Session 5E

Studies on teachers' written feedback in the L2 classroom has mainly concentrated on written corrective feedback (WCF), that is, the correction of grammatical and lexical mistakes and mechanics (Author 2018). However, teachers' feedback practices are holistic in the sense that feedback involves different categories. Research with more advanced students have shown that teachers comment extensively, not only on grammar, vocabulary, and mechanics but also focus on text-related categories (Magno and Amarles 2011). Thus, there is a divide between what research has focused on and the holistic nature of teachers' feedback practices. Inspired by hermeneutics (Gadamer, 2010), this study relates the whole and its parts and a new feedback analysis model from a holistic perspective is developed. Unlike previous L2-studies, this study adopts the main categories from Straub (1996), i.e. the focus, (what the teachers focus in comments) is separated from manners (how the teachers communicate with the students). 

The study was conducted in a web-based Swedish-as-a-Second-Language course and included three experienced teachers and their beginner-level L2 students of culturally diverse backgrounds. All communication between teachers and students took place in a learning management system without any physical meetings. The analysis of this study dealt with teacher feedback on 60 texts from 12 of the students with the aim to see what the teachers naturally paid attention to. The model for analyzing teachers' verbal comments is partly based on subcategories adopted from previous research models (Ferris et al. 1997; Hyland & Hyland 2001; Hyland 2001) but were also analysed inductively using coding, categorization and classification (Strauss 1987) and according to "the constant comparative method" (Lincoln & Guba 1985: 339). The analysis of feedback strengthens the importance of applying the main distinction between focus and manner in L2 contexts. Within focus, reinforcement of learning outcomes was a new category. Concerning focus, the teachers concentrated on language accuracy. Results also revealed that politeness and asking for information about the content were new categories within the main category manner. All three teachers gave mostly information, but also different forms of suggestions. There was also variation between teachers, for example, concerning praise.

References
Ferris, Dana R., Susan Pezone, Cathy R. Tade, and Sharee Tinti. 1997. Teacher commentary on student writing: Descriptions and implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6: 155–182.
Gadamer, Hans.- Georg. 2010 [1960]. Wahrheit und Methode. Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik.Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Hyland, Fiona. 2001. Providing effective support: investigating feedback to distance language learners. Open Learning 16: 233–247. 
Hyland, Fiona, and Ken Hyland. 2001. Sugaring the pill. Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 79: 185–212.
Lincoln, Yvonna. S., and Egon Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage.
Magno, Carlo, and Arceli M. Amarles. 2011. Teachers' feedback practices in second language academic writing classrooms. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment 6: 21–30.
Straub, Richard. 1996. The concept of control in teacher response: defining the varieties of "directive" and "facilitative" commentary. College composition and communication 47: 223–251.

While L2 instruction is generally considered to enhance, further advance or accelerate the acquisition of a second language (Loewen & Sato, 2017), the effectiveness of L2 instruction may differ relative to learners' educational background. Adult learners with no or disrupted formal education may not benefit from L2 instruction in the same way as more highly educated learners (Deygers & Vanbuel, 2021). Unfortunately, the effectiveness of L2 courses for learners with diverging educational backgrounds remains largely unexamined. To date, SLA research has been limited in terms of target population (Andringa & Godfroid, 2020) and study design (Plonsky 2013). Due to known problems of sampling bias, hardly any large-scale studies have examined L2 gains in adult L2 learners with diverging educational profiles. The few studies that have, have been cross-sectional in nature. Thus, in order to advance the understanding of instructed SLA in a wider sample of adult learners what is needed are large-scale, longitudinal, within-subject studies (Webb & Chang, 2015).
In this study, we will examine what adult learners of Dutch as an L2 with diverging educational backgrounds gain from L2 instruction over a period of three months. Data are collected in February/March and May/June 2022 in a sample of 1500 learners in 150 classrooms by means of a listening and reading comprehension test (authors, forthcoming), the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test in Dutch (Schlichting, 2005). A background questionnaire was administered to collect demographic data. We analyze the data by means of growth curve models. This will allow us to take into account salient differences between individual learners, such as both prior L2 skills and L2 gains over time (Steele, 2014). Based on the limited research available on lower-educated learners, we expect to find lower gains in these learners than in their higher-educated peers. This study will be the first SLA study to examine educational effectiveness in a large sample of adult L2 learners with diverging educational backgrounds longitudinally. 
References
Andringa, S., & Godfroid, A. (2020). Sampling Bias and the problem of generalizability in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 40, 134-142. 
Deygers, B., & Vanbuel, M. (2021). Gauging the impact of literacy and educational background on receptive vocabulary test scores. Language Testing (Online First), 1-21.
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition. New York: Routledge. 
Plonsky, L. (2013). "Study quality in SLA. An Assessment of Designs, Analyses, and Reporting Practices in Quantitative L2 Research." Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 655-687.
Schlichting, L. (2005). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III-NL. Nederlandse versie. Handleiding. Amsterdam: Harcourt Test Publishers.
Steele, F. (2014). Multilevel Modelling of Repeated MeasuresData. LEMMA VLE Module 15, 1-64. (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/cmm/learning/course.html).
Webb, S., & Chang, A. C-S. (2015). How does prior word knowledge affect vocabulary learning progress in an extensive reading program? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 651 – 675.

Building on MacIntyre et al. (2020) and Mercer & Gregersen (2020), this exploratory study examines the transition to emergency remote instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic based on questionnaire responses from over 6,000 language learners and teachers from 118 countries. While a rich body of literature exists on distance language education, this refers to regular courses that had been planned in advance as fully online by design-conditions drastically differed from the circumstances imposed by the current pandemic.
To examine how the stakeholders adapted to and coped with emergency remote instruction, we had constructed an original online survey composed of 441 items. Constructs of interest were derived from existing validated scales or scales developed specifically for this project. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses with direct oblimin, excluding items exhibiting cross-loading or low loadings (< .30), led to the development of over 30 new scales exhibiting acceptable to very good reliability indices (Cronbach's α: .72–.92, McDonald's ωₕ: .75–.92) and adequate fit as indicated by TLI and RMSEA values.
Responding to specific research questions, regression and other inferential analyses of instructors' responses revealed that: 
1. teachers coped better when they worked in higher education: F=9.31, p< .001, ηp²=.02 [.01;.04] and used synchronous delivery: t=−6.2, p< .001, d=.33 [.22;.43];   
2. educators were more engaged in developing than economically developed countries: t=3.59, p< .05, d=.31 [.14;.48];   
3. psychological overload was mediated by perception of student coping;  
4. instructors' stress levels were affected by anxiety about the future, living conditions, self-acceptance, appraisal of situational impact, course optionality, and perceived effectiveness of virtual delivery;  
5. on average, teachers felt that remote instruction depressed students' language progress by around 64% compared with in-person classes;  
6. future learning outcomes were the biggest cause for concern in A1-level classes: β=.09, R²=.51, p=.026;  
7. the breakup of some constructs in clusters of naturally correlating variables (Fig. 1, uploaded) suggests that in crisis situations these may function differently than during 'business as usual', supporting the Strong Situation Hypothesis (see e.g. Meyer et al., 2010) and in line with Resnik and Dewaele (2021);  
8. participants' coping behaviour and attitudes were moderated by multilingualism operationalized as weighted proficiency in languages spoken. Although 'more polyglot' teachers found remote teaching harder than initially expected (r =.223), they demonstrated more stability in their lives (−.278) and instruction (−.373) and were more likely to believe that they would come out unscathed (.252). They felt their students were coping well (.302), and their classes were longer (.271). 
Subsequently, we shift attention to factors distinguishing better- and worse-coping language learners. We then compare the teacher and student subsamples side-by-side to see whether Extraversion similarly or differentially affected Anxiety in the two cohorts. A two-step cluster analysis, combining the hierarchical and k-means clustering algorithms, revealed that Extraversion influenced Anxiety only in the instructor cohort (t=6.02, p< .001, d=.28 [.16, .42]).
Time permitting, we will canvass the impact of other personality traits identified through EFA: among teachers Sociability, Self-compassion and appreciation, Patience, Competence, Organization, Emotional reactivity, Orientation onto others, Adaptability, Nonverbal expressiveness, and Reticence; among learners Organization, Adaptive Competence, Sociability, Self-compassion and Self-uncompassion.