Volume 6, Issue 2 (6-2021)                   IJREE 2021, 6(2): 52-70 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Zarearsanjani L, Fakhraee Faruji L. The Effect of Unfocused versus Focused Metalinguistic Feedback on the Iranian EFL Learners’ Use of Dependent Clauses in Writing. IJREE. 2021; 6 (2)
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-502-en.html
Department of English Language Teaching, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (851 Views)
This study attempted to investigate the effect of using focused vs. unfocused metalinguistic feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ use of dependent clauses in writing. On the basis of an Oxford Quick Placement Test, 60 learners out of 90 intermediate female EFL learners with the age range of 17 to 27 from Melal language institute in Karaj were chosen to participate in the study. They were assigned to two experimental groups. The homogeneity of the two groups in terms of writing ability was determined by comparing their means in a writing pretest. The treatment was done through using focused feedback for the first experimental group and unfocused feedback in the second experimental group during 14 session. At the end of the treatment, a writing test was conducted as the posttest. The results of Paired Samples t-test showed that the participants in both experimental groups performed better in writing posttest. However, the results of one-way ANCOVA showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups’ means on the posttest scores of achievements in accurate use of dependent clauses between two groups. The results were discussed in relation to some implications and recommendations for further research.
Full-Text [PDF 854 kb]   (88 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special

References
1. Adams, R. (2003). L2 output, reformulation and noticing: implication for IL development. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(3), 347-376. doi:10.1191/1362168803lr127oa [DOI:10.1191/1362168803LR127OA]
2. Aghajani, M. (2018). Types of intelligences as predictors of self-efficacy: A study on Iranian EFL students. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 3(4), 12-26. doi:10.29252/ijree.3.4.12 [DOI:10.29252/ijree.3.4.12]
3. Akkuzu, N. (2014). The role of different types of feedback in the reciprocal interaction of teaching performance and self-efficacy belief. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(3), 37-67. doi:10.14221/ajte.2014v39n3.3 [DOI:10.14221/ajte.2014v39n3.3]
4. Almasi, E., & Tabrizi, A. R. N. (2016). The effects of direct vs. indirect corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners' writing accuracy. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(1), 74-85. http://www.jallr.com/index.php/JALLR/article/viewFile/237/pdf237
5. Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 227-257. doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8 [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8]
6. Baghzou, S. (2011). The effects of content feedback on students' writing. Ankara Üniversitesi DilveTarihCoğrafyaFakültesi Dergisi, 51(2), 169-180. http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/26/1661/17733.pdf [DOI:10.1501/Dtcfder_0000001275]
7. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (2016). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 218-238. [DOI:10.2307/1170535]
8. Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102-118. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004 [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004]
9. Bitchener, J. (2012). Written corrective feedback for L2 development: Current knowledge and future research. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 855-860. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/tesq.62 [DOI:10.1002/tesq.62]
10. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409-431. doi:10.1177/1362168808089924 [DOI:10.1177/1362168808089924]
11. Brannon, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in writing. Qualitative Research in Writing, 3(2), 77-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
12. Brown, D. H. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). NY: Pearson Educations, Inc.
13. Burke, D., & Pieterick, J. (2010). Giving students effective written feedback. Mc Graw Hill: Open University Press.
14. Cardelle, M., & Corno, L. (1981). Effects on second language learning of variations in written [DOI:10.2307/3586751]
15. feedback on homework assignments. TESOL Quarterly, 15(3), 251-261. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2307/3586751
16. Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267-296. https://faculty.uscupstate.edu/dmarlow/718/Error%20Correction%20-%20Chandler.pdf [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9]
17. Chawla, V., & Thukral, P. (2011). Effects of student feedback on teaching competence of student teachers: A microteaching experiment. Contemporary Educational Technology, 2(1), 77-87. [DOI:10.30935/cedtech/6044]
18. Corpuz, V. (2011). Error correction in second language writing: Teachers' beliefs, practices, and students' preferences (Doctoral dissertation). Queenland University of Technology, Faculty of Education. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/49160/
19. Elhawwa, T., Rukmini, D., Mujiyanto, J., & Sutopo, D. (2019). Effect of focused and unfocused feedback on learners' writing accuracy within different gender and cultural background groups. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 10(3), 382-400. doi:10.24093/awej/vol10no3.27 [DOI:10.24093/awej/vol10no3.27]
20. Ellis, R. (2008). Principles of instructed second language acquisition. CAL Digest available at http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/instructed2ndlang .html http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/digest_pdfs/Instructed2ndLangFinalWeb.pdf
21. Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. English Language Teaching Journal, 63(5), 97-107. [DOI:10.1093/elt/ccn023]
22. Ellis, R., Leowen, S., & Elram, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335-349. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ777394 [DOI:10.1017/S0272263109990544]
23. Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashimi, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(2), 353-371. doi:10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001 [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001]
24. Eshtiyaghi, E., & Pourhossein Gilakjani, A. (2021). The effect of unit-of-translation on Iranian upper-intermediate EFL learners' achievement in bizarre news translation. International Journal of Research in English Education, 6(1), 77-93. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-491-en.html [DOI:10.52547/ijree.6.1.77]
25. Etemadfar, P., Namaziandost, E., & Banari, R. (2019). The impact of different output-based task repetition conditions on producing speech acts among Iranian advanced EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 9(12), 1541-1549. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0912.10 [DOI:10.17507/tpls.0912.10]
26. Fageeh, I. A. (2003). Saudi college students' beliefs regarding their English writing difficulties (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Pennsylvania.
27. Farjadnasab, A., & Khodashenas, M. (2017). The effect of written corrective feedback on EFL students' writing accuracy. International Journal of Research in English Education, 2(2), 30-42. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-41-en.html [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.2.30]
28. Farrokhi, F., & Sattarpour, S. (2011). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy of Iranian EFL learners. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 1(12), 797-1803. doi: 10.4304/tpls.1.12.1797-1803 [DOI:10.4304/tpls.1.12.1797-1803]
29. Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315-339. doi:10.2307/3588049 [DOI:10.2307/3588049]
30. Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes. A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11. [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6]
31. Ferris, D. R. (2004). The grammar correction debate in L2 writing: Where are we and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime…?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(2), 49-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005 [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005]
32. Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the shorthand long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81-104). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007]
33. Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161-184. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X]
34. Fogal, G. G. (2010). EFL literature studies: Student feedback on teaching methodology. Asian EFL Journal, 12(4), 114-129. https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/PDF/Volume-12-Issue-4-Fogal.pdf
35. Foster, P., Alan, T., & Gillian, W. (2000). Measuring spoken language: a unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 354-357. [DOI:10.1093/applin/21.3.354]
36. Frear, D. (2010). The effect of focused and unfocused direct written corrective feedback on a new piece of writing, college English. Issues and Trends, 3, 57-71. https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/bitstream/140.119/79949/1/4.pdf
37. Frear, D., & Chiu, Y. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners' accuracy in new pieces of writing. System, 53, 24-34. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2015.06.006 [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2015.06.006]
38. Gedion, A., Tati, J. S., & Peter, J. C. (2016). A syntactic errors analysis in the Malaysian ESL learners' written composition. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(6), 96-104. http://www.jallr.com/index.php/JALLR/article/view/406
39. Gharanjik, N., & Ghoorchaei, B. (2020). The impact of metalinguistic corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners' acquisition of the hypothetical conditional. AJELP: The Asian Journal of English Language & Pedagogy, 8(2), 27-38. doi: [DOI:10.37134/ajelp.vol8.2.3.2020]
40. Guo, Q. (2015). The effectiveness of written CF for L2 development: A mixed-method study of written CF types, error categories and proficiency levels (Doctoral dissertation). Auckland University of Technology.
41. Hunt, K. W. (1965). Grammatical structures written at three grade levels. NCTE Research Report No. 3.
42. Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(1), 17-29. doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00124-8 [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00124-8]
43. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing: An introduction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing contexts and issues (pp. 1-19). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139524742]
44. Karimi, M., & Fotovatnia, Z. (2010). The effects of focused vs. unfocused written teacher correction on the grammatical accuracy of Iranian EFL undergraduates. The Asian EFL Journal, 62, 117-141. https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/monthly-editions-new/the-effects-of-focused-vs-unfocused-written-teacher-correction-on-the-grammatical-accuracy-of-iranian-efl-undergraduates/
45. Karimnia, A., & Heydari Gheshlagh, N. (2020). Investigating culture-specific items in Roald Dahl's "Charlie and Chocolate Factory" based on Newmark's model. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 5(2), 1-12. doi:10.29252/ijree.5.2.1 [DOI:10.29252/ijree.5.2.1]
46. Khanlarzadeh, M., & Nemati, M. (2016). The effect of written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy of EFL students: an improvement over previous unfocused design. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 4(2), 55-68. doi:10.30466/ijltr.2016.20365
47. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619. doi:10.1093/applin/aml029 [DOI:10.1093/applin/aml029]
48. Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals. 24(3), 203-218. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x]
49. Made, S. I., & Wuli Fitriati, S. (2017). The socio-cultural constraints in the implementation of politeness strategies in the interactions among English language education students. English Education Journal EEJ, 7(1), 19-25. https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej/article/view/14681
50. McGarrell, H. (2011). AILA matters: Writing teacher response (WTR). International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 140-142. [DOI:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2011.00281.x]
51. Mirshekaran, R., Namaziandost, E., & Nazari, M. (2018). The effects of topic interest and l2 proficiency on writing skill among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(6), 1270-1276. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0906.16 [DOI:10.17507/jltr.0906.16]
52. Mulliner, E., & Tucker, M. (2015). Feedback on feedback practice: perceptions of students and academics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 266-288. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02602938.2015.1103365 [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2015.1103365]
53. Namaziandost, E., Abdi Saray, A., & Rahimi Esfahani, F. (2018). The effect of writing practice on improving speaking skill among pre-intermediate EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(1), 1690-1697. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0812.16 [DOI:10.17507/tpls.0812.16]
54. Namaziandost, E., Hosseini, E., & Utomo, D. W. (2020). A comparative effect of high involvement load versus lack of involvement load on vocabulary learning among Iranian sophomore EFL learners. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 7(1). doi:10.1080/23311983.2020.1715525 [DOI:10.1080/23311983.2020.1715525]
55. Namaziandost E., & Nasri, M. (2019). Innovative practices in L2 writing materials in the EFL
56. classroom: Effect on writing enhancement and attitude to English course. Asian Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 9(9), 1-12. doi:10.5958/2249-7315.2019.00017.0 [DOI:10.5958/2249-7315.2019.00017.0]
57. Namaziandost, E., Nasri, M., & Ziafar, M. (2019). Comparing the impacts of various inputs (I + 1 & I-1) on pre-intermediate EFL learners' reading comprehension and reading motivation: the case of Ahvazi learners. Asian. J. Second. Foreign. Lang. Educ, 4(13), 1-20. doi:10.1186/s40862-019-0079-1 [DOI:10.1186/s40862-019-0079-1]
58. Namaziandost, E., Pourhosein Gilakjani, A., & Hidayatullah (2020). Enhancing pre-intermediate EFL learners' reading comprehension through the use of Jigsaw technique. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 7(1), 1-15. doi:10.1080/23311983.2020.1738833 [DOI:10.1080/23311983.2020.1738833]
59. Namaziandost, E., Razmi, M. H., Heidari, S., Tilwani, S. A. (2020). A contrastive analysis of emotional terms in bed-night stories across two languages: Does it affect learners' pragmatic knowledge of controlling emotions? Seeking implications to teach English to EFL learners. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50(6), 645-662. [DOI:10.1007/s10936-020-09739-y]
60. Namaziandost, E., Razmi, M. H., Tilwani, S. A., & Pourhosein Gilakjani, A. (2021). The impact of authentic materials on reading comprehension, motivation, and anxiety among Iranian male EFL learners. Reading & Writing Quarterly. https://10.1080/10573569.2021.1892001 [DOI:10.1080/10573569.2021.1892001]
61. Namaziandost, E., & Shafiee, S. (2018). Gender differences in the use of lexical hedges in academic spoken language among Iranian EFL learners: A comparative study. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 3(4), 63-80. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-130-en.html [DOI:10.29252/ijree.3.4.63]
62. Neisi, L., Hajijalili, M., & Namaziandost, E. (2019). The impact of using inverted classrooms on promoting extensive versus intensive reading comprehension among Iranian upper- intermediate EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 9(12), 1513-1523. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0912.07 [DOI:10.17507/tpls.0912.07]
63. Neisi, L., Nasri, M., Akbari, S., & Namziandost, E. (2019). The comparative effect of teacher-assigned topics and student-selected topics on Iranian upper-intermediate EFL learners' writing skill. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-15. https://al-kindipublisher.com/index.php/jeltal/article/view/121
64. Nemat Tabrizi, H., & Ghaffari, S. (2015). The effect of focused vs. unfocused written teacher correction on grammatical accuracy of Iranian medical students. Academic Research International, 6(2), 398-411. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Effect-of-Focused-and-Unfocused-Direct-Written-Frear/5171d58b6eec6dda1066ffd7e271d7b5e9b72e8f
65. Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Language Learning, 47(1), 101-143. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/0023-8333.31997003 [DOI:10.1111/0023-8333.31997003]
66. Pourhosein Gilakjani, A., Namaziandost, E., & Ziafar M. (2020). A survey study of factors influencing Iranian EFL learners' English pronunciation learning. International Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE), 5(2), 103-123. [DOI:10.29252/ijree.5.2.103]
67. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-395-en.html
68. Rezaei, M. (2011). A post-process approach: e-mail dialogue journal writing and its impact on quality and quantity of high school students' writing. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(1), 19-30. http://ejournal.atmajaya.ac.id/index.php/ijelt/article/view/1537
69. Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (3rd Ed.). London: Pearson Education.
70. Sadeghi, K., & Mosalli, Z. (2013). The effect of task complexity on the quality of EFL learners' argumentative writing. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1(2), 115-134. http://ijltr.urmia.ac.ir/article_20445.html
71. Saeb, F. (2016). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback on the grammatical accuracy of beginner EFL learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(2), 22-26. https://www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/IJALEL/article/view/1075 [DOI:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.2p.22]
72. Salem, M. S. A. (2011). The effect of journal writing on written performance, writing apprehension and attitude of Egyptian English Majors. A Dissertation, Pensylvania State University.
73. Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158. [DOI:10.1093/applin/11.2.129]
74. Semke, H. (1984). Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17(3), 195-202. [DOI:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x]
75. Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255-283. [DOI:10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x]
76. Sheen, Y. (2014). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 203-234. [DOI:10.1017/S0272263109990507]
77. Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System, 37(4), 556-569. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002]
78. Soleimani, M., & Modirkhamene, S. (2020). Various corrective feedback types in collaborative vs. individual writing conditions. International Journal of Research in English Education, 5(3), 24-39. [DOI:10.29252/ijree.5.3.24]
79. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-352-en.html
80. Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students' reflections. Journal of second language writing, 14(3), 153-173. [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002]
81. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x]
82. Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners' ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255-272. http://epi.sc.edu/ar/AS_4_files/Truscott%202007.pdf [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003]
83. Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 292-305. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003 [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003]
84. Van Beuningen, C. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1-27. doi:10.6018/ijes.10.2.119171 [DOI:10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119171]
85. Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence of the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1-41. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00674.x]
86. Yazdizadeh, Z., Shakibaei, G., Namaziandost, E. (2020). Investigating the relationship between Iranian undergraduate TEFL learners' self-regulation and self-efficacy. International Journal of Research in English Education, 5(3), 12-23. http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-308-en.html [DOI:10.29252/ijree.5.3.12]
87. Zarei, M., Ahour, T., Seifoori, Z. (2018). The effects of implicit, explicit, and emergent oral feedback on Iranian EFL learners' accuracy, fluency, and attitude. Journal of Language Horizons, 2(2), 75-102. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2019.26029.1122
88. Zohdi Rad, M., & Ghafournia, N. (2017). The effect of focused corrective feedback and attitude on grammatical accuracy: a study of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4(15), 75-85. http://jfl.iaun.ac.ir/article_579695.html

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2021 CC BY-NC 4.0 | International Journal of Research in English Education

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb