scholarly journals Studies on Written Corrective Feedback: Theoretical Perspectives, Empirical Evidence, and Future Directions

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting Wang ◽  
Lin Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives

scholarly journals Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing: Theoretical Perspectives, Empirical Insights, and Future Directions

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Van Beuningen
Keyword(s):  
Error Correction ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Pedagogical Tool ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Considerable Controversy

The role of (written) corrective feedback (CF) in the process of acquiring a second language (L2) has been an issue of considerable controversy among theorists and researchers alike. Although CF is a widely applied pedagogical tool and its use finds support in SLA theory, practical and theoretical objections to its usefulness have been raised (e.g. Truscott, 1996; 1999; 2004; 2007; 2009). In the present paper, I start by summarizing the theoretical arguments underpinning the use of CF in L2 classrooms. Subsequently, the objections raised against error correction are reviewed, and some controversies concerning different CF methodologies and error types are discussed. Next, the paper provides a critical summary of the findings produced by empirical work to date, and sketches out some of the issues that need to be attended to in future research. Based on the available empirical evidence, I conclude that, by offering learners opportunities to notice the gaps in their developing L2 systems, test interlanguage hypotheses, and engage in metalinguistic reflection, written CF has the ability to foster SLA and to lead to accuracy development.

The Empirical Evidence of the Effect of Written Corrective Feedback From Information Processing Perspective

2018 ◽  
pp. 30-56
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Theoretical Expectation ◽  
Affective Factors ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Information Processing Perspective ◽  
English Articles ◽  
Positive Effect

The theoretical perspectives reviewed in the previous chapter have led many in the field to believe that written CF can have a positive effect on L2 learning. The recent written CF studies reviewed in this chapter confirmed the theoretical expectation. However, it needs to be noted that although more explicit written CF types, such as metalinguistic explanation, direct correction, and direct correction plus metalinguistic explanation were proved to facilitate the learning of English articles and past tense for students of different proficiency levels, more research is needed to find out the correlation between the complexity and written CF type. Furthermore, whether these types of written CF could facilitate the learning of more complex language features needs to be examined. Last but not least, learner's factors, including affective factors, learning aptitude, motivation, and so on need to be investigated regarding the extent to which they may have an impact on the effect of written CF.

scholarly journals EMI lecturers’ practices in correcting English

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-284
Author(s):  
Guzman Mancho-Barés ◽  
Marta Aguilar-Pérez
Keyword(s):  
Education Policy ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Education ◽  
Language Assessment ◽  
Assessment Practices ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Show Evidence ◽  
English Medium Instruction ◽  
Actual Teaching

Abstract Research on English-medium instruction (EMI) has pointed to lecturers’ refusal to teach or correct English. This study seeks empirical evidence to investigate the extent to which content lecturers’ assessment practices align with their expressed beliefs regarding language teaching. Drawing on three types of data – a questionnaire, interviews and students’ exams – we aimed at finding and exploring EMI lecturers’ written corrective feedback (WCF) as part of language assessment practices. Findings suggest that while EMI content lecturers repeatedly express their refusal to teach English, their actual teaching practices show evidence of some provision of language-related feedback. These findings are discussed against university language education policy. A gate opener lecturer profile is identified whose corrective feedback creates opportunities for correctly using disciplinary English.

Written corrective feedback from sociocultural theoretical perspectives: A research agenda

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neomy Storch
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Zone Of Proximal Development ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Individual Factors ◽  
Proximal Development ◽  
The Third ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Automated Feedback

Using key constructs from sociocultural theory and activity theory, this paper outlines three broad areas of future research on written corrective feedback (WCF) that may be of interest to second language (L2) researchers and practitioners. The first area uses the constructs of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) and scaffolding to assess the nature and appropriateness of the feedback provided. The second area uses the construct of tools and considers learners’ responses to the means used to provide WCF, including automated feedback. The third, and perhaps most important area, views WCF as an activity, and examines context-related and individual factors that impact on the provision and response to WCF. The paper provides concrete examples of small-scale longitudinal studies in each of these areas, including recommendations as to the kind of data and measures to employ.

scholarly journals WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN WRITING INSTRUCTION: A QUALITATIVE SYNTHESIS OF RECENT RESEARCH

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pei Fen Dawn SIA ◽  
Yin Ling CHEUNG
Keyword(s):  
Writing Instruction ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
English Language ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Language Teachers ◽  
Written Feedback ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Teachers Perceptions ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback

Giving written feedback to students is an important part of writing instruction. However, few studies have been conducted to investigate current trends of written corrective feedback in the secondary and university contexts. To identify and evaluate the current state of empirical evidence, we conducted a qualitative synthesis of published research that examined written corrective feedback in both English-as-the-first-language and English-as-the second/foreign-language settings. Four claims emerged in our analyses of 68 empirical studies published in journals from 2006-2016. Each claim is supported by empirical evidence. The claims are: (1) Individual differences play a part in the effectiveness of written corrective feedback; (2) Students’ and teachers’ perceptions affect the effectiveness of written corrective feedback; (3) Giving corrective feedback through technology is beneficial to students; and (4) Written corrective feedback is more effective when it is used concurrently with collaborative tasks. This meta-synthesis study sheds light on the written corrective practice of English Language teachers across different pedagogical settings and the factors that may affect student engagement in teacher written feedback. Keywords: written corrective feedback, secondary school, university

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document