scholarly journals STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHERS’ WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN THE MALAYSIAN ESL CLASSROOM

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (Number 2) ◽  
pp. 103-136
Author(s):  
Malini N. G. Ganapathy ◽  
Debbita Tan Ai Lin ◽  
Jonathan Phan

Purpose – This study examined the types of written corrective feedback provided to ESL students in writing classes in Malaysian secondary schools, and their perceptions towards the provision of written corrective feedback in the Malaysian context. Methodology – A survey questionnaire was administered randomly among 720 Form Four students from 10 secondary schools in Penang. The questionnaire was based on a Likert scale and responses were analysed using descriptive statistics. Findings – Results showed that most learners benefited from and preferred direct feedback, and tended to focus on form such as grammar, paragraph organisation, content and clarity of ideas. Students preferred this form of feedback as they were able to understand errors more clearly. It was found that most students were unable to self-regulate their own errors; a majority could not locate their own errors and had become passive learners within the Malaysian schooling system. Significance – The study is significant to Malaysian secondary schools in its effects, depicting the many forms of corrective feedback available in the ESL context that can be employed in school besides the popularized direct feedback used within the syllabus.

There has been an ongoing debate about the value of providing corrective feedback in writing assignments in English as a foreign/second language classes. Despite the fact, corrective feedback in writing has been analyzed from various perspectives, learners’ expectations regarding feedback given by language instructors are still to be considered. This paper investigates the types of written feedback preferred by the Malaysian students. This study investigated how language learners perceive the usefulness of different types and amounts of written corrective feedback, and also the reasons they have for their preferences. Qualitative and quantitative data was collected from 103 ESL students by means of computer generated written questionnaires. The results showed that Malaysian learners react in favor of direct feedback to their written work, and yet they show little tolerance for simply marking the error without explanation. Moreover, considerable number of the respondents favored indirect corrective feedback with a clue. Possible explanations for the results were given with reference to the theoretical constructs of SLA.


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 702-726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Benson ◽  
Robert DeKeyser

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled Karim ◽  
Hossein Nassaji

This study investigated the short-term and delayed effects of comprehensive written corrective feedback (WCF) on L2 learners’ revision accuracy and new pieces of writing (i.e., the transfer effect of feedback). Three types of feedback were compared: direct feedback and two types of indirect feedback that differed in their degree of explicitness (i.e., underlining only and underlining+metalinguistic cues). Fifty-three intermediate level learners of English as a second language (ESL) were divided randomly into four groups: One direct, two indirect, and a control group. Students produced three pieces of writing from different picture prompts and revised them over a three-week period. Each group also produced a new piece of writing two weeks later. The study included seven sessions: Writing 1, revision of Writing 1, Writing 2, revision of Writing 2, Writing 3, revision of Writing 3, and Writing 4 (delayed writing). The results showed that all the three feedback groups significantly outperformed the control group in revision tasks. Some short-term accuracy improvements were also found on new pieces of writing for direct and underlining+metalinguistic feedback, but the effects were largely non-significant.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (28) ◽  
pp. 361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamed A. Alhumidi ◽  
Sani Yantandu Uba

This study investigates the effect of indirect written corrective feedback to Arabic intermediate students in Kuwait. There are 20 participants altogether in this study, ten male and ten female. They each wrote two assignments on the same topic. No feedback was received on the first assignment, and the second was conducted after indirect feedback was offered to them on the first task. The results show that indirect feedback is effective in improving their writing and language skills. The results also indicated a higher number of spelling errors than any other errors. The findings of this study suggest some teaching implications which include raising students’ awareness of the need to avoid many writing errors. Teachers should not correct all students’ errors, but should only correct those errors which are deemed necessary to correct. Teachers should also focus their attention on teaching and learning tasks, which concentrate on indirect written feedback rather than direct feedback. Again, as the leaners seem to have more problems with spelling errors rather than any other errors, teachers should devise strategies which concentrate on improving such errors, and writing correct words. This study advocates a large scale of studies which cover the wider context of Kuwaiti intermediate students.


Author(s):  
Taichi Yamashita

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.


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 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 103-117
Author(s):  
Rizgar Qasim Mahmood

Written Corrective Feedback has been one of the most controversial topics (Waller, 2015), and it has been researched extensively. Still, the lack of research among Kurdish EFL learners made it necessary to conduct the current research. This study focuses on investigating learners’ perceptions of written corrective feedback and its types. It attempts to answer what the Kurdish EFL learners’ perceptions of written corrective feedback are, and what types of written corrective feedback among Kurdish Learners are preferred. Answering these questions is significant as the results can be used by both teachers and learners to improve learners’ writing accuracy. A survey questionnaire was distributed to collect data. After analyzing data, the results reveal that most Kurdish EFL participants were not fully aware of WCF and its effectiveness as a learning tool. However, they still expected their writing teachers to provide them with WCF in writing tasks. Also, the results indicate that Kurdish EFL learners preferred two types of WCF: explicit and implicit WCF. Hence, the results have many pedagogical implications for writing teachers and learners. Firstly, it shows how EFL learners from other countries and contexts perceive WCF, and secondly, results encourage writing teachers to give more attention and value to WCF.


Author(s):  
Laurie Miller ◽  
Anna Sophia Habib ◽  
Paul Michiels

With Mason’s increasing population of multilingual students, faculty in writing intensive courses at the undergraduate and graduate level are often looking for innovative, efficient approaches to providing feedback on student writing.This session will provide an overview of dynamic written corrective feedback (Hartshorn et. al, 2010; Ferris,1999), a strategy that allows faculty to look past errors in accuracy by prioritizing attention to student efforts towards complexity. We use this model in English composition classes to help multilingual students become more reflective, self-reliant writers in terms of their idea development, critical analysis and language accuracy. During the session composition and language faculty from INTO-Mason’s undergraduate and graduate program will explain the research behind the technique, provide examples of this feedback approach and engage participants in a discussion of its potential use in their classes.  This method can be used to support all students across a variety of disciplines that require writing assignments. References:Ferris, D. (1999). The case of grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11.Hartshorn, K. J., Evans, N. W., Merrill, P. F., Sudweeks, R. R., Strong-Krause, D., & Anderson, N. J. (2010). Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 84–109. 


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document