Feedback timing and engagement with feedback. Effects on L2 written accuracy

Written corrective feedback (WCF) is critical in EFL/ESL writing classrooms. This study aims to review existing research studies on the quality of WCF generated by ChatGPT and humans and to examine how WCF generated by ChatGPT can support WCF that humans give to students’ written work in higher education EFL/ESL writing contexts. To meet these goals, the researcher examined 23 studies published in 18 peer-reviewed journals from 2023-2024. The analysis results highlighted potential strengths and weaknesses of WCF generated by ChatGPT and humans. WCF generated by ChatGPT could review various aspects of writing and provide extensive descriptive feedback, yet it sometimes might experience system fatigue that affects the WCF quality. ChatGPT could also provide inaccurate WCF, give WCF that lacked human nuances, and were greatly influenced by how prompts were presented to it. Meanwhile, humans could provide aspects of WCF not accounted for ChatGPT, but their WCF might involve subjective judgment and be unclear. With these findings in mind, the researcher identified three phases of how ChatGPT can work harmoniously with humans to provide quality WCF for students in writing classrooms. Those phases were making various efforts to enhance WCF generated by ChatGPT in students’ writing in support of the feedback provided by lecturers, enhancing students’ in-depth understanding that not all ChatGPT feedback is accurate, and combining ChatGPT-based WCF, specifically on earlier drafts of students’ writing. Pedagogical implications, which highlighted the essence of working synergistically with ChatGPT and mastering prompts to generate the most helpful WCF, for EFL/ESL lecturers in writing classrooms who wish to support their feedback with ChatGPT to provide quality WCF to their students’ written work were presented. The researcher then proposed recommendations for future systematic review studies, expanding the research contexts, the scope of reviewed materials, and the research method of the reviewed articles, to address gaps and expand on the insights presented in this study.

Written corrective feedback (WCF) is widely used among writing teachers in attempt to improve students’ language accuracy in their written tasks. Experts of second language (L2) writing stated that WCF plays a significant role in language accuracy development because it is related to the development and improvement of students’ accuracy in second language writing. Corrective feedback can be grouped into direct WCF and indirect WCF. However, results in many past empirical studies were inconclusive because of variation in how the effectiveness of WCF was measured. Additionally, there is a lack of investigation pertaining to the students’ perceptions toward the feedback they received, which may reveal important factors that influence the students’ reception of the feedback that resulted in performance changes. Hence, the purpose of this study is to explore factors that contributed to the accurate use of the past tenses resulting from direct WCF and indirect WCF. Interviews were conducted with 12 students and the qualitative findings revealed the following factors: 1) learner attitudes towards feedback provided, 2) learner beliefs towards what corrections entailed, and 3) types of scaffolding. Additionally, the findings revealed the importance of teacher-student conference, the need for students to be trained over a longer period of time in relation to the use of error codes and the need for instructor to understand and implement direct and indirect feedback accordingly in their teaching. Keywords: written corrective feedback; second language acquisition; direct-indirect feedback; past tenses; mixed methods

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.

The aim of this article is to introduce the application of languaging as the mediational tool to enhance the written corrective feedback’s effectiveness in L2 writing. Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) shows L2 learners their grammatical and ungrammatical errors in writing. It is a form of feedback that is commonly applied pedagogically in writing class. With WCF, L2 learners can improve their ability to write without errors. Nevertheless, providing WCF alone without engaging L2 learners will make the L2 learners become passive learners. They merely copy their teachers’ WCF where they can neither identify nor correct their errors. Therefore, it is recommended that L2 learners are given the opportunity to engage (to notice and understand) with the WCF. Languaging creates the opportunity for L2 learners to engage with the teachers’ WCF. Languaging is a process where L2 learners make meaning, shape knowledge and experience through language. L2 learners use language (languaging) to solve difficult task like L2 writing. When L2 learners languaging the teachers’ WCF, they should be able to improve their writing skills. This paper has pedagogical implications in L2 writing.

Written corrective feedback (WCF) plays an important role in second language (L2) education. While there have been many studies on the topic, the needs to understand WCF from different contexts are still needed. In the context of Indonesia, this study focused on types of English teachers’ WCF given on students’ argumentative essays, and types of WCF Indonesian secondary school students prefer as well as the reasons behind their preferences. The data were collected from twelfth-grade students’ essays (N=80) and questionnaire (N=98). To confirm the data, interview to six students were conducted. The WCFs on the essays were analyzed using a classification checklist while the questionnaire and the interviews were analyzed to understand students’ feedback preference and the underlying reasons of their preference. Findings revealed that there were different WCF styles among the three English teachers. It was also discovered that direct WCF was the most preferable type of feedback. From the findings, there seems to be a misalignment between teachers’ practices and students’ preferences regarding indirect and metalinguistic WCF. This discrepancy calls for teachers to address feedback literacy skills.

The role of written corrective feedback (WCF) in the process of acquiring a second language (L2) has been an issue of considerable controversies over past decades. This article intends to provide a critical review of the increasing number of WCF studies thus far and to inspire new perspectives for future research. It starts by briefly tracing the theoretical positions on the role of WCF in L2 instruction. Subsequently, a synthesis of empirical arguments with respect to the effectiveness of WCF, the relative merits of various WCF options, and the amenability of different error categories to WCF are presented. Based on all the evidence, two common limitations: the focus on form-oriented WCF options and the narrow range of target errors are critically discussed in the final part. It concludes by suggesting that an integration between such learning enhancing variables as micro context and written feedback, and that an extension of target structure from learners’ rule-governed errors to their non rule-governed errors should be investigated in future WCF studies so that fresh insights for WCF research could be achieved on one hand and pedagogical implications for L2 classroom instruction could be offered on the other.

Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) is a controversial topic among theorists and researchers in L2 studies. Ellis, Sheen, Murakami, and Takashima (2008) identify two dominant dichotomies in this regard, that is focused vs. unfocused WCF and direct vs. indirect WCF. This study considered both dichotomies in a matrix format, resulted in the recognition of four types of operationally defined WCF, and aimed at: (1) investigating the effects of four types of WCF (i.e., focused direct CF, unfocused direct CF, focused indirect CF, and unfocused indirect CF) on intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance; (2) finding out the most effective type of WCF for intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance; (3) determining learners’ attitudes toward the effectiveness of using WCF and the types which they had received. After conducting Nelson English Language Test (Test 300 D), out of 140 male and female Iranian EFL learners, 120 of them were selected as intermediate learners, aging from 14-18. The subjects were then assigned randomly to four homogeneous groups (each group including 30 participants). The pre-test and post-test both included a writing test which assessed learners’ writing performance, and then their scores were analyzed by using analytic marking scale. The results indicated that, learners outperformed in all of the four groups, validating WCF as an effective technique which can be used in EFL classes. A clear implication of the study is that WCF types (specially unfocused direct CF) should be emphasized as an essential tool for developing writing ability of intermediate EFL learners. Keywords : Written Corrective Feedback (WCF), Focused CF, Unfocused CF, Direct CF, Indirect CF, Writing Performance, Intermediate EFL Learners

Previous research mainly shows students’ improvement of composition benefits from Written Corrective Feedback (WCF). According to the five types of WCF mentioned by Ellis, containing direct WCF, indirect WCF, metalinguistic WCF, focused and unfocused WCF and reformulation, the paper reviews previous literature to help teachers adjust their WCF method to students’ preferences. The paper’s main findings are: 1) teachers’ preference for WCF is inconsistent with students’ preferences; 2) students prefer detailed and explicit feedback such as direct WCF; 3) teachers prefer indirect WCF to encourage students to reflect on their mistakes. This paper contributes to improving the teaching method of WCF.

Low proficiency L2 learners make frequent grammatical errors and apply inappropriate English language use and writing conventions despite learning the language for years. To reduce the grammatical and non-grammatical errors in the low proficiency L2 learners’ writing, teachers provide Written Corrective Feedback (WCF). However, a strong claim on WCF's adverse effects on L2 learners’ language development has prompted mixed responses on the WCF’s effectiveness. Numerous studies on WCF's effectiveness were conducted, and the findings showed inconclusive results. The present study aims to examine the ‘Written Languaging’ (WL) effect of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) on low proficiency L2 learners’ writing accuracy. WL is a mediational tool used to enhance the WCF’s effectiveness. The study was conducted on 47 low proficiency L2 university students for five weeks to elicit WL of WCF's effects on low proficiency L2 learners’ writing accuracy, where a multiple-case research approach was used to collect and analyze the data of the study. An error ratio was applied to measure the overall accuracy of writing. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to determine whether WL's provision on the WCF affects the writing accuracy of the low proficiency L2 learners' new writing text. The finding shows that WL's provision on the WCF did not facilitate the low proficiency of L2 learners' writing accuracy because the L2 learners' writing accuracy could improve only with teachers' WCF. The study is significant to the pedagogical teaching of writing development for lower proficiency L2 learners, particularly in applying the mediational tool in the provision and processing of WCF and the complementary pedagogical strategy to WCF.

This study examined the formation of writing instructors' written corrective feedback (WCF) philosophies and evaluated the effectiveness of a one-shot WCF training session in facilitating teacher transformation in WCF practices, a common professional development practice to train in- service language instructors at universities. Four writing instructors, with varying levels of experience and educational background, teaching in a school of foreign languages in Türkiye volunteered for the study. Prior to the training, seven essays that the instructors provided WCF for were collected. To expand their knowledge of WCF, the instructors then participated in a one-hour WCF training program, which covered types of WCF, forms of WCF, stages of WCF, the benefits of WCF, and some helpful tips for WCF. After the training, the instructors assessed and provided WCF for an additional seven essays. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and WCF analysis of essays and analyzed using a rubric including all themes covered in the training and a thematic analysis of interview themes. The results suggested instructors' WCF philosophies were shaped by a combination of experience, school policies, and master's education. Furthermore, while the one-shot training program did not entirely transform the instructors' WCF philosophies, it had some impact on their practices.

Written corrective feedback (WCF) research has extensively examined the effectiveness of direct versus indirect feedback approaches, yet findings remain inconsistent regarding their relative impact on complex grammatical structures. The acquisition of past counterfactual conditionals presents particular challenges for second language learners due to their syntactic and semantic complexity, with limited research investigating feedback effectiveness for this structure. This gap limits theoretical understanding of how different feedback types engage cognitive processing mechanisms during the acquisition of linguistically complex features. This quasi-experimental study investigated the differential effects of direct and indirect WCF on Turkish EFL learners' acquisition of English past counterfactual conditionals. Ninety-four first-year university students were randomly assigned to three groups: Direct WCF (n=32), Indirect WCF (n=32), and Control (n=30). Using a pretest-posttest design with immediate and delayed posttests, participants completed reconstruction tasks over an eight-week period. The Direct WCF group received explicit corrections with correct forms provided above errors, while the Indirect WCF group received metalinguistic clues requiring self-correction. Results showed that direct WCF demonstrated superior immediate effectiveness, but this advantage diminished at delayed posttest, where both treatment groups performed comparably while significantly outperforming the control group. The findings indicate that direct feedback facilitates immediate accuracy improvement in complex grammatical structures, while both feedback types achieve equivalent long-term effectiveness. These results support instructional approaches that employ direct feedback when immediate accuracy is prioritized and suggest that both feedback types engage cognitive processing mechanisms that support sustained learning of complex grammatical features.

In writing classes, teachers implement Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) as a form of Corrective Feedback (CF). It is an instructional strategy teachers used in the classroom to improve L2 students' writing skills. Nevertheless, the incongruity between the preferences of students and the instructional strategies employed by teachers for WCF has resulted in challenges for teachers and perplexity for the students. The study aims to achieve the following objectives: 1) to examine the forms of CF used by L2 teachers when assessing students' writing, 2) to explore the types of CF that students prefer when receiving feedback on their writing, and 3) to determine whether the teachers' WCF practices align with the students' preferences. The researchers employed the Feedback Scale to gather data for the study. Additionally, purposive opportunistic sampling was utilised in selecting the study’s participants. The findings show that the L2 teachers provide more indirect WCF and focused WCF, whereas the L2 students prefer direct WCF and unfocused WCF. This demonstrates the concept of a disparity between the pedagogical approaches that teachers employ and the preferences that students have expressed regarding WCF. The study has implications on the writing instruction of English Language writing class.

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. This study aims to investigate the effects of direct WCF, indirect WCF, and metalinguistic explanation on the past simple tense acquisition of senior high school learners in Pakistan. Much research has been conducted involving adults, while little has been done to consider senior high school students in this regard. This study has been aimed to explore the effects of direct WCF, indirect WCF and metalinguistic explanation on the writing performance of senior high school students in Pakistan. Students were divided into four groups, each with one type of feedback, including group four as the control group with no feedback. All four groups had written narration on a given picture and were treated by mentioned feedback. After that, results were compared to look for effective feedback type. After writing task, a survey and interview were conducted to explore students’ perceptions about WCF and WCF strategies. The study found that learners want feedback from their teachers and prefer direct feedback and Metalinguistic explanation. This research has been planned to help learners in their early stage through WCF learn a second language and form a strong linguistic base that will help them construct grammatically correct sentences and compositions.

A quasi-experimental study was conducted to examin the effectiveness of providing written corrective feedback (WCF) to Arab speakers of English on ten uses of English prepositions. Arab speakers commonly find it difficult to correctly use English propositions, mainly due to the differences between the two languages (e.g. Ortega, 2009). Examples of prepositions misuse are “married from,” “die from,” and “kind with.” The WCF implementation lasted for seven weeks. The students’ being in intact classes made random assignments to different groups difficult. The data were derived from three tests: pre-test, immediate post-test and delayed post-test as well as an open-ended questionnaire. The experimental group (n= 25) received WCF on their writing, oral meta-linguistic tutorials, and a treatment task for their pre-test. For both the immediate post-test and the delayed post-test, they only received WCF on their writings. The control group (n= 25) only received general comments, like “good organization of the story events.” The statistical results of the independent samples t-test show the experimental group outperforming the control group on the target features. The analysis of the questionnaire data also shows the benefits of WCF for improving preposition use. The results also have pedagogical implications with regard to WCF. Keywords: WCF, writing, prepositions, students’ views, Arabic, EFL

Written corrective feedback (WCF) is widely used to point students to the grammatical errors in their written work and help reduce them.This paper reports a quasi-experimental study that compared the effectiveness of direct and indirect teacher WCF in a Thai context.One hundred and twenty Thai students at two public universities in southern Thailand were assigned to write argumentative essays within a treatment period; each treatment had 60 students.The feedback was given by four ESL/EFL lecturers at the two universities.Grammatical aspects focused on were tenses, subject-verb agreement, articles, singular/plural nouns, prepositions and adjectives/adverbs.Means for the number of errors were obtained at three points, namely, pretest, immediate posttest and delayed posttest.The findings revealed that time and WCF type as main effects showed differentiated results on all six grammatical aspects.Interaction effects between time and WCF were found for tenses and subject-verb agreement.For between-subjects effects, indirect WCF was more effective than direct WCF.For within-subjects effects, generally the differences in the mean values were significant between pretest and delayed posttest, but not between pretest and immediate posttest.These findings have implications for writing instruction and research in an ESL/EFL tertiary context.