Abstract

In early written corrective feedback studies, there were a lot of attempts to test if the feedback types are effective. This study was based on the assumption prevailing in the new era of studies of written corrective feedback, that feedback is effective. Firstly, it aims to compare the think-aloud protocols of the preferred and unpreferred feedback types which were chosen by 20 English learners (10 in preferred, and 10 in unpreferred feedback). To this aim, learners were asked to write diaries for six weeks. In each session, concurrent think-aloud protocols were employed and learners’ verbal reports were extracted, and their mental processes were coded through developing a table of mental operations. In the second part of the study, the relative effectiveness of the preferred and unpreferred feedback was measured. Using the Chi-square goodness-of-fit test, the findings of the first part showed a significant difference between the mental operations for each feedback type. The results for the second part suggested that there is a significant difference between the effectiveness of the preferred and unpreferred feedback types. This latter finding indicates that the preferred feedback can facilitate the development of the accuracy in L2 learners’ writing more than the unpreferred feedback.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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

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.