scholarly journals Taiwanese Student Attitudes Towards Error Correction and Written Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing Classes

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Berg ◽  
Yichen Lu
Keyword(s):  
Error Correction ◽  
Student Attitudes ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Writing Teachers ◽  
Writing Classes ◽  
Efl Writing ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Writing Students

<p>Error correction and corrective feedback in L2 writing has long been an important issue for EFL teachers and researchers, as well as EFL students. This study aimed to examine a population of Taiwanese EFL writing students to assess their attitudes and preferences for corrective feedback in their English writing. This study utilized a 31-question self-report survey to gather data from 79 EFL writing students. Results indicate that most students felt it was very important for the teacher to provide comprehensive direct or indirect coded feedback on all types of errors, but mostly on grammatical errors. The findings hold important implications for EFL writing teachers in Taiwan. EFL writing teachers should have open dialogues with their students in order to determine the most beneficial form of feedback for each class.</p>

scholarly journals Written Corrective Feedback: The Practitioners’ Perspective

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman W. Evans ◽  
K. James Hartshorn ◽  
Emily Allen Tuioti
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Writing ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Writing Pedagogy ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Writing Classroom ◽  
Writing Teachers ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
Fundamental Research ◽  
Research Questions

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.

scholarly journals EFL Writing Students’ Responses towards Teacher Feedback to Enhance Their Writing Quality

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Listyani Listyani
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Teacher Feedback ◽  
Writing Quality ◽  
Writing Classes ◽  
Efl Writing ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Writing Students

This study deals with seventy-six students’ feelings and perceptions on the teacher feedback that they received from their writing classes. Teacher feedback is sometimes seen as something unwanted, sickening, and even frustrating. Some students do not like getting feedback from their teachers as they think that the feedback corners them, pinpointing their weaknesses and errors. This makes them full of stress and have greater anxiety. Those aspects may be the negative sides of feedback that some students perceive. As a matter of fact, if learners are willing to look deeper into the benefits of feedback that teachers give, especially in writing, they will not feel the negative sides of feedback. Instead, they will crave and wait for it. The purpose of this study is to reveal the perceptions of 76 EFL learners’ reactions towards teacher feedback that they received in their writing classes. The results of the study hopefully can inspire writing lecturers to give supportive corrective feedback, so that EFL learners’ writing can be improved.

The role of task repetition with direct written corrective feedback in L2 writing complexity, accuracy and fluency

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sima Khezrlou
Keyword(s):  
Error Correction ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Task Repetition ◽  
Linguistic Form ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Initial Task ◽  
Writing Complexity

Abstract This study explored whether the effects of task repetition in drawing learners’ attention to linguistic form could be reinforced through the provision of two types of unfocused direct written corrective feedback. Fifty-seven learners formed three conditions: (1) task repetition with no feedback (TR, control), (2) task repetition with error correction (TR+EC), and (3) task repetition with reformulation (TR+R). All groups repeated an identical writing narrative task but only the experimental groups received feedback after their initial task performance. All participants were then asked to complete a new task of the same type followed by a new task of a different type. Performance was gauged by multiple measures of complexity, accuracy and fluency. Results revealed the persistent superiority of the TR+EC condition on all measures of accuracy while the TR+R condition led to immediate written complexity improvement regarding subordination. Furthermore, both the TR+R and TR conditions resulted in delayed fluency gains.

scholarly journals Critical Feedback on Written Corrective Feedback Research

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neomy Storch
Keyword(s):  
Research Agenda ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Restricted Range ◽  
Writing Teachers ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Large Growth ◽  
Critical Feedback ◽  
Research Findings

Recently we have witnessed a large growth in research on written corrective feedback (WCF). However, the question posed here is: are researchers and L2 writing teachers now any wiser about the efficacy of WCF? I begin with a summary of early studies and some of their major shortcomings. I then examine more recent studies and conclude that, although many of the shortcomings of earlier research have been largely addressed, research findings are still inconclusive. I argue that currently, in the desire to conduct more robust research, the pendulum has swung too far towards experimental studies. Such studies tend to employ ‘one off’ treatments, often provided on a very restricted range of errors, and ignore the learners’ goals and attitudes to the feedback provided and to improvement in accuracy. I conclude by suggesting directions for a more meaningful and ecological valid research agenda on written corrective feedback.

scholarly journals Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences of University Students in English Communication Classes

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
Hulya Unsal Sakiroglu
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Error Correction ◽  
Student Attitudes ◽  
Elevated Level ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Language Competence ◽  
Oral Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Exposure ◽  
Feedback Preferences

The ultimate goal of teaching foreign language is to achieve an elevated level of language competence via providing maximum language exposure and minimum learner mistakes. To fulfill the goal, many strategies have been developed. One of the strategies is the provision of feedback during the formal speaking courses. Nevertheless, format of the oral corrective feedback in English as a foreign language (EFL) classes has been controversial regarding methods of correction, timing of correction and target errors. Moreover, learner attitudes toward correction are deemed to be an important component. In this study, the aim was to investigate how and when the error correction should take place in EFL communicative classes based on students’ perspectives. A total of 65 students at Kafkas University who were pre-intermediate and intermediate levels were interviewed using a self-report questionnaire, 14 of which were discarded due to irrelevant and redundant replies. The results revealed that 90% of the learners would like to be corrected when they had errors during the process of speaking English. Majority of the students indicated the preference to be corrected after finishing turn with nice and friendly manners. The results indicated that teachers should be aware of student attitudes toward oral corrective feedback.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Correcting Grammatical Errors in Writing Classes: An EFL Teacher’s Perspective

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 227-237
Author(s):  
Hye-Kyung Kim
Keyword(s):  
Error Correction ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Teaching Writing ◽  
Grammar Instruction ◽  
Writing Classes ◽  
Efl Writing ◽  
Grammar Correction ◽  
Grammatical Errors ◽  
Teacher's Perspective

The role of grammar instruction to help students reduce errors in L2 writing is under debate: Truscott (1996, 1999, 2007) claims that error correction is largely ineffective and harmful, whereas Ferris (1997, 1999, 2004) argues that students need feedback on their grammatical errors. Grammar correction is considered to be one of the most important forms of feedback. This paper examines the role of grammar correction in L2 writing on the basis of these controversies and discusses some pedagogical implications of error correction for teaching writing, with particular reference to my own experience of teaching EFL writing classes in South Korea.

Scaffolding student engagement with written corrective feedback: Transforming feedback sessions into learning affordances

2021 ◽  
pp. 136216882110409
Author(s):  
Chi-Duc Nguyen
Keyword(s):  
Student Engagement ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Error Correction ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Attentional Focus ◽  
Assessment Practice ◽  
Writing Conference ◽  
Teacher Student ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Future Learning

This study proposed a three-step writing conference in which foreign/second language (L2) students, under the guidance of their writing instructor, first fastened their attentional focus on a form-related error, analysed a collection of standard L2 samples to deduce the underlying knowledge, and then planned for their error correction as well as future learning of this knowledge. The ultimate goal of this formative assessment practice was to scaffold student engagement with written corrective feedback (WCF). Using a between-group experiment design, the present study compared the effects on the success rate of error correction and L2 uptake of the above writing conference ( n = 14) against those brought about by a typical Teacher–Student ( n = 12) and a typical Student–Student one ( n = 12). Research participants were 38 intermediate learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) recruited from three intact classes at a language-learning center in Vietnam. The suggested writing conference was indeed found to yield better error correction and L2 uptake than the other counterparts. A closer look at the students’ mental engagement with WCF revealed that such engagement was moderately correlated with their L2 uptake. These findings altogether suggest that student engagement with WCF should not be taken for granted or, in other words, this engagement should be contingently supported by the writing instructor in order to foster learning from WCF.

scholarly journals The Role of Written Corrective Feedback in Developing Writing in L2

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-98
Author(s):  
Gabrijela Petra Nagode ◽  
Karmen Pižorn ◽  
Mojca Juriševič
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Educational Background ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Young Learners ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Sociocultural Perspectives ◽  
History Of ◽  
Giving Feedback ◽  
Cognitive Perspectives

Feedback plays an important role in developing L2 writing in young learners. The article provides a brief overview of the history of giving feedback and of some contemporary views within this field. Special attention is paid to cognitive perspectives, such as the influence of written corrective feedback on shortterm memory, the influence of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback on error correction, the influence of written corrective feedback on a particular category of error, the influence of direct and indirect written corrective feedback and combinations of various types of written corrective feedback, and the influence of educational background and L2 learning background on the effectiveness of written corrective feedback in terms of sociocultural perspectives. The main aim of the article is to present readers (especially teachers) with the variety of aspects of giving written corrective feedback in developing L2 writing and thus in enabling young learners to develop their L2 writing skills more effectively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document