Asynchronous Online Peer Written Corrective Feedback

2015 ◽  
pp. 271-297
Author(s):  
Shahin Vaezi ◽  
Ehsan Abbaspour
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Writing Achievement ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Significant Difference

The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether there is any statistically significant difference between the effects of asynchronous online peer WCF through blogging and face-to-face peer WCF on the writing achievement of Iranian EFL learners. The study also investigated the extent to which students revise their writings based on peer comments provided. This study also measured the attitude of students towards peer WCF through blogging as compared with that of the participants receiving face-to-face peer WCF. The findings indicated that there is no statistically significant difference between the effects of face-to-face and asynchronous online peer WCF on the writing achievement of the Iranian EFL learners. In terms of the extent of incorporating the peer comments in their final drafts, the participants in the FF group incorporated more of the comments they received into their second drafts in comparison with the OL group. Finally, it was revealed that the participants of each group generally expressed their satisfaction with both methods of peer review.

scholarly journals THE EFFECTIVENESS OF WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN TEACHING WRITING CAUSE EFFECT AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF SMA NEGERI 1 GROGOL KEDIRI

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (`1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Ratna Dewi Pamungkas ◽  
Agus Amroni
Keyword(s):  
Language Use ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Teaching Writing ◽  
Writing Achievement ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Content Organization ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Text Content

This article aims to know the Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback in Teaching Writing Cause Effect at the Eleventh Grade of SMAN 1 Grogol Kediri. This research was quantitative experimental design, more specifically uses true experimental by posttest only controls class design to analyze the data. The data were analyzed and interpreted by means of SPSS 23.0 version. The study reveals that the effectiveness of written corrective feedback has a significant effect on students’ writing achievement in term of content of the text: content, organization, vocabulary, language use and mechanic. The result of students’ writing score from control class and experimental class demonstrated a significant difference. It is found that the experimental class outperformed the control class in writing achievement with t = 9.021, df = 66 and P = .000 and 95% Confidence Interval ranging from 9.138 to 14.332. From the sig. (2-tailed) we can see the P is lower than 5% (0.000 < 0.005). So, it can be concluded that the value is significant in 5% significant level. Thus, the significance different between the mean value of both class is found.

scholarly journals On the Differential Effects of Individual and Collaborative Written Corrective Feedback on the Accuracy of Iranian Female EFL Learners’ Writing

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Alireza Bonyadi
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Feedback Group ◽  
Test Analysis ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Differential Effects ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Writing Accuracy

This paper aimed at examining the differential effects of individual and collaborative written corrective feedbacks on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. To this end, 60 female English language learners were selected from among 80 students of intermediate EFL learners in private language institute in Urmia (West Azerbayjan, IRI). The participants were randomly divided into two groups namely, ‘individual feedback group’ and ‘collaborative feedback group’. Two different correction procedures were provided for both groups. For the first group, the assignment papers of the participants was gathered by the instructor in order to be provided with explicit written corrective feedback for their writings in terms of grammar and mechanics, while for the second group, six participants wrote on a topic and each composition was corrected by four EFL learners. Finally, a post-test on writing was conducted for both groups, and a t-test analysis was used to compare the mean scores of both groups. The findings of the study revealed that there was a significant difference between the individual and collaborative corrective feedback groups in terms of their writing accuracy.

scholarly journals The Effect of Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Written Syntactic Accuracy

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Mohammadreza Valizadeh
Keyword(s):  
Control Period ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Placement Test ◽  
Treatment Control ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grammatical Errors ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Feedback Strategies

This quasi-experimental study, using a pretest-treatment-posttest-delayed posttest design, investigated the effects of two comprehensive corrective feedback strategies: direct corrective feedback (DCF), and metalinguistic explanation (ME) on L2 learners’ written syntactic accuracy. The participants were 90 Turkish EFL learners. After ensuring their homogeneity in terms of L2 proficiency using Oxford Quick Placement Test, they were assigned to three groups: DCF, ME, and No Feedback (NF). The treatment/control period lasted for five weeks, during which the experimental groups wrote an argumentative essay in class, received the unfocused feedback, and revised their corrected text. The participants in the NF group were provided with feedback only on content, orthography, and organization, but not on grammatical errors. Results of the posttests and delayed-posttests (after a two-week interval) revealed that both experimental groups significantly outperformed the NF group; however, no statistically significant difference was found between the DCF and ME groups. Pedagogical implications are discussed in the paper.

scholarly journals The Effect of Spatial Intelligence-based Metalinguistic Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Development in Writing

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
Mehdi Solhi Andarab
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
T Test ◽  
Written Feedback ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Spatial Intelligence ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Metalinguistic Feedback ◽  
Intermediate Learners

Correcting and providing feedback to the written work of the learners has always been one of the hotly-debatedissues over the last decades. While a group of scholars argue in favor of the effectiveness of the written corrective(CF) feedback, others question the utility and usefulness of the CF on writing of the learners. Even there seem to befewer consensuses on the typology of the CF. Metalinguistic written corrective feedback (CF) (e.g., briefgrammatical descriptions and error codes) is a type of written feedback, through which teacher gives metalinguisticclue to the nature of the errors (Ellis, 2009). In this study, a different type of metalinguistic feedback, conceptualizedas spatial intelligence-based (SIB) metalinguistic written CF_ using the colorful stationery to write, highlight, locate,or underline the linguistic errors of the learners while giving feedback_ was used while providing feedback to thelearner’s work. In order to investigate the effectiveness of SIB metalinguistic written CF on English as a foreignlanguage (EFL) learners’ development in writing, 47 intermediate learners were randomly assigned into two groups.The learners in the first group received SIB metalinguistic written CF for their errors in writing, while the ones in thesecond group only obtained metalinguistic written CF for their errors. An independent samples t-test applied on thescores achieved from a posttest showed a significant difference in scores of the first group and that of theexperimental group. Results indicated that the accuracy (mechanics) and style of the writing of the first group ofstudents who received SIB correction for their linguistic errors exceled that of the second group students whosereceived written correction was only metalinguistic. However, there was no significant difference between thegroups in the content, and organization of their writing.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Efficiency in Teacher Correction Strategies in Iranian EFL Learners’ Speaking Improvement

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 183
Author(s):  
Roya Keshavarz ◽  
Amin Marzban
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Placement Test ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Teaching Methodology ◽  
Moderator Variable ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Feedback Type ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
And Control

<p>The present study was an attempt to investigate the effect two types of corrective feedback (i.e., recast and metalinguistic) in order to find out which one is more effective on EFL learners’ speaking improvement and also to see if gender could play a role in the relative impact of the two types of corrective feedback on learners’ speaking ability. To this end, 65 EFL learners of intermediate level in one of language institutes in Shiraz, Iran were selected and divided into three groups including two experimental groups and one control. The instruments used to collect the data included IELTS test as the pre and post tests and Oxford Placement Test (OPT) in order to obtain the homogeneity in participants’ English proficiency. The collected data were codified and entered into SPSS Software (Version 22) and were analysed using descriptive statistics, t-test, and Tukey test. The results indicated that although applying these two types of corrective feedback could have made improvement in EFL learners’ speaking ability, there was not observed any significant difference between impacts of recast and metalinguistic on EFL learners’ production. The test results also indicated that there was not any significant difference regarding gender within the three groups. This homogeneity further shows that in this study, the gender variable did not have any effect on the role of corrective feedback and it can be concluded that the observed difference between metalinguistic group, recast group, and control group is just the result of the provided corrective feedback type which has acted as the intervening variable and the moderator variable such as gender did not prove to have any effect in the outcome of this study. The findings can contribute to syllabus design and teaching methodology areas.</p>

scholarly journals CAN EFL LEARNERS' LEARNING STYLES IMPACT THEIR PERFORMANCE ON WRITING SKILL UNDER DIRECT AND INDIRECT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACKS?

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 155
Author(s):  
Mojtaba Maghsoudi ◽  
Sahar Saeedi
Keyword(s):  
Learning Styles ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Skill Scores ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Field Dependent ◽  
Writing Skill ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Experimental Group

This study presents the findings of an investigation of the impact of teacher error corrective feedback on 180 field-dependent/ field-independent (FD/FI) male and female pre-intermediate and advanced Iranian EFL learners writing skill. The participants were separated into two experimental groups and one control group and were asked to write three paragraphs of about 100-150 words around three different topics, each in odd days of a week; then they received direct (in experimental group 1), indirect (in experimental group 2) and no correction feedback (in control group). The results based on Mean Scores, Standard Deviation, Multivariate Analyses and 1-way ANOVA showed that there was not any significant difference between the FD/FI learners' writing skill scores who had received corrective feedback on their errors; however, as indicated by the second finding of the present study it would be better to feedback field-dependent/-independent EFL learners indirectly. It was also indicated that, learners' learning styles had made a significant change in their writing skill scores.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document