Abstract
In an article published in System Vol. 40 Andrew Sampson (2012) made several claims regarding the positive effect of “coding” or “marking” of second language writing errors and how the use of said coding can have a positive effect on the number of errors appearing in L2 writers’ subsequent writings. However, upon closer examination of the article’s methodology, we feel such a claim regarding the use of coding in the L2 writing classroom is not justified without further research. In this commentary, through reexamination of Sampson’s research, we argue that (1) correction of errors that appeared on previous drafts should not be equated with the ability to produce correct forms in future writings; (2) equality of sampling across learners’ texts should have been more systematic; and (3) error types deserve a more systematic classification scheme. We further elaborate on the flaws found in the research methodology and where appropriate suggest alternatives. Finally, we conclude with some suggestions regarding coded verses uncoded feedback.
Highlights
Among the traditional four skills, writing seems to be the skill that is the most difficult for learners to master and for teachers to teach
EFL writing teachers are seeking effective methods of providing learners with feedback that results with them producing future writing that is more competent than their previous writings
When we first ran across the article, we felt the method of coding grammar errors might be a practical approach we could introduce in EFL teacher training courses
Summary
Among the traditional four skills, writing seems to be the skill that is the most difficult for learners to master and for teachers to teach. EFL writing teachers are seeking effective methods of providing learners with feedback that results with them producing future writing that is more competent than their previous writings. To accomplish this goal, many EFL writing teachers utilize a process approach to the teaching of writing that incorporates a system that indicates when learners have made grammatical errors. Many EFL writing teachers utilize a process approach to the teaching of writing that incorporates a system that indicates when learners have made grammatical errors Many of these teachers settle on marking strategies after consultation from language teaching resource books or second language acquisition literature published in authoritative journals. Having results from a more methodologically sound study would lend support to whether employing the use of coding of students’ grammar errors in the EFL writing classroom would result in a return rate worth the investment by teachers
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
