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 viewed as a combination of spontaneous, 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?

Data collection UserAgeNative language Language level Time of study No. of texts Length of writing Graded texts A34SpanishAdvanced6 months words 4 B37SpanishIntermediate4 months words 4 C34GermanAdvanced2 months 1190 words 1

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 kongruensfel Proposals: vårt gemensamma intresse våra gemensamma intressen Version 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

Error typeDetectionsDiagnosesCorrections No. of judge- ments Mean value No. of judge- ments Mean value No. of judge- ments Mean value Typographical Orthographical184,6183,9164,2 Morphosynt.44,043,833,7 Syntactical133,5133,284,5 Lexical Semantic Pragmatic Style All errors354,1353,6274,2

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 Welcome! to contact us :