Abstract

This current research aimed at finding out the impact of different feedback modes, that is indirect corrective feedback and direct corrective feedback, on the writing proficiency of EFL students at the university level. Direct and indirect corrective feedbacks were provided by covering global and local aspects of writing together. This study reported on a 14-week study with 63 students majoring in the English Education Department of an outstanding university in Surabaya, Indonesia. The pre-test was given to 35 students that belonged to a high proficiency level group, whereas 28 students belonged to the low proficiency level. The proficiency level was used to examine whether the corrective feedback was effective for certain levels of learners’ proficiency. An experimental design was run to examine whether there was a noteworthy different impact of direct corrective feedback (DCF) and indirect corrective feedback (ICF) on descriptive essays produced by EFL students. Two groups of participants, DCF group and ICF group, wrote eight topics in which each was treated using different feedback. The results revealed that the DCF is more powerful than ICF and contributes significantly to improve students’ EFL writing, regardless of the students’ level of proficiency (high or low). The outcomes of DCF and ICF in the EFL writing process that do not depend on proficiency level indicates that the use of DCF and ICF is not influenced by proficiency level. In other words, direct corrective feedback is advantageous for both low and high proficiency learners in EFL writing process.

Highlights

  • A number of researchers have investigated studies on written corrective feedback

  • The research findings were used in answering the research questions: (1) whether students treated using Direct Corrective Feedback (DCF) had better proficiency in writing process compared to those taught using ICF, and (2) whether the effects of direct corrective feedback and indirect corrective feedback on EFL writing depended on the students’ proficiency levels

  • The results of the computation on the post-test by applying DCF indicated the maximum and the minimum scores made by the high proficiency students are 92.50 and 80.00, while the maximum and the minimum scores made by low proficiency students are 86.50 and 58.00

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A number of researchers have investigated studies on written corrective feedback. The studies have proven experimentally that learners truly require corrective feedback to improve the quality of writing. It will not be wise to allow learners to produce errors in ESL (English as a Second Language) and EFL (English as a Foreign Language) writing products without any strategies to help them. But allowing them to make errors is a strange action for a teacher. Khanlarzadeh and Nemati (2016) revealed that unfocused written corrective feedback (WCF) during the process of revision does not improve EFL students’ accuracy in writing when there is no available feedback Learners will not gain language improvement. Khanlarzadeh and Nemati (2016) revealed that unfocused written corrective feedback (WCF) during the process of revision does not improve EFL students’ accuracy in writing when there is no available feedback

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (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