scholarly journals EFL Students' Preferences Towards Written Corrective Feedback: An Exploratory Study on Age and Level of Proficiency

Author(s):  
Sara Orts ◽  
Patricia Salazar

Corrective feedback (CF, henceforth) has been an issue of investigation in second language acquisition for a number of years now. In the English-as-a-foreign-language classroom, students may have different preferences towards how to have their errors corrected. Research has shown that differences in the learning styles of the students will affect the learning environment by either supporting or inhibiting their intentional cognition and active engagement. In the classroom, teachers can use this information as a tool to motivate students and help them improve in their learning process. This exploratory study was carried out to analyse students’ preferences towards written correction in two different groups at a high school in Spain. Students filled out a questionnaire and results were analysed in order to determine whether age and level of English may be factors affecting their preferences for error correction.

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 669-685
Author(s):  
Parivash Jamali Kivi ◽  
Ronald M. Hernández ◽  
Jorge Luis Escalante Flores ◽  
Doris Fuster-Guillén

This study aimed at finding the correlation between Iranian and Turkish EFL learners’ cognitive styles and their preferences for different WCF types. Sixty out of seventy-five EFL students at the intermediate level in two contexts (Iran and Turkey) were selected through the Oxford Placement Test. There were two instruments in this research: The Learning Styles Questionnaire, and CF questionnaire. The researcher gave detailed instructions on how to complete the surveys. The findings demonstrated that there was a correlation between EFL students’ cognitive styles and their WCF preferences in both Iran and Turkey contexts. The second research question results indicated that there was a relationship between learners’ cognitive styles and their preferences for different types of errors to be corrected. The results of the third research question showed that the correlation between Iranian students’ cognitive styles and their preferences for different CF frequencies was not significant. The last research question results showed that the correlation between Turkish students’ cognitive styles and their preferences for different CF frequencies was not significant.   Keywords: Cognitive Styles – EFL Learners – Preferences – Written Corrective Feedback.


2013 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constanza Tolosa ◽  
Martin East ◽  
Helen Villers

This study contributes to the body of research that aims to understandthe relationship between online communication and foreign language(FL) learning, in particular when teachers seek to provide authenticopportunities for interaction for their learners. The study wasmotivated by efforts made in the New Zealand context to overcome thegeographic limitations of interaction between FL learners and nativespeakers. We report on the findings of an exploratory study into anonline reciprocal peer tutoring program established to enhance the FLlearning of a group of beginner eleven-year old students of Spanish,with particular focus on the benefits of written corrective feedback. Theproject aimed to examine the processes by which students tutored eachother in the online environment as they responded to each other’s texts.The analysis of the students’ messages focused on (1) the aspects oflanguage corrected by the tutors, (2) the frequency with which tutorsaccurately identified and provided input on errors, (3) the types offeedback provided by the tutors, and (4) what the learners did with thecorrections and feedback. The findings indicate that the students werewilling to contribute to peer correction and used different strategiesand correction techniques to foster attention to linguistic form,although they were not always capable of providing accurate feedbackor metalinguistic explanations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 209
Author(s):  
Setiyowati Setiyowati ◽  
Hanna Sundari

<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>


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Gorman ◽  
Rod Ellis

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting Wang ◽  
Lin Jiang

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.


Author(s):  
Nahla Al-Hazzani ◽  
Sultan Altalhab

Saudi students encounter many problems in writing skill as several studies revealed (e.g. Alhazmi, 2006; Alsamdani, 2010). Providing effective and useful feedback may help to overcome these challenges. Therefore, this study examines the effect of teachers’ written corrective feedback on female Saudi EFL students’ written essays and to what extent it affects students’ written grammatical and lexical accuracy. The sample comprises 50 foundation level students, across two groups: an experimental group (n=29) and a control group (n=21). Data were gathered over a 10-week period using a pre-/post-test/delayed post-test design for comparable groups. The findings show that although many errors were made in the writing performances, the students in the experimental group had significantly better achievements than the students in the control group on the measure. The results lend support to the efficiency of teachers’ written corrective feedback, showing it has a significant positive effect on the participants’ grammatical and lexical accuracy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-132
Author(s):  
Hooman Saeli ◽  
An Cheng

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document