Direct Written Corrective Feedback Research Articles

The relative effects of direct and indirect written corrective feedback on L2 learning: The moderating role of field dependence/independence

The current study investigated the relative effects of direct and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on the learning of regular past tense, and the extent to which learning outcomes were related to individual variation in field dependence/independence (FDI). Fifty-nine Chinese intermediate second language (L2) learners of English were randomly assigned to two treatment groups and a control group. The two treatment groups carried out three written dictogloss tasks and received direct WCF and indirect WCF, respectively, on their erroneous use of regular past tense. The control group performed the same writing tasks but received feedback on the content of their writing. To evaluate the effect of treatment, a grammaticality judgement task and a picture description task were administered as the pretest, immediate posttest, and delayed posttest. The Group Embedded Figures Test was used to measure learners’ FDI orientation. The results showed that both treatment groups outperformed the control group on the posttests, but no significant differences were observed between the two treatment groups. In addition, the results suggested that FDI was related to learning outcomes as measured by the picture description task. Field independent learners had an overall advantage over field dependent learners, especially where indirect WCF was provided.

THE EFFECTS OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON FRENCH WRITING SKILLS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

Written corrective feedback (WCF) in second-language writing studies has been conducted over the last two decades to investigate whether it has a positive or negative impact on students' writing skills. Teachers can use direct WCF or indirect WCF strategies to provide this feedback. However, conflicting views still exist on which WCF strategy is most effective in improving second language writing skills. This study aims to examine the effects of implementing direct and indirect written corrective feedback on the enhancement of French writing skills. The research employed a quantitative approach utilizing a static-group pre-test and post-test design. The participants in this study consisted of fifty-six students enrolled in the French Language Education Study Program at a public university in Bandung, Indonesia. They were divided into two experimental groups, referred to as the direct and indirect written corrective feedback groups. They were assessed through a writing test for French narrative texts. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS, employing normality and homogeneity tests, as well as the N-Gain test and Mann-Whitney U test which aimed to determine the average differences and their significance. The findings indicated that the direct written corrective feedback group exhibited a significantly greater improvement (N-Gain score: 0.3229) compared to the indirect written corrective feedback group (N-Gain score: 0.1174). Nonetheless, the statistical analysis utilizing the Mann-Whitney U test found no significant difference in the N-Gain scores between the two WCF classes (p0.05). The results of this research are expected to contribute to second language writing studies and provide insights for teachers in teaching writing in French as a foreign language.

The Effect of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback on Accuracy and Fluency of University Students' English Writing

This research aimed to determine the effect of WCF (Written Corrective Feedback), direct and indirect, on overall accuracy, error types, and overall accuracy and fluency in pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test in rewritten text. The research questions examined the potential links between the direct & indirect WFC, grammar & non-grammar errors, and standpoint of feedback for accuracy and fluency. A total of 100 English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students from the University of Pahlawan Tuanku Tambusai in Indonesia were involved in the research. The findings revealed significant variations among the three experimental groups in the proportions of both effectively and unsuccessfully rectified errors. as well as the proportions of uncorrected and deleted errors in both grammar and non-grammar categories. The cohort that received the Direct WCF had the most significant enhancement in accuracy. This study showed that offering direct WCF (written corrective feedback) can enhance participants accuracy gradually over an extended period of time (long term). Indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) can enhance participants' fluency in terms of overall word count. while direct WCF can improve participants' fluency in terms of t-units over a longer period of time.

Investigating synchronous and asynchronous written corrective feedback in a computer-assisted environment: EFL learners’ linguistic performance and perspectives

While the existing literature contains a plethora of studies on written corrective feedback (WCF), little attention has been paid to the timing of such a practice. To fill this gap, this study adopted a quasi-experimental design to compare the effects of synchronous WCF (SWCF) and asynchronous WCF (AWCF) on Chinese tertiary EFL learners’ linguistic performance and perceptions. Three intact university English classes were recruited and assigned into three groups: SWCF group (n = 30), AWCF group (n = 30), and comparison group (n = 32). The two treatment groups received nine rounds of mid-focused direct WCF in a computer-mediated setting, while the comparison group did not receive any feedback. The results indicated that the two treatment groups improved their linguistic accuracy significantly, although the treatment did not promote syntactic complexity and fluency. Furthermore, SWCF was more effective than AWCF in enhancing accuracy. The comparison group failed to improve any dimensions of their linguistic performance. To explore the EFL learners’ perspectives on SWCF and AWCF, we conducted semi-structured interviews with the two treatment groups, showing that learners generally had positive perceptions about the two types of WCF. Some important implications are discussed.

Direct and indirect written corrective feedback in learning writing: The students' perception

This study was carried out based on the hottest issue regarding the role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF). The role and use of direct WCF and indirect WCF have been debated issues among second language acquisition and writing researchers. The controversial issue regarding the necessity of feedback started from Truscott’s comment that direct written corrective feedback does not improve students’ writing skills. This research explored the students’ perception of direct WCF and indirect indirect WCF. Qualitative descriptive was applied in this research involving 30 students as the subject. A questionnaire and interview were carried out as the instruments in collecting data. An interactive model that included data collecting, coding, data display, and conclusion or verification was employed for the data analysis. The findings suggested that direct written corrective feedback had a beneficial impact because 99.91% of students said they preferred it.

Engagement with written corrective feedback: Examination of feedback types and think-aloud protocol as pedagogical interventions

This study examined the combined effects of written corrective feedback (WCF) and think-aloud protocols (TAPs) as two types of pedagogical intervention for improving the revision quality of second language (L2) writing. With a quasi-experimental design, it explored whether TAPs trigger deeper processing of WCF under two WCF-type conditions: direct or indirect WCF. Participants were 80 high-intermediate learners of English as a second language (ESL) at a US university who were divided into (1) direct WCF+TAPs; (2) direct WCF-only; (3) indirect WCF+TAPs; and (4) indirect WCF-only. The impacts of the interventions were gauged by changes in seven subsystems of complexity–accuracy–lexis (CAL) between the first and final drafts of narrative essays. Results showed differential impacts of the four conditions depending on the linguistic dimensions, including some negative impacts of TAPs. Participants’ comments during TAP sessions were used to triangulate the interventions’ effects. We conclude that WCF and TAPs promoted different types of processing; while WCF contributed to the potential restructuring of learners’ interlanguage systems, TAPs triggered learners’ higher-order thinking and served as a self-reflection tool to make strategic decisions in revising the text.

The Students’ and Teachers’ Preference of Written Corrective Feedback

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.

The role of feedback type and language anxiety in the effectiveness of written corrective feedback for L2 learning

ABSTRACT The present study examined the relative effect of direct and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on L2 learning and the mediating role of language anxiety in the effectiveness of these two types of WCF. Forty-five Chinese L2 learners of English were randomly assigned to three experimental conditions: direct WCF (n = 15), indirect WCF (n = 15), and control (n = 15). The learners performed two text reconstruction tasks designed to elicit the past counterfactual conditional over two treatment sessions. The treatment effect was assessed by a grammaticality judgement task and a picture-cued production task before and immediately after the treatment. Language anxiety was measured by the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale. The results showed that both treatment groups performed better than the control group on the two assessment tasks, but no significant differences were found between the two treatment groups. In addition, the results suggested that the effect of indirect WCF was mediated by individual differences in language anxiety.

The Effectiveness of Direct and Metalinguistic Written Corrective Feedback to Deal With Errors in the Use of Information-Structuring Connectors

Background. Writing is a complex skill, even more so, if the student does not handle the generic structure of the institutionalized practices imposed on Higher Education.
 Purpose. The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of direct and metalinguistic focused written corrective feedback (WCF) on information structuring connectors.
 Methods. This quantitative study compares focused WCF effectiveness in 39 subjects who are divided into three groups: the first one is the control group, which did not receive feedback, the second is the experimental group 1 that was corrected through direct WCF and the third one corresponds to experimental group 2 that received feedback through metalinguistic cues.
 Results. The findings indicate that WCF is effective for the experimental groups. There is a significant decrease in the number of errors of information-structuring connectors in experimental group 2, while experimental group 1 shows a reduction, but without statistical significance. As for the control group, it did not present improvements. In addition, the development of writing tasks corrected through metalinguistic WCF strategies led to textual cohesion improvement with the accurate use of connective devices.
 Conclusions. It is important to reflect on the use of focused feedback as part of the writing process, firstly, because writing cannot be taught without reviewing a student's writing, and secondly, considering that focused feedback supports the noticing of errors and decreases teacher correction time.

The English Teacher’s Written Corrective Feedback on the Students’ Writings in Vocational High School

This study was aimed to find out the types of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) given by the English teacher to the students’ writings, the reason of the teacher in giving certain types of WCF, and the contributions of the WCF for the students. This study employed a case study design which involved one English teacher and three students from different acquisition levels. The data were obtained from documentation and interview. The types of WCF given by the teacher were classified by using the theory from Ellis (2008). The data from the interview were analyzed by using thematic analysis proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006). The results showed that the teacher used Direct WCF, Unfocused WCF, and Electronic Feedback in correcting the students’ errors. It was found that the teacher gave those types of WCF in order to make the students understand about the mistakes that they made in their writings. It was also found that high and medium achieving students stated that WCF from their teacher were beneficial for them in order to avoid the same mistakes in the future while low achieving student did not get the benefit of feedback.

STUDENTS’ EMOTIONAL RESPONSES TOWARD TEACHER’S DIRECT WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK

This study aims to find out what emotional responses students after receiving to Direct Written Corrective Feedback (DWCF) from the teacher in their writing assignments. The research design used in this research is a narrative case study design. The respondents of this study were the students of Senior high school in Karawang. To collect students’ emotional response data, semi-structured interviews and students' reflective journals are used. Then, collected data were analyzed by using thematic analysis. The results revealed that students’ emotional responses toward teacher’s direct written corrective feedback include positive and negative responses. The positive responses were happy (6), satisfaction (5), motivated (3). While, negative responses were surprised (1), disappointed (2), dissatisfaction (1). Based on these findings, it can be concluded that most of students responded the teacher’s feedback positively. The reason why most of students gave the positive responses was revealed by the result of interview that students feel happy because the feedback that the teacher provides is very useful.

Investigating EFL Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices about Written Corrective Feedback: A Large-scale Study

An increasing number of studies have examined teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding written corrective feedback (WCF) in recent years. However, the sample size in these previous studies tends to be small. Through questionnaires and teacher interviews, the present study explored the WCF beliefs and practices of 2,012 EFL teachers in Beijing, China. It found that the majority of teachers regarded error correction as a responsibility shared by both teachers and students, and they preferred selective WCF and integrative use of direct and indirect WCF methods. Also, they tended to have confidence in the effectiveness of their WCF. As for their practices, they would mostly underline the errors and point out the types or underline all errors with types indicated. In addition, most teachers would give feedback directly, and the number of teachers for and against delivering feedback on recurring errors seemed to be even. This study indicates the necessity of offering in-service EFL teachers training on WCF.

Minding the gap

This study investigates how different ways of receiving peer written corrective feedback (WCF) affect learners’ opportunities to actively engage in negotiation of form in tandem virtual encounters. Two types of WCF are compared, namely direct WCF plus oral metalinguistic explanation and indirect WCF plus oral prompt. During a telecollaboration programme between Italian students of English and US students of Italian, the participants (n = 16) were given several tasks to complete in dyads, including that of providing feedback on written compositions produced by their partner in the target language. The eight dyads were divided into two groups which received the same instructions for the activities, with the exception of instructions on how to provide WCF to their partner. The data of six dyads – three from each group – were analysed with regard to the quality of language-related episodes. The data analysis showed that indirect WCF plus oral prompt was more effective in leading the NNSs to actively engage with negotiation of form during the discussion phase. This result will be discussed together with other findings which emerged from the analysis, with the aim to provide useful insights on how to promote focus on form when implementing peer-review activities in telecollaboration programmes.

Sustaining University English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Writing Performance through Provision of Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback

Writing is regarded as a crucial skill in English language curricula at the secondary and tertiary levels in the Chinese education system. Currently, Chinese teachers of English as a foreign language (EFL) often adopt a product approach to teaching EFL writing, in which they emphasize the quality of their students’ written products and show little concern with the writing process. To help L2 learners achieve sustainable development of their writing proficiency, teachers employ a comprehensive approach to correct their students’ language errors as a common practice. However, empirical studies regarding its efficacy on different dimensions of L2 writing are insufficient. This study intended to fill this lacuna in a Chinese EFL context, which investigated the effects of sustained comprehensive written corrective feedback (WCF) on accuracy, complexity, fluency, and content and organization quality of EFL students’ writing. Quasi-experimental in design, it involved a comparison group and a treatment group receiving four sessions of direct comprehensive WCF. Results show that such WCF contributed to writing accuracy and fluency over time. Our textual analysis further reveals that it particularly benefited students’ grammatical accuracy, reducing some rule-based grammatical error types. However, it showed limited effects on complexity, content, or organization of students’ writing. Interestingly, the comparison group did not improve any dimensions of their writing. Possible implications are also discussed.

Which is the most effective technique for inducing learners’ attention to written corrective feedback (WCF): revision or discussion? : Approximate replication of Ekanayaka and Ellis (2020)

Ekanayaka and Ellis (2020) investigated two ways of inducing attention to written corrective feedback (WCF) – asking learners to revise their texts following feedback individually and asking them to review the corrections through peer discussion. The current study is an approximate replication. It examined the effects of direct semi-focused WCF on 91 first year undergraduates learning English at a University in Sri Lanka over a 4 week period. The study was quasi-experimental involving two experimental groups: (1) the first group received WCF with an opportunity to revise their writing following WCF; (2) the second group received WCF with an opportunity to discuss the errors in pairs. There was also a control group that completed the writing tasks without receiving WCF or opportunity to revise/review. All three groups completed three problem solution writing tasks, one each week. The results largely matched those of Ekanayaka and Ellis. Both the experimental groups gained in accuracy in new writing more than the control group. The requirement of revision following WCF proved to be more effective than peer discussion. Students also perceived being asked to revise their writing individually as more helpful than discussing corrections in pairs. However, the effects of revising in the replication study were stronger than that in the original study.

A Contribution of Teacher vs. Student Languaging in Response to Direct Corrective Feedback to Iranian EFL Learners' Writing Accuracy

This study endeavored to investigate into teacher vs. student languaging in response to Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) and its effect on promoting writing accuracy. To this end, 45 pre-intermediate Iranian English learners were selected based on their performance on an Oxford Placement Test and were randomly assigned into the three groups of Student-Generated Languaging (SGL), Teacher-Generated languaging (TWCF), and Non-generated Languaging (NGL). The groups were invited to write a composition with the same topic based on the written prompts in their textbook as the pretest while they revised the composition on the final session as the posttest. During 14 sessions of treatment, each group was provided with direct WCF on the erroneous parts of their compositions differing from each other in that the SGL group was requested to language about the reasons behind the erroneous items; the TWCF group received direct languaging by the teacher while the NGL group received direct WCF without any languaging. The results of the ANOVA revealed that the SGWL group significantly outperformed the other two groups in writing accuracy on the posttest. It came to light that direct WCF followed by written languaging by the learners led to increased gains in English learners' writing accuracy.

The Role of Error Type and Working Memory in Written Corrective Feedback Effectiveness on First-Language Self Error-Correction

This study examined the role of error-type and working memory (WM) in the effectiveness of direct-metalinguistic and indirect written corrective feedback (WCF) on self error-correction in first-language writing. Fifty-one French first-year psychology students volunteered to participate in the experiment. They carried out a first-language error-correction task after receiving WCF on typographical, orthographic, grammatical, and semantic errors. Results indicated that error-type affected the efficacy of WCF. In both groups, typographical error-correction was performed better than the others; orthographic and grammatical error-correction were not different, but both were corrected more frequently than semantic errors. Between-group comparisons showed no difference between the two groups in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors, while semantic error-correction was performed significantly better for the direct group. Results revealed that WM was not involved in correcting typographical, orthographic, and grammatical errors in both groups. It did, however, predict semantic error-correction only in response to direct-metalinguistic WCF. In addition, the processing component of WM was predictive of semantic error-correction in the direct WCF group. These findings suggest that error-type mediates the effectiveness of WCF on written error-correction at the monitoring stage of writing, while WM does not associate with all WCF types efficacy at this stage.

When Written Corrective Feedback Is Ineffective in Second-Language Grammar Acquisition

This paper describes an opportunity for theoretical linguists to make a particular sort of contribution to the teaching of second-language (L2) grammar. Currently, a popular procedure in L2 instruction for teaching grammar is indirect Written Corrective Feedback (WCF). In this procedure, instructors do not provide corrections but rather merely flag L2 students’ errors with proofreading symbols. These symbols are intended to guide learners to self-correct errors, and it is hoped that through this process, learners might make fewer errors in future writing with these points of grammar. Despite its widespread use, there is evidence that indirect WCF only leads to increased competence for a limited subset of grammatical patterns, exerting no significant positive effect with points of grammar not in this subset. A plausible explanation in such cases is that indirect WCF can fail to provide learners with sufficient feedback to acquire the grammatical paradigm. In such cases, direct WCF may be more helpful, but there is another option, which is to supplement indirect or direct WCF with metalinguistic explanation (ME) of targeted grammatical structures. However, the exact nature of this ME could be critical. As the view of language acquisition depicted under Skill Acquisition Theory (SAT) would predict, learners would specifically require ME that consists of accurate and concisely formulated declarative knowledge of the grammar point in a format that permits the pattern to be proceduralized and eventually automatized. Since formulating concise, accurate, and proceduralizable declarative knowledge for grammar points is a challenge in and of itself, theoretical linguists could pursue this objective and thus helpfully make a particular contribution to L2 grammar instruction. Addressing learner errors involving the articles in English is discussed as an example.

Direct Written Corrective Feedback on Junior High School Students’ Recount Text Composition

This present study is aimed to investigate the extent to which direct written corrective feedback (CF) assists students in minimizing students’ errors on recount text composition. This qualitative study was carried out in class VIII C at a junior high school in Malang. The Subjects of this study were the English teacher from class VIII C at the school and six students from three different levels of proficiency in this class. This present study found that: (1) Students made six types of errors on their recount text compositions after receiving direct written CF, 2) Direct written CF assists low proficiency students to a little extent in minimizing their errors on recount text compositions, (3) Direct written CF assists average proficiency students to a little extent in minimizing their errors on recount text compositions, (4) Direct written CF assists high proficiency students to a medium extent in minimizing their errors on recount text compositions.

Less is more? The impact of written corrective feedback on corpus-assisted L2 error resolution

The past decade has seen a sharp increase in research into L2 learners’ direct use of language corpora (typically known as ‘data-driven learning’, DDL) for error resolution in L2 writing. However, a crucial yet underexplored variable in this process is whether and how the form of written corrective feedback (WCF) provided on L2 writing facilitates effective corpus consultation for L2 error resolution. Focusing on L2 writers at the post-graduate level and using a short private online course for DDL training, we determine the impact of four WCF conditions (varying in their degree of directness) on students’ use of corpora for lexical and grammatical error resolution, and the appropriacy of error revisions made with/without corpora for these error types. The results suggest that ‘less (WCF) is more’ if learners are to make successful error revisions via corpus consultation, with more direct WCF conditions often resulting in students revising errors without consulting a corpus. However, less direct WCF conditions sometimes resulted in inappropriate revisions, as learners required additional information as to the nature and location of the specific error. Differences were also found in the effectiveness of corpus consultation for grammatical and lexical error types, with WCF a confounding factor. These results suggest that if corpora are to be used for L2 error resolution, teachers need to carefully consider whether their WCF allows for meaningful engagement with corpora to occur, and whether corpus consultation is suitable or desirable for resolving all error types.