The Perceptions and Preferences of the General Foundation Programme Students Regarding Written Corrective Feedback in an Omani EFL Context

Soufiane Trabelsi

Abstract


Despite the fact that there has been a growing body of research investigating the effectiveness of written corrective feedback (WCF) for improving L2 learners’ writing accuracy, fewer studies have investigated learners’ preferences and perceptions of WCF. This paper, which is based on a doctoral research project, reports on an exploratory study that investigated the preferences and perceptions related to the aspects of WCF in an EFL context. Qualitative data was collected from focus groups administered to a sample of intermediate and pre-intermediate General Foundation Programme (GFP) students. The results showed that the students valued feedback and preferred the comprehensive feedback approach. They wanted it to be indirect and unfocused as well as teacher initiated. The findings also showed that they perceived their teacher feedback as timely, involving a variety of techniques, sufficient, efficient, clear, explicit, familiar to them, comprehensive. Despite all that, they sometimes faced some challenges in understanding their teachers’ comments. The paper concludes with some implications for teaching and learning.

Keywords


Written Corrective Feedback, EFL Writing, Comprehensive Feedback, Indirect Feedback, Unfocused Feedback, Error Correction, Peer Feedback

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alkhatib, M. N. (2015). Written corrective feedback at a Saudi university: English language teachers' beliefs, students' preferences, and teachers' practices. Unpublished PhD Thesis, the University of Essex.

Amrhein, H. R. and Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers prefer and why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13, 95-127.

Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychology Review, 89, 369-406.

Aridah, (2004). Students Preferences and Reaction to Teacher Feedback. Malang: State University of Malang Press.

Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 227-257.

Berg, E. C. (1999). The effect of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 215-241.

Bitchener, J. & Ferris, D. R (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge.

Braun, V. &. Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77 - 101.

Brookhart, S. M. (2003). Developing measurement theory for classroom assessment purposes and uses. Educational Management: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 5-12.

Brophy, J. (1981). Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of Educational Research, 51, 5-32.

Cardelle, M. A. & Corno, L. (1981). Effects on second language learning of variations in written feedback on homework assignments. TESOL Quarterly, 15(3), 251-261.

Carless, C. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219–233.

Caulk, N. (1994). Comparing teacher and student responses to written work. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81-188.

Chaudron, C. (1984). The effects of feedback on students' composition revision. RELC Journal, 15(2), 1-15.

Cohen, A. D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. Learner Strategies in Language Learning, 57-69.

Cohen, A.D., & Cavalcanti, M.C. (1990). Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 155-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Connor, U. M. & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 257-276.

Corpuz, V. F. (2011). Error correction in second language writing: Teachers' beliefs, practices and students' preferences. Unpublished Master‘s Thesis, Queensland University of Technology.

Diab, R. L. (2005). EFL university students' preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 38(1), 27-51.

Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339–368.

Ferris, D. R. (1995a). Can advanced ESL students be taught to correct their most serious and frequent errors? CATESOL Journal, 8(1), 41-62.

Ferris, D. R. (1995b). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33–53.

Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315–339.

Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of error in second language writing classes. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Research implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ferris, D. R. & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161-184.

Flower, L. (1994). The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Ghazal, L., Gul, R., Hanzala, M., Jessop, T. & Tharani, A. (2014). Graduate students’ perceptions of written feedback at a private university in Pakistan. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(2), 13-27.

Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. London: Longman.

Grami, M. (2005). The effect of teachers‘ written feedback on ESL students‘ perception: A study in a Saudi ESL university-level context. Annual Review of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, 2, 18-41.

Halimi, S. S. (2008). Indonesian teachers' and students' preferences for error correction. Wacana, 10(1), 50–71.

Hammouda, A. (2011). A study of students and teachers' preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128-129.

Han, Z. H. (2002). Rethinking of corrective feedback in communicative language teaching. RELC Journal, 33, 1-33.

Hedgcock, J. & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 141– 163.

Hendrickson, J. M. (1984). The treatment of error in writing work. In S. McKay (Ed.), Composing in a second language (pp. 145-159). Rowley MA: Newbury House.

Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher-written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 255–286.

Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4(1), 33-54.

Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keh, C. (1990). Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation. ELT Journal, 44, 94-304.

Kulhavy, R. W. (1977). Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 211–232.

Lamberg, W. (1980). Self-provided and peer-provided feedback. College Composition and Communication, 31(1), 63-69.

Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203-218.

Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285–312.

Long, M. (1977). Teacher feedback on learner error: Mapping cognitions. In C. Y. H. Brown (Ed.), On TESOL`77 (pp. 278-294). Washington D.C.: TESOL.

Lyster, R., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott´s `What´s wrong with oral grammar correction'. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 457-467.

Mahfoodh, O. (2011). A qualitative case study of EFL students’ affective reactions to and perceptions of their teachers’ written feedback. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 14–25.

Mendonca, C. & Johnson, K. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 745-769.

Montgomery, J. L. & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher-written feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 82–99.

Nicole, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.

Noora, A. (2006). Iranian non-English majors' language learning preferences: The role of language institutes. Retrieved from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/site_map.php (accessed 5/1/2016).

Oladejo, J. A. (1993). Error correction in ESL: Learners’ preferences. TESL Canada Journal, 10, 71-89.

Paltridge, B. (2004). Approaches to teaching second language writing. 17th Educational Conference, Adelaide. Retrieved from https://celta.wikispaces.com/file/view/Paltridge.pdf/30724017/Paltridge.pdf

Radecki, P. & Swales J. (1988). ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16, 355-365.

Reichelt, M. (1999). Toward a comprehensive view of L2 writing: Foreign language writing in the U.S. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 181-204.

Rollinson, P. (1998). Peer response and revision in an ESL writing group: A case study. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid.

Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23-30.

Rothschild, D. & Klingenberg, F. (1990). Self and peer evaluation of writing in the interactive ESL classroom: An exploratory study. TESL Canada Journal, 8, (1), 52-65.

Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. N. Ortega (Ed.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133-164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Saito, H. (1994). Teachers' practices and students' preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46-70.

Schulz, R. A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students' and teachers' views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29(3), 343-364.

Schwartz, F. &. White, K. (2000). Making sense of it all: Giving and getting online course. In K. W. Weight (Ed.), The online teaching guide: A handbook of attitudes, strategies, and techniques for the virtual classroom (pp. 57–72). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Spear, K. (1988). Sharing writing: Peer response groups in English classes. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

Villamil, O. S. & De Guerrero, M. C. M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behaviour. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 51-75.

Williams, J. (2005). Teaching writing in second and foreign language classroom. Boston: McGraw Hill.

Zacharias, N. T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC journal, 38(1), 38-52.

Zhan, L. (2016). Written teacher feedback: Student perceptions, teacher perceptions, and actual teacher performance. English Language Teaching, 9(8), 73-84.

Zhu, H. (2010) An analysis of college students’ attitudes towards error correction in EFL context. English Language Teaching, 3, 127-130.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2010-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

Advances in Language and Literary Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.