SECOND LANGUAGE WRITING RESEARCH AND WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN SLA

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana R. Ferris

For more than a decade now, a great deal of research has been done on the topic of written corrective feedback (CF) in SLA and second language (L2) writing. Nonetheless, what those research efforts really have shown as well as the possible implications for practice remain in dispute. Although L2 writing and SLA researchers often examine similar phenomena in similar ways, they do not necessarily ask the same questions. SLA-focused researchers investigate whether written CF facilitates the acquisition of particular linguistic features. In contrast, L2 writing researchers generally emphasize the question of whether written CF helps student writers improve the overall effectiveness of their texts. Understanding these differences in starting points is important because it provides a possible explanation for the conflicting methodologies and conclusions of various reviews on this topic (e.g., Ferris, 2003, 2004; Truscott, 1996, 2007). This article briefly traces the history of these two parallel lines of research on written CF and notes both contrasts and convergences. It then moves to a focused discussion of the possible implications and applications of this body of work for the L2 language and writing classroom and for future research efforts.

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 308-322
Author(s):  
Omar Abdullah Altamimi ◽  
Mona Masood

The past two decades witnessed increased attention in the role of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) in improving the English as a second language(ESL) students’ written linguistic accuracy. Several methods were suggested, including the use of the electronic means of providing corrective feedback. The electronic methods proved to be effective despite the limited numbers and contexts. However, the extent of these studies is still unknown. Furthermore, no comprehensive review of the studies had been conducted to date. This systematic literature review will identify and classify the research on providing ESL teachers with Electronic Written Corrective Feedback (EWCF). A survey of several experimental and analytical studies that focused on testing the effect of different methods of EWCF on ESL students was conducted, covering the period between 2006 and 2020. Two major groups of studies emerged from this research, and several gaps were identified. The research concluded with several recommendations regarding the potential tracks for future research on EWCF. The current research will serve as a guideline for ESL writing practitioners and researchers on future teacher corrective feedback in second language writing.


2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-139
Author(s):  
Ehsan Abbaspour

Whether corrective feedback is effective in L2 writing has always been a controversial issue among Second Language Acquisition (SLA) scholars despite a vast body of research investigating the issue. This conflict is rooted in the fact that different researchers subscribe to different theories of SLA which are at times contradictory in nature. The present article reviews and investigates major SLA theories with respect to their views and stance toward the efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) and error correction in second language writing. Many of these theories do not address the role of corrective feedback explicitly or merely focus on the role of oral feedback. Polio (2012) and Bitchener and Ferris (2012) have partially investigated the issue at stake reviewing a number of SLA theories. In this study, however, attempt is made to shed light on the role of WCF especially in the theories which are not directly concerned with L2 writing.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omar Abdullah Altamimi ◽  
Mona Masood

The past two decades witnessed increased attention in the role of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) in improving the English as a second language(ESL) students’ written linguistic accuracy. Several methods were suggested, including the use of the electronic means of providing corrective feedback. The electronic methods proved to be effective despite the limited numbers and contexts. However, the extent of these studies is still unknown. Furthermore, no comprehensive review of the studies had been conducted to date. This systematic literature review will identify and classify the research on providing ESL teachers with Electronic Written Corrective Feedback (EWCF). A survey of several experimental and analytical studies that focused on testing the effect of different methods of EWCF on ESL students was conducted, covering the period between 2006 and 2020. Two major groups of studies emerged from this research, and several gaps were identified. The research concluded with several recommendations regarding the potential tracks for future research on EWCF. The current research will serve as a guideline for ESL writing practitioners and researchers on future teacher corrective feedback in second language writing.


2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman W. Evans ◽  
K. James Hartshorn ◽  
Emily Allen Tuioti

Considerable attention has been given to written corrective feedback (WCF) in second language writing (L2) over the past several decades. One of the central questions has focused on the appropriateness of its use in L2 writing. In these academic discussions, scholars frequently describe how WCF is utilized in the classroom. However, many of these claims of teacher practice have no research base, since few studies have actually asked teachers what place WCF has in their writing classroom (Ferris, et al., in press/2011a; Ferris, et al., in press/2011b; Hyland, 2003; Lee, 2004). This paucity of data from teachers about their WCF practices is problematic. Understanding teacher perspectives on corrective feedback is integral to our understanding the place of WCF in L2 writing pedagogy. Accordingly, this article reports on a study that asks two fundamental research questions: (a) To what extent do current L2 writing teachers provide WCF? and (b) What determines whether or not practitioners choose to provide WCF? These questions were answered by means of an international survey completed by 1,053 L2 writing practitioners in 69 different countries. Results suggest that WCF is commonly practiced in L2 pedagogy by experienced and well-educated L2 practitioners for sound pedagogical reasons.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-444
Author(s):  
Barry Lee Reynolds ◽  
Mark Feng Teng

The study examined the types of written corrective feedback given by second language writing teachers on Taiwanese secondary school students’ collocation errors. First, the written corrective feedback that teachers provided on learners’ word choice errors was examined to uncover the types of feedback provided. Then, analysis focused on verb–noun collocations to draw attention to how students had been receiving different types of written corrective feedback from teachers on a single collocation error type. Results showed that some sentences tagged as including word choice errors only contained rule-based errors. Furthermore, for verb-noun collocation errors, teachers chose to provide indirect and direct feedback almost equally at the expense of metalinguistic feedback. Based on the results, we suggested options for second language writing teachers when providing feedback on word choice errors.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kirsten Reid

<p>Students studying in university contexts often find learning to write English for academic purposes especially challenging. Some of the challenges reside in acquiring the necessary skills and strategies to be successful academic writers. A less tangible consideration which has received recent attention from first and second language writing researchers is the relationship between writing and identity. How do student writers become part of a situated community in which some discourses may be privileged over others? While all writing can be a potential site of struggle, this may have particular significance for second language students who bring their own unique backgrounds and literacy histories to their academic writing and may find becoming part of a new and heterogeneous discourse community profoundly unsettling. Using case study methods, this dissertation explores the experiences of four undergraduate students as they become academic writers in a second language. It also carries out an analysis of some of the linguistic features one particular student essay to examine how writers simultaneously construct their texts and are constructed by them.</p>


RELC Journal ◽  
2022 ◽  
pp. 003368822110729
Author(s):  
Zhenhao Cao ◽  
Zhicheng Mao

While a surge of research has investigated the use of reformulations and models as positive evidence feedback (PEF) in second language (L2) writing, so far no research synthesis seeking to review the status quo of this particular topic has been published. To fill the gap, the present study synthesized 23 studies on reformulations and models as PEF in L2 writing and examined the salient findings regarding three major research strands: (1) students’ noticing and incorporation from reformulations; (2) students’ noticing and incorporation from models; and (3) effects of PEF on L2 writing. Informed by the study findings, we suggest L2 teachers vary their feedback decisions with flexibility, consider individual and contextual factors in PEF practices, combine PEF and corrective feedback to maximize student learning, and provide guidance to support student actions in response to PEF. We also propose three areas for further research, namely going beyond linguistic issues to explore the potential of PEF, systematically investigating factors influencing students’ engagement with PEF, and collecting longitudinal data to examine the long-term effect of PEF. This study enhances our understanding of this emerging research area and provides implications for L2 pedagogy, as well as suggestions for future investigations.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 1629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ning Fan ◽  
Yingying Ma

This paper argues that corrective feedback is effective in improving L2 student writers’ written accuracy, and what educational researchers should be concerned with is not only if corrective feedback should be used in writing practice, but also how. Two studies are analyzed to argue that corrective feedback is beneficial for students’ writing performance, but some types of feedback can lead to writing development in some aspects, while can result in negative effects in others. Also, an interaction approach and the skill acquisition theory are used to provide theoretical framework to each of the two studies, and to back up the usefulness of corrective feedback. In addition, some of the argument about the ineffectiveness of corrective feedback is refuted empirically and theoretically to further prove its effectiveness in L2 writing practice.


2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona Hyland

This article provides an overview of the contributions made to this special issue on feedback by the seven papers, examining how they reflect both the growing interest in different areas of research into feedback on writing and the continuing search by teachers for more effective feedback practices. Focusing first on the papers by Van Beuningen, Storch, Evans, Hartshorn and Allen, it discusses how these papers situate written corrective feedback research in the wider area of second language acquisition research and contribute to the debate in feedback research on research design issues. This is followed by an examination of the major findings of the four situated empirical studies by Bitchener, Ma, El-ebyary and Windeatt, and Martinez and Roca, which make up the second section. Echoing the authors of these papers, this article argues that we need more longitudinal naturalistic studies, adopting both cognitive and socio-cultural SLA frameworks to investigate the role of feedback and its impact on individual learners in more depth. Finally some pedagogic implications are discussed, including the need for feedback practices which facilitate students’ abilities to self regulate and evaluate their performance, and the need to raise teachers’ awareness of the different feedback sources and modes of delivery available to them.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document