Direct Written Corrective Feedback, Learner Differences, and the Acquisition of Second Language Article Use for Generic and Specific Plural Reference

2015 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHARIS STEFANOU ◽  
ANDREA RÉVÉSZ
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Plural Reference ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Learner Differences

Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 702-726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Benson ◽  
Robert DeKeyser
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Feedback Group ◽  
Writing Classes ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Metalinguistic Feedback ◽  
Learner Differences ◽  
Direct Feedback

Most second language researchers agree that there is a role for corrective feedback in second language writing classes. However, many unanswered questions remain concerning the linguistic features to target and the type and amount of feedback to offer. This study examined essays by 151 learners of English as a second language (ESL), in order to investigate the effect of either direct or metalinguistic written feedback on errors with the simple past tense and the present perfect tense. This inquiry also considered the extent to which learner differences in language-analytic ability (LAA), as measured by the LLAMA F, mediated the effects of these two types of explicit written corrective feedback. Learners in both feedback groups were provided with corrective feedback on two essays whereas the control group received general comments on content. Learners in all three groups then completed two additional writing tasks to determine whether or not the provision of corrective feedback led to greater gains in accuracy compared to no feedback. Both treatment groups performed better than the comparison group on new pieces of writing immediately following the treatment sessions, yet direct feedback was more durable than metalinguistic feedback for one structure, the simple past tense. Participants with greater LAA proved more likely to achieve gains in the direct feedback group than in the metalinguistic group, whereas learners with lower LAA benefited more from metalinguistic feedback.

Individual and collaborative processing of written corrective feedback affects second language writing accuracy and revision

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 100566
Author(s):  
Syed Muhammad Mujtaba ◽  
Barry Lee Reynolds ◽  
Rakesh Parkash ◽  
Manjet Kaur Mehar Singh
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Writing ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
Collaborative Processing ◽  
Writing Accuracy

The Effects of Written Corrective Feedback on Chinese EFL Learners’ Acquisition of English Collocations

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting Wang ◽  
Lin Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Choice Test ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Facilitative Role

AbstractThe role of written corrective feedback (CF) in the process of acquiring a second language (L2) has been an issue of considerable controversies over past decades. This study thus endeavors to extend current work on written CF by investigating and comparing the effect on collocation learning of one traditional type of feedback—direct corrective feedback (DCF)—with an innovative type of error correction, feedback provided within context—situated feedback (SF). The effects of the two types of written feedback were measured by examining the accurate use of target collocations in a translation test and a multiple choice test completed by 73 intermediate EFL students in China. Three groups were formed: a DCF group, an SF group, and a control group. The study found that both treatment groups outperformed the control group in the posttests and delayed posttests and that there were significant advantages of the SF group in comparison to the DCF group in both posttests. The results suggested that the provision of written CF was helpful for collocation learning and that situational context could promote the facilitative role of written CF in language acquisition. These findings are discussed from the perspectives of both second language acquisition (SLA) theory and language pedagogy and implications for future research efforts are put forward.

scholarly journals Innovating teacher feedback with writing activities aimed at raising secondary school students’ awareness of collocation errors

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-444
Author(s):  
Barry Lee Reynolds ◽  
Mark Feng Teng
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Secondary School ◽  
Secondary School Students ◽  
Second Language Writing ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Word Choice ◽  
Writing Teachers ◽  
School Students ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Writing

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.

scholarly journals Teacher Electronic Written Corrective Feedback, Trends and Future Directions

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 308-322
Author(s):  
Omar Abdullah Altamimi ◽  
Mona Masood
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Writing ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Esl Students ◽  
Esl Writing ◽  
Esl Teachers ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Writing

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.

scholarly journals Understanding Written Corrective Feedback in Second-Language Grammar Acquisition

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 259
Author(s):  
Jason Paul Wagner ◽  
Douglas J. Wulf
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Skill Acquisition ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Positive Change ◽  
Choice Test ◽  
Grammatical Competence ◽  
Grammar Acquisition ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Correct Usage

<p>Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) is used extensively in second-language (L2) writing classrooms despite controversy over its effectiveness. This study examines indirect WCF, an instructional procedure that flags L2 students’ errors with editing symbols that guide their corrections. WCF practitioners assume that this guidance will lead to increased grammatical competence over time in new writing samples. This study finds that these assumptions are correct overall. However, in-depth analyses of L2-English learners’ correction behaviors in four elicitation tasks over a 12-week period demonstrate that WCF is not uniformly effective at increasing accuracy for all grammatical constructions. In fact, WCF fails to exert any positive effect with a number of grammatical constructions. This result can be understood via Skill Acquisition Theory (SAT) when the treatability of constructions with WCF is considered. Specifically, grammatical constructions that include only a binary option for correct usage are highly amenable to positive change via WCF since employing WCF is akin to correcting errors flagged on a true/false test. By contrast, grammatical constructions with more than a binary choice for correct usage, akin to correcting errors flagged on a multiple-choice test, are not amenable to positive change.</p>

SECOND LANGUAGE WRITING RESEARCH AND WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN SLA

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana R. Ferris
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Writing ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Student Writers ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
History Of

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.

Learning Korean honorifics through individual and collaborative writing tasks and written corrective feedback

2019 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyejin Cho ◽  
YouJin Kim
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Collaborative Writing ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Collaborative Group ◽  
Individual Group ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractTo date, the majority of task-based instructed second language acquisition studies have investigated the effects of tasks on second language morphosyntactic development, and little attention has been paid to the effectiveness of dialogic tasks on the learning of pragmatics in classroom contexts (Plonsky, L. & Y. Kim. 2016. Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 36. 73–97). The present study is a partial replication study of Taguchi and Kim (2016. Collaborative dialogue in learning pragmatics: Pragmatic-related episodes as an opportunity for learning request-making. Applied Linguistics 37. 416–437) and aims to compare learning outcomes between collaborative and individual task groups while written corrective feedback is provided.Thirty-two high beginner learners of Korean from two classes participated in this study. Each class was randomly assigned to either a collaborative or an individual group to complete e-mail writing tasks. In the collaborative group, students wrote e-mails with a partner, whereas the individual group wrote e-mails independently to introduce their professors during study abroad using four types of Korean honorifics. Both groups received indirect corrective feedback on honorifics used during task performance. Written description tests (WDT) were designed to investigate the short-term and long-term learning of Korean honorifics in line with the instructional tasks. Students’ responses on the WDT were analyzed in terms of the number of suppliance and accurate production of each target feature. Students’ responses to teacher feedback were analyzed using the following categories: resolved correctly, resolved incorrectly, and unresolved.The results showed that there was no significant difference in the production of target features during task performance when indirect WCF was provided to both conditions. Furthermore, both groups significantly outperformed in the immediate and delayed posttest than the pretest. However, the results found no difference in learning of Korean honorifics between the two groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document