Abstract
Truscott (1996) questions the practicability of grammar correction, and he believes that written corrective feedback (WCF) is not only a waste of time, but even harmful to the students as well. This has led to a great deal of discussion and research on WCF in second-language (L2) writing. Ferris (1999) is the representative opponent of Truscott’s point of view, who argues that WCF should not be abandoned in that it can improve the accuracy of L2 learners’ writing. Many empirical studies have been conducted and the results support Ferris’ view that WCF is useful in promoting the development of L2 writing. This paper gives a literature review from a dichotomy perspective of WCF.
Highlights
Written corrective feedback (WCF) in L2 writing, otherwise known as grammar correction (e.g., Truscott, 1996, 1999) or written error correction, has been much studied and hotly debated in applied linguistics over the past 18 years. Truscott (1996) questions the practicability of grammar correction, and he believes that Grammar Correction (GC) is a waste of time, but even harmful to the students as well
Truscott (1996) questions the practicability of grammar correction, and he believes that written corrective feedback (WCF) is a waste of time, but even harmful to the students as well
Despite from the rare existing studies, most of them take Ferris’ (1999) stance for granted by testing which type of GC is more effective than others based on students’ perceptions, it would certainly be premature to formulate any conclusions about this topic, more researches are needed on investigating students real perceptions over the effectiveness of GC
Summary
Written corrective feedback (WCF) in L2 writing, otherwise known as grammar correction (e.g., Truscott, 1996, 1999) or written error correction, has been much studied and hotly debated in applied linguistics over the past 18 years. Truscott (1996) questions the practicability of grammar correction, and he believes that Grammar Correction (GC) is a waste of time, but even harmful to the students as well. Truscott (1996) questions the practicability of grammar correction, and he believes that Grammar Correction (GC) is a waste of time, but even harmful to the students as well. This has led to a great deal of discussion and research on GC in second-language (L2) writing. In response to Truscott (1996), Ferris (1999) pointed out Truscott (1996)’s stance “grammar correction has no place in writing courses and should be abandoned” A few studies have been proven on the ineffectiveness of GC (Kepner, 1991; Polio et al, 1998; Truscott, 1996, 1999)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
