The value of a focused approach to written corrective feedback

John Bitchener · Ute Knoch

233 citations0/0 files storedELT Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning Student Assessment and Feedback Second Language Acquisition and Learning

Abstract

Investigations into the most effective ways to provide ESL learners with written corrective feedback have often been overly comprehensive in the range of error categories examined. As a result, clear conclusions about the efficacy of such feedback have not been possible. On the other hand, oral corrective feedback studies have produced clear, positive results from studies that have targeted particular error categories. This article presents the results of a study that examined the effectiveness of targeting only two functional error categories with written corrective feedback in order to see if such an approach was also helpful for ESL writers. The ten-month study was carried out with 52 low-intermediate ESL students in Auckland, New Zealand. Assigned to groups that received written corrective feedback or no written corrective feedback, the students produced five pieces of writing (pre-test, immediate post-test, and three delayed post-tests) that described what was happening in a given picture. Two functional uses of the English article system (referential indefinite ‘a’ and referential definite ‘the’) were targeted in the feedback. The study found that those who received written corrective feedback on the two functions outperformed the control group on all four post-tests.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 233 citations exist upstream.

References

2005The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing 2008Evidence in support of written corrective feedback 1999The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to truscott (1996)2004DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF PROMPTS AND RECASTS IN FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION 2007The Effect of Focused Written Corrective Feedback and Language Aptitude on ESL Learners' Acquisition of Articles 1986Salience of Feedback on Error and Its Effect on EFL Writing Quality 2000Patterns of Teacher Response to Student Writing in a Multiple-Draft Composition Classroom: Is Content Feedback Followed by Form Feedback the Best Method?1991An Experiment in the Relationship of Types of Written Feedback to the Development of Second-Language Writing Skills

Cited by

2015Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing 2019Teacher written corrective feedback: Less is more 2014The relative effects of peer and teacher feedback on improvement in EFL students’ writing ability 2014Learner uptake of teacher electronic feedback in ESL composition

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.