Volume 2, Issue 2 (6-2017)                   IJREE 2017, 2(2): 30-42 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


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

Farjadnasab A, khodashenas M. The Effect of Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Students' Writing Accuracy. IJREE. 2017; 2 (2)
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-41-en.html
Islamic Azad University, E-Campus, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (2146 Views)

The present study explores the effect of providing different types of written corrective feedback (WCF) on 79 Iranian EFL learners’ writings over time through a pre-test, immediate post-test and delayed post-test. In this way, the study first aims to investigate the extent to which different types of WCF result in improved accuracy in writing over a period of two months, and then maintains to see if there is a differential effect on accuracy when the students are required to revise their writings based on the feedback provided to them over this period. However, to narrow down the scope of the study, considering the level of the learners, and the type and complexity level of the expected writing tasks, it was decided to use the three linguistic errors (capitalization errors, the correct use of definite and indefinite articles, and simple present tense verb) which occurred mostly frequently during the participants' first writing tasks as the target linguistic structures of the work. After analyzing the collected data, it was found that providing WCF indeed contributes to the accuracy of the students’ writings because the results indicated each type of feedback employed in the treatment groups could clearly bring about writing improvement at varying degrees. In particular, the findings suggested that direct feedback might bring about greater effects on students’ writing accuracy, whereas different types of feedback are more likely to produce rather long term improvement and/or learning over time.

Full-Text [PDF 854 kb]   (1634 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: General

References
1. 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]
2. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback. System, 37(2), 322–329. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2008.12.006]
3. Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191–205. [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001]
4. 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. [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9]
5. Ellis, R., (2008). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97-107. [DOI:10.1093/elt/ccn023]
6. Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339–368. doi: [DOI:10.1017/S0272263106060141]
7. Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in English as a foreign language context. System, 26(3), 353–371. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001]
8. 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]
9. Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
10. Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81–105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007] [PMID]
12. Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 181–201. doi: [DOI:10.1017/S0272263109990490]
13. Ferris, D. R., Chaney, S. J., Komura, K., Roberts, B. J., & McKee, S. (2000). Perspectives, problems, and practices in treating written error. Colloquium presented at International TESOL Convention.
14. 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, 161–184. [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X]
15. Gu´enette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), 40–53. [DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001]
16. Heift, T. (2010). Prompting in CALL: A longitudinal study of learner uptake. Modern Language Journal, 94, 198–216. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01017.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01017.x]
17. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101. doi: [DOI:10.1017/S0261444806003399]
18. Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66, 140-149. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x]
19. Muranoi, H. (2000). Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, 50, 617–673. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00142 [DOI:10.1111/0023-8333.00142]
20. Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83–91. doi: 10.2307/3586390 [DOI:10.2307/3586390]
21. Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 255–283. doi: 10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x [DOI:10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x]
22. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327–369. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x]
23. Truscott, J. (1999). The case for 'The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes': A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111–122. [DOI:10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6]

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

Send email to the article author


© 2018 All Rights Reserved | International Journal of Research in English Education

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb