Search

Copyright of Formación Universitaria is the property of Centro de Informacion Tecnologica (CIT) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The present study aimed to investigate effects of direct and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on the development of Korean EFL writing skills. Feedback was provided using the computer software Grammarly. Twenty-seven students of the English Department of Adult Life-long Education at a university in Seoul participated in this study. The researcher employed a three-stage design: (1) individual writing of a draft in class, (2) two types of feedback (direct WCF vs. indirect WCF, reformulation), and (3) individual rewriting in class. Participants' writing scores significantly improved after receiving feedback overall. In addition, errors in forms and clarity significantly reduced after the feedback, but not errors in word choices. Regarding feedback types, learning gains were more significant after direct WCF than reformulation, although errors in forms after direct WCF and word choice errors after reformulation significantly reduced among three types of errors. Additionally, most errors occurred in forms. The ratio of uptake was relatively low. The direct WCF group demonstrated a higher uptake in errors of forms and clarity, while word choice errors were more effectively addressed by reformulation. Theoretical and pedagogical implications of these findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the existence of many studies on EFL student writing proficiency, little work reports how written corrective feedback influences EFL senior high school students’ self-regulated learning. This study aimed to explore the extent to which EFL high school students prefer types of written corrective feedback strategies in their written work and the impacts on their self-regulated learning. Employing an explanatory mixed-method approach, we combined quantitative data from a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire with qualitative data gathered through semi-structured interviews. Thirty-two EFL senior high school students participated in this study. A descriptive statistical method was utilized to analyze the questionnaire, while a thematic analysis was done on the interview data. The findings revealed that direct feedback was the most preferred among the various strategies of written corrective feedback, closely followed by metalinguistics feedback. Additionally, students perceived that written corrective feedback highly contributed to fostering their self-regulated learning. Thus, this study implies that teachers should be more mindful of students' preferences when providing corrective feedback.

This paper examines the practice of written error correction from different perspectives in real classroom contexts. Although a plethora of research has been done in different contexts, the subject is least exploited in Ghana, especially in senior High school contexts. This paper reports on a qualitative study of written corrective feedback practices in three Senior High schools in Ghana. Drawing on Schmidt’s noticing hypothesis and Swain’s comprehensive output hypothesis models, the study aims to determine whether teachers’ written error corrections effectively direct students towards ‘noticing’ the gaps in their written ‘output’, thereby resulting in higher degrees of learnability. A sample size of 824 students was selected from five common course areas using a systematic random sampling strategy, while a purposive sampling strategy was used to select nine English language teachers who had at least three years of continuous experience from the three schools. The findings of the study indicate that teachers have positive beliefs about the potency of written error corrections in the development of language. However, variances in the choice of strategies, practices of teachers, and preferences of students result in the provision of non-targeted feedback which affects revision and learnability. This study recommends that teachers should collaborate with learners to provide more targeted corrections which would result in enhanced ‘noticing’ and improved learnability of the English language among Ghanaian students.

Giving feedback has always been the backbone of the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing class. Written corrective feedback focuses on responding to students’ written work by extensively correcting their errors or offering constructive suggestions for improvements. The process of digitalization of education offered an alternative to teachers’ written feedback and opened up new opportunities to give video feedback to students. The latter has the potential of improving feedback provision through video capture tools, such as screencasts. The purpose of the research project was to investigate the effectiveness of using screencast video feedback on EFL writing and explore students’ perceptions of receiving video feedback for their written assignments. The mixed-method research was carried out with a group of 40 English language students in their academic writing class at a private university in Georgia. To investigate students’ perceptions, an online questionnaire was applied that focused on the benefits perceived by the students and technical issues faced during the process of video feedback. The qualitative data was obtained from semi-structured interviews in which the participants talked about the impact of the technology and their overall experience of using it. The findings of the study revealed that video feedback appeared to have been very interactive and supportive in the learning-to-write in a foreign language process. The participants also regarded video feedback as supportive, engaging, multimodal and easily comprehensible.

This study examines the joint effects of task repetition and corrective feedback on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. Two types of task repetition were investigated: identical repetition where learners repeated the same task, and procedural repetition where learners performed tasks with different content following the same procedure. Under each repetition condition, learners received direct correction or metalinguistic feedback on their erroneous use of three linguistic structures: the past tense, articles, and prepositions. 80 Korean university EFL learners were randomly assigned to four groups: identical repetition + direct feedback, identical repetition + metalinguistic feedback, procedural repetition + direct feedback, and procedural repetition + metalinguistic feedback, and received one of the four instructional treatments. The results showed that (1) procedural repetition was superior to identical repetition in enhancing learners’ writing accuracy regardless of whether direct feedback or metalinguistic feedback was provided, and (2) there were no significant differences between the two types of feedback despite a trend toward a greater effect for metalinguistic feedback for the past tense and a greater effect for direct correction for articles and prepositions. The results demonstrate the advantage of procedural repetition over identical repetition in enhancing the effects of corrective feedback in L2 writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many studies have examined how written corrective feedback (WCF) can raise English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ understanding of language concepts. However, not much is known about how students’ perceptions and preferences could influence the effects of WCF. This study examined how Secondary School Certificate (SSC) students and teachers in Pakistan International School, Saudi Arabia, felt about WCF in writing classes. It aimed to identify the WCF aspects of the target language the students preferred. A questionnaire survey was distributed to 30 SSC-level EFL students and 10 teachers at the school who participated voluntarily in the study. The findings revealed that the students had sympathetic perspectives despite having preferences for WCF. They mainly believed that WCF might help them enhance their language knowledge and writing abilities. Through WCF, they learned what to avoid and how to write better. The teachers also found WCF helpful in enhancing the basic understanding of the target language. The findings showed that the students and teachers believed direct WCF to be the most effective technique for improving the former’s writing abilities, followed by indirect strategies such as underlining errors or providing codes. The research was considered relevant and pertinent as it addressed diverse aspects of WCF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although, written corrective feedback (hereafter referred to as CF) is applauded in many writing courses for fostering students' quality writing, its impact on grammatical accuracy in L2 students' writing remains a debated topic. Thus, this study looked into the effect of CF types on L2 students' grammatical accuracy in writing. To achieve this objective, the design of this study was quasi-experiment. During the intervention of the study three groups: two experimental groups and one control group were participated with a total of 150 students. Over the intervention of 8 weeks, the students received pretest, immediate post-test and a delayed post-test was given. The data collected through the writing tests was analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Scheffe post hoc tests. The findings indicated that although CF types have positive effects during the immediate posttest scores, they did not have any positive effect on L2 students' grammatical accuracy in writing context in the delayed posttest scores. This implies that CF alone is not sufficient for improving the grammatical accuracy of high school students in Ethiopia. Although the CF literature discussed its importance in the language acquisition, teachers are advised to focus on students' additional exposures in writing accuracy rather than grammatical correction in their writing classes and use longer treatment to allow language learners' engagement with the CF types provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Didacticae: Revista de Investigación en Didácticas Específicas is the property of Didacticae: Revista de Investigacion en Didacticas Especificas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The purpose of this study was to examine the development of English article accuracy in second language writing following direct or indirect corrective feedback (CF). Participants were 56 middle-school-aged learners of English nested within four classrooms who were studying for the writing portion of the Secondary School Admission Test. In this longitudinal analysis, each student completed four essays, with a weekly gap between each assignment. On the measures of writing accuracy, adolescent students in the direct CF group demonstrated increasing trajectories of accuracy with English article usage compared to the indirect CF group. Additionally, there was a significant difference in improvement by proficiency level: for lower proficiency learners, but not higher proficiency learners, both indirect and direct corrective feedback resulted in improvement in English article accuracy. The findings suggest that CF treatments designed to enhance a learner's accuracy can be influenced by the learner's existing proficiency, at least among adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explored the role of feedback‐seeking behaviors (FSB) in how English‐as‐a‐second language (ESL) learners benefit from written corrective feedback (WCF). Seventy‐six learners enrolled in an ESL writing course at a major university in the United States completed an FSB questionnaire, wrote a narrative essay, received WCF on their essays, and were given the opportunity to seek further feedback while revising their essays. Five writing measures were used to assess the quality of the revised essays and code the WCF provided. Paired‐samples t‐tests showed that the students made statistically significant improvements in all but one (content) of the target measures. Multiple regression analyses showed that WCF predicted improvements in only one measure (language use), whereas the learners' feedback monitoring (an implicit feedback‐seeking strategy involving attending to, processing, and using feedback) predicted the organization, vocabulary, language use, mechanics, as well as the overall quality of the students' revisions. The results suggest that students benefit from WCF only if they seek, process, and use it. These findings confirmed the importance of feedback monitoring in how students benefit from WCF and support a learner‐centered perspective that views students as proactive agents in the feedback process. Theoretical and pedagogical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Written corrective feedback has been extensively investigated with regard to its effectiveness, comparison of its different types, and perceptions about its effectiveness. However, few studies have addressed the types of errors receiving Corrective Feedback (CF) and still, much fewer have focused on formulaic errors as targets of CF. Thus, the current study compared formulaic and non-formulaic errors as targets of CF in learner writing. In addition, it examined the CF types provided for these errors. Finally, it sought the effect of a teacher awareness-raising program on teachers' attention to formulaic versus non-formulaic errors and on the CF types used to correct these errors. To achieve these purposes, eight English language teachers from four language institutes were selected through convenience sampling. First, during two sessions, the teachers asked the learners to write two compositions on two writing topics. Next, an awareness-raising program for teachers was run to raise the teacher's awareness level about formulaic and non-formulaic errors and CF types for correcting such errors. Then, the learners were asked to write two other compositions each in one session. The results showed that before the treatment, non-formulaic errors received considerably more CF than formulaic errors and that the percentage of direct CF was more than other CF types. In addition, the study showed that the awareness-raising program for teachers influenced their attention to formulaic errors. The findings of this study indicate that teachers need awareness-raising about the importance of formulaic sequences and the need to correct formulaic errors whenever possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research addressed several key problems: the extent of use of teachers' feedback strategies, the effects of WCF on students' performance, and the significant correlation among the variables. A quantitative descriptive research design was used, and 153 participants were surveyed through the messenger platform and Google Forms. Research findings indicate that among the four types of written corrective feedback (WCF), direct feedback was the most frequently employed strategy by teachers, while focused feedback was the least utilised. Furthermore, results indicate that students value reflective learning facilitated by teachers' written corrective feedback, especially in error recognition and constructive feedback responses, as non-education students displayed positive attitudes toward receiving feedback. The study also revealed a positive correlation between WCF and research writing performance, regardless of age, gender, or degree program, with relatively low values at 0.022, 0.003, and 0.005, respectively, using partial eta squared. Additionally, significant correlations were observed between students' GPAs in research courses and the impact of WCF, revealing a disparity in GPAs between Research 1 and Research 2. As direct, unfocused, and indirect written corrective feedback showed a statistically significant relationship in the extent of use of teachers' written corrective feedback, focused feedback shows no significant correlation. The findings emphasise the importance of evaluating different written corrective feedback strategies to enhance students' research writing outcomes. Findings call for the strategic use of written corrective feedback based on the specified needs and level of performance of non-education students. Furthermore, students, teachers, and the institution are to work hand in hand to create a culture of continuous improvement of students in research writing and academic performance through written corrective feedback.

Despite considerable evidence that supports the use of grading rubrics (GRs) as tools for written corrective feedback, there is a paucity of research that investigates which of the different types of GRs best develops learners' International English Language Testing System (IELTS) writing scores in English as a medium of instruction (EMI)-contested settings. This study attempted to explore which rubric types (i.e., holistic, ESL composition profile, correction code, and IELTS) best assist English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners in writing proficiency and which type leads to improving IELTS scores when such practice is embedded in EMI-disputed settings. Therefore, 351 male and female Saudi EFL learners were recruited to participate voluntarily. These participants were distributed equally among four groups corresponding to rubric type. For almost four months, the participants were exposed to a process-genre approach in which they were required to draft topics based on the comments received from their peer colleagues and teacher. The comments provided depended on the rubrics specified for their group type. The participants' pretest, midterm, and posttest scores were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance, t-tests, and paired samples t-tests. The results revealed that the ESL composition profile developed gradually, followed by the correction code group. However, the holistic groups did not improve. The tests were also assessed by specialists using the IELTS rubric. The findings revealed that the IELTS groups outperformed the other groups in all tests, followed by the female group in the ESL composition profile in the posttest. Meanwhile, other groups failed to improve. We discussed the results, considering the importance of GRs for improving EFL learners’ scores. Finally, we outlined the pedagogical implications for writing teachers in EMI settings. This study aimed to contribute to the growing research on EMI in relation to GRs, especially in the context of tertiary education in Saudi Arabia.

Providing written corrective feedback (WCF) for students’ written work is a common practice in the writing classrooms at the Faculty of English, The University of Danang-University of Foreign Language Studies (UD-UFLS). To optimize teaching strategies, teachers must comprehensively understand their students’ attitudes towards this process. Through questionnaires and interviews, this study gathered data from 10 teachers who are in charge of the English language classes and 120 first-year English-majored students to explore their perspectives on the practice of giving WCF in writing lessons. The findings reveal that a majority of students anticipate receiving more focused and direct feedback from their teachers. In addition, the results provide insights into teachers’ expectations regarding students’ post-WCF activities and the extent to which students fulfill these expectations. The study also offers recommendations for refining teaching strategies to better align with students’ expectations, thereby narrowing the gap between teachers’ methods and students’ preferences.

The efficacy of written corrective feedback (WCF) is affected by a variety of variables. To maximize the effect of WCF, it is necessary to find out what variables are more predictive of learning. The present study explored the best predictors of learning among six facets of WCF: explicitness, intensiveness, error type, complexity, languaging, and mode of languaging. Seventy‐five first‐year university students wrote an essay and received WCF on their errors. Then the essays with WCF were returned to learners, who were assigned to five conditions: languaging about WCF in written form prompted, languaging about WCF in written form unprompted, languaging in oral form prompted, languaging in oral form unprompted, and no languaging. The languaging groups languaged about the WCF they received and the non‐languaging group only looked through the corrections on their essays. One day after the languaging activity, all groups took an immediate test, and 4 weeks later, a delayed test. It was found that learning in the immediate test was best predicted by error type, complexity, and languaging, and learning in the delayed test was best predicted by error type and mode of languaging. Based on these findings, the pedagogical implications of the study are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While a surge of research has investigated the use of reformulations and models as positive evidence feedback (PEF) in second language (L2) writing, so far no research synthesis seeking to review the status quo of this particular topic has been published. To fill the gap, the present study synthesized 23 studies on reformulations and models as PEF in L2 writing and examined the salient findings regarding three major research strands: (1) students' noticing and incorporation from reformulations; (2) students' noticing and incorporation from models; and (3) effects of PEF on L2 writing. Informed by the study findings, we suggest L2 teachers vary their feedback decisions with flexibility, consider individual and contextual factors in PEF practices, combine PEF and corrective feedback to maximize student learning, and provide guidance to support student actions in response to PEF. We also propose three areas for further research, namely going beyond linguistic issues to explore the potential of PEF, systematically investigating factors influencing students' engagement with PEF, and collecting longitudinal data to examine the long-term effect of PEF. This study enhances our understanding of this emerging research area and provides implications for L2 pedagogy, as well as suggestions for future investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the efficacy of varying degrees of written corrective feedback (WCF) explicitness on the accuracy of revised drafts and new pieces of writing among learners of different proficiency levels. A total of 130 learners of English were divided into three proficiency groups (basic, independent, and proficient users), with learners at each proficiency level receiving four types of WCF that differed in their degree of explicitness: direct corrective feedback plus metalinguistic explanation (DCF + ME), direct corrective feedback only (DCF), indirect corrective feedback plus metalinguistic explanation (ICF + ME), and indirect corrective feedback only (ICF). Learners completed a text reconstruction task as their first draft, revised their writing according to one of the four types of WCF, and completed another text reconstruction task after 2 weeks. While the accuracy scores differed across different test times for learners at all proficiency levels, split-plot ANOVAs with post hoc comparisons showed that differential effects of varying degrees of WCF explicitness on the accuracy of learners' revised and/or subsequent writings were found only for the proficient group where the DCF + ME group significantly outperformed the ICF group on revised drafts and both the ICF and ICF + ME groups on new pieces of writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Written feedback (WF) in English as a foreign language (EFL) writing has been explored from two perspectives, including product-based WF, which is provided on completed drafts, and process-based WF, which can be used during pre-, while-, and post-writing. Students’ perceptions have been mainly investigated in relation to product-oriented WF preferences and practices, but not in comparison to the two WF approaches. This exploratory quantitative study examined students’ preferences and reported instructor practices of the product and the process approaches of WF in the higher education EFL writing context. Data were collected from 468 Moroccan students through a questionnaire covering the characteristics of the two WF types using nine different subscales, enabling several comparisons during data analysis. Four principal component analyses were employed to validate the questionnaire. The data and sampling in each case were appropriate for factor analysis (0.78 ≤ KMO ≤0.93). Reliability values (0.71 ≤ Cronbach’s alpha ≤0.95) were acceptable. 1) Students reported higher preferences for receiving written corrective feedback; effective WF modes containing specific, personalized, and detailed WF supporting the identification of the next steps in the writing process; and content-based WF related to macroaspects (e.g., the range of ideas and the development and relevance of a topic, purpose, genre, context, and audience). 2) Moreover, they reported that their instructors used these approaches more often than other WF techniques. 3) However, there were discrepancies between the two constructs in the case of all subscales. Students perceived that mostly all the techniques of the two approaches of WF are of great importance in EFL writing classes; however, they mostly all reported that, in comparison to their preferences, instructors applied them less frequently. The study suggests adapting instructor WF practices to students’ preferences to effectively develop their writing skills.

There is growing interest in multi-dimensional approaches for investigating student engagement with written feedback (WF), drawing and building on prior theoretical work carried out both within and beyond second language teaching and learning. It is thought that understandings of developing L2 writers' affective, behavioural, and cognitive processes and responses explain the utility they gain from WF. The present study constitutes a systematic methodological review of 35 empirical studies of student engagement, reviewing their conceptual orientations, methodologies and methods, contexts and sampling approaches, written texts, and WF. The study identified a pre-eminent methodological approach constituting mixed method case studies (often situated in Chinese tertiary settings) involving the triangulation of textual measures with student verbal reports (usually semi-structured or stimulated recall interviews), albeit with variations in the operationalisation of behavioural and cognitive engagement. Teachers constituted the main feedback provider queried (frequently for the purposes of examining engagement with corrective feedback), although were seldom recruited as informants to provide their perspectives on student engagement. Relatively few studies contrasted engagement across multiple feedback sources, such as peers or AWE applications. Texts subject to written feedback tended to be short (and perhaps elicited for the purposes of research), with fewer studies investigating engagement with WF on authentic high-stakes or longer-form writing (e.g., theses drafts, research articles). Methodological limitations of existing scholarship are posited and suggestions for future research outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the utility of model‐based feedback is well documented, little is known about which factors modulate its effectiveness. The current study investigated the extent to which learner differences in receptive and productive vocabulary sizes, as well as differences in their language aptitude (measured by the LLAMA test), mediated the effects of using models as a written corrective feedback (WCF) tool. Sixty Korean learners of English (ages 18–21) were divided into an experimental and a control group. They all completed an argumentative writing task. Before revising their texts, the experimental group received model texts to compare their first draft, while the control group self‐corrected their errors without a model. Subsequently, all 60 participants took the LLAMA and vocabulary size tests. The model group's revisions showed significant improvements in vocabulary, content, and organization compared to the control group. The results also showed that learners' receptive and productive vocabulary sizes significantly predicted the effectiveness of model‐based feedback. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This quasi-experimental study investigated the effect of using model texts as a written corrective feedback (WCF) strategy on second language learners' writing, in both rewritten drafts and new drafts. It further examined learners' perceptions of model-based feedback and how those perceptions affected model effectiveness. Sixty-six English learners were equally divided into either a model group (i.e. an experiment group) or a control group. They wrote an argumentative essay, rewrote the same text, and then wrote a new text using a different prompt. Before rewriting their first draft, the model group received model texts with which they compared their initial writing, whereas the control group self-corrected their errors instead. The model group also completed a perception questionnaire on the usefulness of model-based feedback. The model group outperformed the control group, but only in the rewriting task. Furthermore, in the rewriting task there was a significant correlation between learners' perceptions of models and the effectiveness of model-based feedback, but not in the new writing task. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper extends a similar study by Kim and Emeliyanova (2021) by comparing the effects of self-revision (R) and peer-discussion (D) on linguistic accuracy following semi-focused direct written corrective feedback WCF. The study involved three groups of low-intermediate English as a second language (ESL) learners in a Sri Lankan university. The two experimental groups (R and D) received semi-focused WCF on ten problem-solution writing tasks. The R group (n = 30) revised each task and the D Group B (n = 31) discussed corrections for each task in pairs. A Control group (n = 31) just completed the tasks without WCF. Grammatical accuracy in all ten tasks was measured using obligatory occasion analysis. Both experimental groups (but not the Control group) improved in accuracy over the ten tasks. The R group was consistently more accurate than the D with medium effect sizes but the difference was not statistically significant. Overall, the findings echo those reported by Kim and Emeliyanova. The results are discussed in terms of the writers' cognitive, behavioural and attitudinal engagement with WCF, drawing on findings from an exit questionnaire and interviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the effects of direct and two types of indirect comprehensive written corrective feedback (WCF) that differed in their degree of explicitness on students' revision accuracy as well as shortterm and delayed transfer effects of WCF on new writings over time. Feedback treatment was provided three times to test the durability of the effect of feedback. Participants were fifty-three intermediate level adult ESL students studying at a private ESL school in Canada. In order to explore the differential effects of explicit and implicit WCF on non-grammatical accuracy participants were randomly divided into four groups: direct, two indirect (underlining only and underlining+metalinguistic cues), and control group. Participants were asked to produce four pieces of narrative writing from four different picture prompts. They also had to revise those narratives over a three-week period. To find out the delayed effects of feedback on accuracy, all groups were asked to write a new narrative two weeks after the last WCF treatment. Findings demonstrated that both Direct and Underline only feedback groups made significant gains in nongrammatical accuracy in revision tasks. However, none of the feedback groups displayed any significant short-term and delayed nongrammatical accuracy improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Giving feedback has always been the backbone of the English as a Foreign Language (EFL), writing class. Written corrective feedback focuses on responding to students' written work by exten.sively correcting their errors or offering constructive suggestions for improvements. The process of digitalization of education offered an alternative to teachers' written feedback and opened up new opportunities to give video feedback to students. The latter has the potential of improving feedback provision through video capture tools, such as screencasts. The purpose of the research project was to investigate the effectiveness of using screencast video feedback on EFL writing and explore students' perceptions of receiving video feedback for their written assignments. The mixed-method research was carried out with a group of 40 English language students in their academic writing class at a private university in Georgia. To investigate students' perceptions, an on]ine questionnaire was applied that focused on the benefits perceived by the students and technical issues faced during the process of video feedback. The qualitative data was obtained from semi-structured interviews in which the participants talked about the impact of the technology and their, overall experience of using it. The findings of the study revealed that video feedback appeared to have been very interactive and supportive in the learning-to-write in a foreign language process. The participants also regarded video feedback as supportive, engaging, multimodal and easily comprehensible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

First-year composition courses must balance a range of writing instruction priorities including genre and audience awareness with language instruction, particularly for second-language writers. Despite the attested efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback for language gains in intensive English programs, little research has investigated dynamic written corrective feedback in supporting language and discourse development among L2 first-year composition students. In the present study, pre- and post-test writing from 63 second-language first-year composition writers was analyzed for grammatical accuracy as well as lexical and syntactic complexity. Writers with dynamic written corrective feedback intervention (n = 30) failed to outperform a control group on nearly all measures, and in fact made significantly more verb errors and demonstrated significantly less syntactic complexity over time compared to the control group. Results suggest that while dynamic written corrective feedback is efficacious in some settings, it may be at cross purposes with other first-year composition discourse-based goals such as genre and audience awareness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In conventional written corrective feedback (WCF) practice, teachers spend an inordinate amount of time identifying every error in student writing. Research evidence suggests that such a comprehensive WCF approach is both undesirable and ineffective. Recent research has shown that focused WCF, where teachers respond to errors selectively, is a good practice since it is more manageable and less discouraging for students. Much of existing WCF research on focused WCF, however, has adopted the experimental or quasi-experimental design, involving a very small number of error categories, without paying attention to the real-life classroom conditions in which WCF takes place. To fill the research gap, the present study investigates how two secondary teachers select target language features for focused WCF and the issues that arise from their WCF practice. The paper provides pedagogical implications that contribute to our understanding of how teachers can go about selecting errors for focused WCF in authentic second language writing classrooms, as contrasted with experimental classrooms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current paper presents and evaluates a custom GPT designed to give interactive, on-demand feedback on an uploaded essay according to course-specific content, with a focus on basic essay structure, vocabulary, top-heavy sentences, connector usage, use of examples and formal language. The results showed that the GPT performed well in providing specific feedback on basic structuring issues, wordiness and informality among other areas. However, performance could be inconsistent and inaccurate on occasion. It is concluded that custom GPTs have potential for use in tandem with a human instructor with the aim that the GPT provides initial feedback for lower order concerns so that the human instructor can focus on higher order concerns such as coherence and argumentation.

Abstract Previous research has explored how L2 students with one specific level of English proficiency engage with teacher written corrective feedback (WCF) underpinned by a tripartite dimensional construct of student engagement in the context of Chinese public universities. Yet, scant attention has been paid to how students of differing proficiency levels engage with teacher WCF in a Chinese private college context. Based on a quadripartite construct of student engagement, this case study has explored how L2 Chinese students with high proficiency (HP) and with low proficiency (LP) cognitively, affectively, behaviorally and agentically engage with teacher WCF. Data collected from multiple sources were examined, including drafts of student essays, teacher WCF, student immediate self-retrospective verbal reports and semi-structured interviews. The study has found imbalances among the four dimensions of engagement, with relatively high affective engagement and less extensive cognitive, behavioral and agentic engagement, which was mediated by the interplay of individual factors like language proficiency, writing self-efficacy and learner belief and contextual factors like student–teacher relationship. The findings contribute to an understanding of the multifaceted and dynamic nature of HP and LP students’ engagement with teacher WCF and provide some implications for both school administrators and teachers in Chinese private colleges.

There is growing interest in multi-dimensional approaches for investigating student engagement with written feedback (WF), drawing and building on prior theoretical work carried out both within and beyond second language teaching and learning. It is thought that understandings of developing L2 writers’ affective, behavioural, and cognitive processes and responses explain the utility they gain from WF. The present study constitutes a systematic methodological review of 35 empirical studies of student engagement, reviewing their conceptual orientations, methodologies and methods, contexts and sampling approaches, written texts, and WF. The study identified a pre-eminent methodological approach constituting mixed method case studies (often situated in Chinese tertiary settings) involving the triangulation of textual measures with student verbal reports (usually semi-structured or stimulated recall interviews), albeit with variations in the operationalisation of behavioural and cognitive engagement. Teachers constituted the main feedback provider queried (frequently for the purposes of examining engagement with corrective feedback), although were seldom recruited as informants to provide their perspectives on student engagement. Relatively few studies contrasted engagement across multiple feedback sources, such as peers or AWE applications. Texts subject to written feedback tended to be short (and perhaps elicited for the purposes of research), with fewer studies investigating engagement with WF on authentic high-stakes or longer-form writing (e.g., theses drafts, research articles). Methodological limitations of existing scholarship are posited and suggestions for future research outlined.

Written corrective feedback (hereafter WCF) has gained great emphasis from a considerable number of studies in second language (L2) writing history; however, an increasing number of previous studies have stressed its importance in helping learners develop their L2 writing abilities there are unresolved controversies regarding the significance and efficacy of various forms of written corrective feedback. Thus, this study was initiated to see the effects of teachers' written corrective feedback on university-entrant students' English language writing achievement. A quasi-experimental research design involving a test as a data-gathering tool was used. To that end, three intact freshman classes were selected and assigned into two experimental groups and one comparison group from a university in northwest Ethiopia. Test scores from self-descriptive paragraph writing were analyzed using a one-way ANCOVA, and the results showed that WCF has an influential role in improving university entrat learners' writing performance. Therefore, the findings from the study showed that both experimental groups performed better than the participants in the control group, indicating that both WCF provision strategies play vital roles in enhancing English language learners' writing performance as university entrants. Nevertheless, the study's findings revealed that statistically significant improvements in the writing proficiency of the study participants in both experimental groups were found the results confirmed that learners who received direct WCF along with metalinguistic explanations performed better than their peers in the indirect group who received indirect WCF. Consequently, it can be concluded that both direct and indirect WCF are crucial pedagogical strategies in improving learners' writing abilities, even though it was still found that direct WCF with a metalinguistic explanation was the most effective strategy in assisting EFL university entrants in improving their writing skills.

This study examines a common pedagogical approach whereby students view teacher feedback outside of class time. Facilitated through Moodle, it aimed to investigate not only the effect of written corrective feedback (WCF) on learning outcomes, but importantly, how frequently students review the feedback they receive. The study was conducted at a Japanese Women’s University in Tokyo (age: M = 19.6, SD = 0.6). Over a 15-week semester, students were required to write weekly homework assignments. These were then marked by the researcher and returned via Moodle, with students encouraged to read their feedback before attempting the next assignment. In line with existing research in the field, a no-WCF control group was compared against treatment groups that received indirect WCF with meta-linguistic explanations. Further to this, using an online system such as Moodle allowed the provision of linked grammar resource pages through basic HTML code embedded within the WCF itself. At the end of the semester student texts were analysed to measure improvement. When pre-test and post-tests were compared there were no significant differences within groups or between groups on measures of fluency and accuracy. However, what sets this study apart from others that have investigated student engagement, is the use of online activity logs which in combination with survey data allowed the investigation of actual study habits rather than merely those that are self-reported. The results of which give better insight and valid explanations for the outcomes of the study and call into question the efficacy of take-home feedback.

Several studies have evaluated the use of sample texts as models, against which second language (L2) learners can compare their original writing, as a written corrective feedback (WCF) strategy. This study contributes to this literature by investigating whether L2 learners' working memory capacity, which is posited to play a crucial role in L2 learning, moderates the effects of models in WCF. Sixty-seven L2 college students were assigned to either a model group or a control group. Students in both groups individually engaged in a three-stage writing task (i.e., writing-comparing-rewriting), but only students in the model group received model essays during the comparison stage. Two weeks later, all participants were asked to repeat the same writing task, to investigate the long-term effects of models as well as to perform two working memory tasks: a complex working memory task (a reading span test) and a phonological short-term memory task (a non-word repetition test). Results showed that the model group learners made significant improvements in their writing, and maintained those positive effects after two weeks. In addition, complex working memory and phonological short-term memory were found to be significant predictors of the extent to which L2 learners benefitted from the use of models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Hachetetepé: Revista Científica de Educación y Comunicación is the property of Universidad de Cadiz and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The use of concurrent data elicitation procedures (e.g. think-alouds, eye-tracking, response time) to investigate learners' cognitive processing and processes is becoming more prominent in research designs as researchers seek to acquire a better understanding of how second language (L2) learners process L2 data (e.g. Martin et al., 2019; Rogers, 2019; Thinglum, 2019; for more recent studies employing concurrent procedures, see Leow, 2019). At the same time, an increasing number of studies have empirically investigated the reactivity of think-aloud protocols in second language acquisition (e.g. Medina, 2019; Morgan-Short et al., 2012). While the studies that have addressed the reactivity issue have yielded mixed findings, only a few studies (e.g. Adrada-Rafael & Filgueras-Gómez, 2019; Sachs & Polio, 2007) have addressed the written mode, particularly in the context of L2 writing that incorporates feedback. As part of a larger study of written corrective feedback, the present study investigates the possible reactive effects of think-alouds during exposure to written corrective feedback, which was provided on learners' L2 writing, on their L2 development. Fifty-nine Korean university learners of English as a foreign language, randomly assigned to either a think-aloud or to a non-think-aloud (silent control) condition, participated in the study. L2 development was measured by a written story-retelling task and a multiple-choice receptive test. Results showed that thinking aloud while processing written corrective feedback during three feedback sessions did not affect learners' development of receptive knowledge and their ability to produce the target structure in a new piece of writing when compared to a non-think-aloud condition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intrapersonal functions of private speech have been researched extensively. However, studies in interactive settings that focus on the interpersonal functions of private speech have been rare. Adopting a case‐study approach, I investigated the social consequences of private speech and how it contributes to the establishment of intersubjectivity during collaborative tasks. Data were collected through video recordings of participants collaboratively processing feedback on jointly produced texts, retrospective interviews that included stimulated recall, and collaborative writing tasks. Findings show instances of private speech acting as a tool that helps establish intersubjectivity, thus promoting joint problem solving and potentially affording interlocutors more opportunities to co‐construct knowledge. These opportunities for learning were made possible when interlocutors used the private speech of a peer as a resource to build upon when deliberating on a response to feedback. This indicates that the ability to understand the intra‐ and interpersonal functions of an interlocutors' private speech is an important aspect of interactional competence in an additional language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2016, Lawley proposed an easy-to-build spellchecker specifically designed to help second language (L2) learners in their writing process by facilitating self-correction. The aim was to overcome the disadvantages to L2 learners posed by generic spellcheckers (GSC), such as that embedded in Microsoft Word. Drawbacks include autocorrection, misdiagnoses, and overlooked errors. With the aim of imparting explicit L2 spelling knowledge, this correcting tool does not merely suggest possible alternatives to the detected error but also provides explanations of any relevant spelling patterns. Following Lawley's (2016) recommendations, the present study developed a prototype computer-based pedagogic spellchecker (PSC) to aid L2 learners in self-correcting their written production in Spanish. First, a corpus was used to identify frequent spelling errors of Spanish as a foreign language (SFL) learners. Handcrafted feedback was then designed to tackle the commonest misspellings. To subsequently evaluate this PSC's efficacy in error detection and correction, another learner Spanish corpus was used. Sixty compositions were analysed to determine the PSC's capacity for error recognition and feedback provision in comparison with that of a GSC. Results indicate that the PSC detected over 90% of the misspellings, significantly outperforming the GSC in error detection. Both provided adequate feedback on two out of three detected errors, but the pedagogic nature of the former has the added advantage of facilitating self-learning (Blázquez-Carretero & Woore, 2021). These findings suggest that it is feasible to develop spellcheckers that provide synchronous feedback, allowing SFL learners to confidently self-correct their writing while saving time and effort on the teacher's part. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Written corrective feedback is widely used in language learning and teaching, and related studies have attracted significant attention in recent years. Through analysis and visualization of 497 articles indexed in the Web of Science core collection over the past 35 years using CiteSpace, this scientometric review aims to explore the developmental stages, involved disciplines, geospatial fingerprint, main research streams, and emerging research trends of written corrective feedback. The following stages were identified based on the timeline of publications and citations: the sprouting phase (1987–2005), the fluctuating phase (2006–2016), and the explosive phase (2017– 2022). The interdisciplinary trend toward written corrective feedback becomes increasingly prominent throughout each stage, and its primary disciplines range from linguistics and cognitive science to psychology and computer science. The primary research contexts for written corrective feedback research are ESL and EFL; countries with multiple coexisting language variants have prioritized research in this field. Existing studies have witnessed a shift from quantitative to qualitative research, and case studies focusing on individual differences are emerging as a newer research frontier. As one of the first few scientometric reviews of written corrective feedback since the phrase first appeared as a combined index term, this study is significant as a reference for comprehensively understanding the intellectual background, dynamics, and evolution of this research field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While written corrective feedback (WCF) has been studied extensively, engagement with WCF by students of less commonly taught languages, especially at the elementary level, has not yet received scholarly attention. To address this research gap, this case study explores how two learners of Japanese as a foreign language at the elementary level engaged with WCF, using the frameworks of Ellis (2010) and Mao and Lee (2022). In addition, the roles of individual and contextual factors were investigated. The participants included two beginner learners in an intensive language program. The data were collected through three multi-draft essays, retrospective stimulated recall, course documents, and class observation. The results reveal that the participants showed extensive overall engagement with WCF. However, each student responded to WCF differently due to individual factors, such as attitude toward WCF, and contextual factors, such as assignment type.

Abstract Although studies on written feedback have confirmed the effectiveness of multiple sources of feedback in promoting learners’ accuracy, much remains to be discovered about its impact on other aspects of language development. Concerns were raised with regard to the possible unfavourable impact of feedback on the complexity of students’ writing which resulted from their attention to producing accurate texts. In response to this need for research, the study investigated the effects of teacher, automated, and combined feedback on students’ syntactic complexity over a 13-week semester. Our data collection included 270 students’ texts including their drafts and revised texts and pre-and post-test writing. Essays were analysed using the web-based interface of the L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer. Regardless of feedback from multiple sources, paired sample t-test results indicate no significant differences between initial and revised texts, resulting in minimal variance between comparison pairs. Moreover, no significant differences were found between the pre-and post-writing assessment in all complexity measures. These findings suggest that providing feedback on students’ writing does not lead them to write less structurally complex texts. The syntactic complexity of their revised essays varied among high-, mid-, and low-achieving students. These variations could be attributed to proficiency levels, writing prompts, genre differences, and feedback sources. A discussion of pedagogical implications is provided.

This study is a qualitative investigation of four English for Academic Purposes students’ thought processes as they engaged with Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback (DWCF) within a synchronous distance online setting. The virtual setting involved the use of the Canvas Learning Management System and Zoom video conferencing for participant engagement. It also used Camtasia screen capture, Audacity, and Otter.ai to facilitate data collection and preparation of detailed transcripts with verbal reports and concurrent actions to use in data analysis. Findings indicate that the participants generally had a positive uptake in DWCF activities conducted over this online setting as demonstrated by overall trends in the transcript data. A discussion of lessons learned and challenges to implementation of online synchronous DWCF is provided

While previous research has identified misalignment of L2 teachers' beliefs and practices on written corrective feedback (WCF), much remains to be known about whether and how writing teachers' beliefs may vary across contexts and evolve over time, as well as the extent to which their beliefs are manifested in their practice. To address this issue, this study draws upon the perspective of complexity theory to explore the data collected in a case study of two novice Chinese EFL teachers' changes in beliefs and practices about WCF across student-centred contexts and teacher-centred contexts. Data were collected from multiple resources, including interviews, drafts of students' writing, and teacher on-script WCF. The data revealed a complex process of change in teachers' beliefs about WCF that underwent distinct stages across contexts. Misalignments between teachers' WCF beliefs and practices and possible reasons for these differences (e.g. teacher professional identity, affective factors, and individual student differences) are also discussed. This study deepens our understanding of writing teachers' complex beliefs about feedback practices and sheds new light on feedback pedagogy in L2 writing classrooms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent work has established that model texts could be employed as a useful feedback technique. However, few studies have employed argumentative writing tasks and analyzed draft quality, and little is known about the role played by the language analytic ability in using model texts. The current study aimed to investigate what Chinese EFL learners (n = 60) noticed at the composition and comparison (comparing their texts with model texts) processes in a four-stage argumentative writing task and explore to what degree model texts can enhance the learners’ subsequent writing. The four stages were: (1) writing (pre-test); (2) comparing (treatment); (3) rewriting (immediate post-test); (4) delayed writing (delayed post-test). The findings showed that learners primarily noticed lexical features in the composition and comparison stages. Higher language analytic ability (LAA) learners and guided noticing learners could notice and elicit more information from the model texts. Overall, the use of model texts was effective in improving learners’ writing by providing alternative elements associated with lexis, grammar, content, and organization. In addition, the beneficial effect of model texts on writing could be maintained after 1 week. Some pedagogical implications are put forward to help teachers make better use of model texts to improve learners’ writing. This study also provides new insights into how language analytic ability affects the effectiveness of using models and provides more information on the type of learner most likely to benefit from model texts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Written corrective feedback (WCF) in enhancing writing proficiency has been the subject of numerous studies, but few studies have examined students' perceptions about the value of feedback on their written errors. Language teachers use global tools and techniques to give students feedback on their written work. How feedback is delivered and received by students is valued differently. The current study concentrated on how students interpret written corrective feedback and which WCF tactics they favor in writing classrooms. To examine these objectives empirically, the researchers employed a selfadministered questionnaire to collect data from 180 participants from a high secondary school in Multan, Pakistan. At the same time, 40 participants were interviewed for their opinions about written corrective feedback (WCF). Some participants expressed concerns about ambiguous feedback that confuses them about their errors, whereas most participants favored the feedback process as beneficial. The most preferred strategies were meta-linguistic explanation and direct written corrective feedback that facilitated writing proficiency and language knowledge. Overall, WCF guides errors to avoid and how to adapt their writing style for composing compelling manuscripts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]