scholarly journals Student Writers’ Affective Engagement with Grammar-Centred Written Corrective Feedback: The Impact of (Mis)Aligned Practices and Perceptions

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-132
Author(s):  
Hooman Saeli ◽  
An Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Affective Engagement ◽  
Context Analysis ◽  
Student Writers ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Grammatical Accuracy ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
High Regard ◽  
Student Identities ◽  
The Impact

This project firstly explored Iranian English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ perceptions about written corrective feedback (WCF)-related practices and preferences. Secondly, the student participants’ first language (L1; e.g., Farsi) learner identities were operationalized, especially focusing on the skill of writing, WCF, and grammar-centred WCF. Thirdly, the students’ affective engagement with WCF was scrutinized, particularly in light of L1 student identities. The participants in the study were 15 students in an Iranian EFL context. Analysis of interview data revealed that the skill of writing was held in low regard by the students. Also, several discrepancies emerged vis-à-vis WCF methods (e.g., direct vs. coded), error correctors (e.g., teacher feedback vs. peer feedback), the amount of correction (e.g., selective vs. comprehensive correction), and the relative importance of different components of writing (e.g., grammar vs. content vs. organization). In particular, the findings showed that the students’ L1 identities involved low regard for writing, but high regard for speaking skills, and that they attached high value to grammatical accuracy and teacher explicit feedback. Finally, the findings indicated that: (a) the students’ second language (L2) identities (e.g., WCF-related preferences) were profoundly affected by their L1 student identities, and (b) the discrepancies between the students’ L2 writing preferences (e.g., preferred amount of WCF) and the teachers’ reported practices could potentially hinder students’ affective engagement with WCF.

scholarly journals The Impact of Teacher Corrective Feedback on EFL Student Writers’ Grammatical Improvement

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Kanyakorn Sermsook ◽  
Jiraporn Liamnimitr ◽  
Rattaneekorn Pochakorn
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Student Writers ◽  
Writing Improvement ◽  
English Writing ◽  
Writing Class ◽  
Grammatical Errors ◽  
Teachers And Students ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
The Impact

This paper aims to provide information about teacher corrective feedback that would be helpful for EFL students’ writing improvement. It focuses on feedback provided to correct grammatical errors made by student writers as the author finds that this type of errors can obstruct the effectiveness of students’ pieces of writing and may result in written miscommunication. Both direct and indirect teacher feedback types are discussed. Some pedagogical suggestions have been made based on the findings. It is hoped that this review article can help teachers and students in a writing class achieve the goal of producing grammatically correct English writing assignments.

scholarly journals WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN WRITING SKILL: A BRIEF REVIEW

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 209
Author(s):  
Setiyowati Setiyowati ◽  
Hanna Sundari
Keyword(s):  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Treatment Length ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Grammatical Errors ◽  
Efl Teachers ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
Analysis Design ◽  
Review Study

<p>The study presented here includes collectively selected research papers that emphasize written corrective feedback, particularly Direct Written Corrective Feedback and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback. Writing is considered the most challenging task for students because writing needs the student's creativity to form ideas of their minds into a form of a text. Some difficulties that EFL students in writing usually find are the lack of the knowledge to choose the appropriate vocabulary, and they also have some problems in grammar and syntax. To overcome these, Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) has been used widely to show students grammatical errors in EFL students' writing works and help EFL students minimize their errors. The Written Corrective Feedback also shows students' performance in enhancing their writing accuracy. Five selected research papers have been selected to give some enlightenment about the effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback. The feedback was given by EFL teachers and lecturers who teach in Indonesia, China, Iran, Malaysia, and Thailand. The method that is used in this literature review study is thematic analysis design. These are divided into five themes. The themes are Participants, Treatment, The Treatment Length, Instruments and Writing Prompt, and The Effectiveness of The Written Corrective Feedback. The findings reveal various results in the use of Direct Written Corrective Feedback and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback.</p>

The impact of one’s response to the teacher’s feedback on the same person’s and the partner’s learning in paired writing

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taichi Yamashita
Keyword(s):  
Collaborative Writing ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Posttest Score ◽  
Esl Students ◽  
American University ◽  
Google Docs ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Description Task ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract The present study investigated the relationship between one dyad member’s revision in response to written corrective feedback (CF) and the same person’s learning and the other dyad member’s learning during collaborative writing. Twenty-eight English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) students at an American university were paired up and collaborated on two animation description tasks in Google Docs while receiving the researcher’s written CF on their errors on the indefinite and definite articles. Learners worked individually on an animation description task one week prior to the written CF treatment (pretest), immediately after the treatment (posttest), and two weeks after (delayed posttest). When pretest score and CF frequency were controlled for, the number of one’s revisions was not related to the same person’s or the partner’s posttest score. However, the number of one’s revisions was significantly positively related to the same learner’s delayed posttest score, but not to the partner’s delayed posttest score.

The relative effects of metalinguistic explanation and direct written corrective feedback on children’s grammatical accuracy in new writing

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Gorman ◽  
Rod Ellis
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Present Perfect ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Grammatical Accuracy ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Metalinguistic Knowledge ◽  
Group 1

Abstract There has been little research investigating the effects of form-focused instruction (FFI) on the second language acquisition of children. This article reports a quasi-experimental study of integrated form-focused instruction for 33 children aged 9–12 years. They completed four dictogloss tasks designed to elicit the use of the Present Perfect Tense and received instruction consisting of either explicit metalinguistic explanation (group 1), direct written correction (group 2) or no form-focused instruction (the comparison group) between performing the tasks. Accuracy in the production of the target structure across the four tasks was variable and showed no improvement from the first to the last. Nor were there any statistically significant differences in accuracy among the three groups. The results support some earlier studies of young children (e.g. Fazio, 2001) that have failed to show that FFI benefits young children. This may be because children fail to make use of their metalinguistic knowledge of grammatical features when undertaking meaning-focused writing tasks.

The effectiveness of written corrective feedback and the impact Lao learners’ beliefs have on uptake

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Rummel ◽  
John Bitchener
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Feedback Preferences ◽  
The Impact

This article presents the results of a study examining the effectiveness of written corrective feedback (CF) on the simple past tense and the impact beliefs may have on students’ uptake of the feedback they receive. A seven-week study was carried out with 42 advanced EFL learners in Vientiane, Laos. Students’ beliefs about written CF were first collected, after which they were assigned to either the control group or to groups that received written CF according to their feedback preferences. Students produced four pieces of writing (pre-test, post-test and two delayed post-tests) that responded to four different narrative prompts. The targeted grammatical feature was the simple past tense. The study found that the three feedback groups showed significant improvement in the use of the targeted feature while the control group did not. Furthermore, the results seemed to indicate that beliefs might have impacted on the extent to which the Lao students improved their linguistic accuracy because the students who received their preferred type of feedback were more successful at eliminating the targeted errors than the ones who did not.

scholarly journals Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback among Graduate Students: The Effects of Feedback Timing

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 78-102
Author(s):  
Grant Eckstein ◽  
Maureen Sims ◽  
Lisa Rohm
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Student Writing ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Feedback Timing ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Grammatical Accuracy ◽  
Premier Cycle ◽  
College Writers ◽  
Effects Of Feedback

Dynamic written corrective feedback (DWCF) is a pedagogical approach that offer meaningful, manageable, constant, and timely corrective feedback on student writing (Hartshorn et al., 2010). It emphasizes indirect and comprehensive writte error correction on short, daily writing assignments. Numerous studies have demonstrated that its use can lead to fewer language errors among undergraduate and pre-matriculated college writers (see Kurzer, 2018). However, the benefits of DWCF among second language (L2) graduate writers and the role of feedback timing have not been well examined. We analyzed timed writing samples over a 12-week intervention from 22 L2 graduate students who either received biweekly feedback on their writing throughout a semester, or postponed feedback until the last two weeks of the semester. Writing was analyzed for grammatical errors, lexical and syntactic complexity, and fluency. Results showed that neither timely nor postponed feedback led to significant improvement in grammatical accuracy or lexical complexity, but timely feedback did result in more fluent and complex writing. These findings suggest that the timing of feedback may be trivial for accuracy development but is more important for complexity among graduate writers. Teachers, teacher trainers, and writing administrators may use these insights as they plan curricula and design grammar and writing interventions. La rétroaction corrective écrite dynamique (RCED) est une approche pédagogique qui propose une rétroaction significative, gérable, constante et opportune sur les rédactions des étudiants (Hartshorn et al. 2010). Elle insiste sur la correction complète et indirecte d’erreurs dans de courts devoirs de rédaction quotidiens. De nombreuses études ont démontré que son utilisation peut amener les rédacteurs de premier cycle ou pré-inscrits au collège à faire moins d’erreurs de langue (voir Kurzer, 2018). Cependant, les avantages de la RCED chez les rédacteurs diplômés de seconde langue (L2) et le rôle joué par l’opportunité de la rétroaction n’ont pas été bien étudiés. Nous avons analysé des échantillons de rédaction écrites en temps limité sur une période d’intervention de 12 semaines chez 22 étudiants diplômés de L2 qui recevaient de la rétroaction deux fois par semaine sur leurs rédactions pendant la durée du semestre, ou une rétroaction différée jusqu’à deux semaines avant la fin du semestre. Les rédactions ont été analysées pour découvrir les erreurs grammaticales, la complexité lexicale et syntaxique, ainsi que la fluidité Les résultats ont montré que ni la rétroaction opportune, ni la rétraction différé ne se traduisaient par une amélioration marquée de la précision grammaticale ou de la complexité lexicale, mais la rétroaction opportune menait à une rédaction plus fluide et plus complexe. Ces résultats suggèrent que l’opportunité de la rétroaction peut ne pas beaucoup influer sur le développement de la précision, mais s’avère plus importante pour la complexité chez les rédacteurs diplômés. Les enseignants, les formateurs d’enseignants et les administrateurs de programmes de rédaction peuvent se servir de ces résultats lorsqu’ils planifient les programmes et conçoivent les interventions en grammaire et en rédaction.

scholarly journals Oral Corrective Feedback on Pronunciation Errors: The Mediating Effects of Learners’ Engagement with Feedback

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 68
Author(s):  
Hooman Saeli ◽  
Payam Rahmati ◽  
Mohammadreza Dalman
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Cognitive Strategies ◽  
Cognitive Engagement ◽  
Effective Communication ◽  
Affective Engagement ◽  
Mediating Effects ◽  
Oral Corrective Feedback ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
Positive Engagement

This study examined low-proficiency Iranian EFL students’ affective, behavioral, and cognitive engagement with oral corrective feedback (OCF) on interdental fricative errors: /θ/and/ð/. The data were collected from 27 learners with favorable and unfavorable perceptions about OCF. After receiving OCF on 30 tested and 30 untested lexical items in tutoring sessions, the participants took a posttest. The analysis of the data showed that the learners with positive perceptions about OCF had significantly higher accuracy gains, as shown by their posttest results. The interviews showed that the learners’ positive perceptions about OCF had positive affective engagement. Also, the learners who perceived pronunciation accuracy as an important component of their language development showed positive patterns of affective engagement with OCF. Additionally, the learners who affectively engaged with direct OCF positively tended to show positive behavioral and cognitive engagement with feedback. These learners reviewed the provided OCF and practiced the correction by employing an array of cognitive strategies (e.g., repetition). Overall, our findings show that positive engagement with feedback can result in higher pronunciation accuracy gains. Therefore, teachers should familiarize themselves with their students’ perceptions about feedback on their pronunciation errors, since these perceptions may impact the way students engage with feedback affectively, behaviorally, and cognitively. For instance, students who value pronunciation accuracy may be more likely to positively engage with feedback on pronunciation errors, while students who emphasize effective communication may negatively engage with such feedback.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document