prata om våra gemensamma intresse.Diagnosis: Om våra syftar på intresse är det kongruensfelProposals: vårt gemensamma intresse våra gemensamma intressenVersion 2 : • Hon skulle komma hit och träffas oss för att prata om våra gemensamma intresser.Diagnosis: Okänt ord Proposals: intressen intressera
Teachers’ views of errors and written feedback • The type of errors depends much on the level of the language reached • Common errors are : syntactical errors, word order, verb inflection, agreement and use of prepositions • Different approaches on written feedback • Immediate written feedback and support for drafting processes could become useful for writers
Preliminary findings cont’ • Users repaired spelling errors without feedback from the program • Users followed Granska’s advice if correctional proposal was provided • Users mentioned to be satisfied with the program’s correction proposals • Users could not understand some of the diagnoses presented when correction proposal was not provided
Discussion • When should we start to adapt/redesign Granska from what we know from the users studies ? • Which types of users should we focus on ? • How should we improve methods for collecting and analyzing writer’s free text production?
Information about the project • www.nada.kth.se/theory/projects/xcheck/ • www.nada.kth.se/theory/projects/granska/demo.html Welcome! to contact us : • tessy@nada.kth.se • knutsson@nada.kth.se