The Effect of Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Written Syntactic Accuracy

Mohammadreza Valizadeh

Abstract


This quasi-experimental study, using a pretest-treatment-posttest-delayed posttest design, investigated the effects of two comprehensive corrective feedback strategies: direct corrective feedback (DCF), and metalinguistic explanation (ME) on L2 learners’ written syntactic accuracy. The participants were 90 Turkish EFL learners. After ensuring their homogeneity in terms of L2 proficiency using Oxford Quick Placement Test, they were assigned to three groups: DCF, ME, and No Feedback (NF). The treatment/control period lasted for five weeks, during which the experimental groups wrote an argumentative essay in class, received the unfocused feedback, and revised their corrected text. The participants in the NF group were provided with feedback only on content, orthography, and organization, but not on grammatical errors. Results of the posttests and delayed-posttests (after a two-week interval) revealed that both experimental groups significantly outperformed the NF group; however, no statistically significant difference was found between the DCF and ME groups. Pedagogical implications are discussed in the paper.


Keywords


Comprehensive/Unfocused Corrective Feedback, Written Corrective Feedback, Direct Corrective Feedback, Metalinguistic Explanation, Syntactic Accuracy

Full Text:

PDF

References


Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 702–726. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818770921

Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004

Bitchener, J., East, M., & Cartner, H. (2010). The effectiveness of providing second language (L2) writers with on-line written corrective feedback. Ako Aotearoa. Ako Aotearoa Publication. Retrieved from https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/download/ng/file/group-5/the-effectiveness-of-providing-second-language-writers-with-on-line-written-corrective-feedback.pdf

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

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168808089924

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback. System, 37(2), 322–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.12.006

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010a). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.002

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010b). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp016

Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001

Bonilla López, M., Van Steendam, E., Speelman, D., & Buyse, K. (2018). The differential effects of comprehensive feedback forms in the second language writing class. Language Learning, 68(3), 813–850. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12295

Bruton, A. (2009a). Designing research into the effects of grammar correction in L2 writing: Not so straightforward. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(2), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2009.02.005

Bruton, A. (2009b). Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were ... System, 37(4), 600–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.005

Bruton, A. (2010). Another reply to Truscott on error correction: Improved situated designs over statistics. System, 38(3), 491–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.07.001

Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9

DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed.), (pp. 94–112). New York, NY: Routledge.

DeKeyser, R. M. (1994). Implicit and explicit learning of second language grammar: A pilot study. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 188–194. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587210

DeKeyser, R. M. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(02), 195–222. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197002040

DeKeyser, R. M. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125–151). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Diab, N. M. (2015). Effectiveness of written corrective feedback: Does type of error and type of correction matter? Assessing Writing, 24, 16–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.02.001

Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. English Language Teaching, 63(2), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023

Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. New York, NY: Routledge.

Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes, a response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6

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

Ferris, D. R. (2004). The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime ...?). Journal of Response to Writing, 13(1), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005

Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81–104). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(02), 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using SPSS (4th. ed.). London: Sage.

Frear, D., & Chiu, Y. H. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ accuracy in new pieces of writing. System, 53, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.006

Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction and the development of second languages. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed.), (pp. 180–206). New York, NY: Routledge.

Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. (2004). Input, interaction and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(3), 283–302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100013097

Geranpayeh, A. (2003). A quick review of the English quick placement test. Extract from Research Notes, 12, 8–10. Retrieved from http://www.lingue.uniss.it/documenti/lingue/what_is_the_QPT.pdf

Guénette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), 40–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001

Guénette, D. (2012). The pedagogy of error correction: Surviving the written corrective feedback challenge. TESL CANADA JOURNAL/REVUE TESL DU CANADA, 30(1), 117–126. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i1.1129

Han, Z. H. (2002). Rethinking the role of corrective feedback in communicative language teaching. RELC Journal, 33(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820203300101

Hartshorn, K. J., Evans, N. W., Merrill, P. F., Sudweeks, R. R., Strong-Krause, D., & Anderson, N. J. (2010). Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 84–109. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.213781

Havranek, G. (2002). When is corrective feedback most likely to succeed? International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3–4), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00004-1

Hulstijn, J. H. (1995). Not all grammar rules are equal: Giving grammar instruction its proper place in foreign language teaching. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 359–386). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.

Hulstijn, J. H., & Schmidt, R. (1994). Guest editors’ introduction. AILA Review, 11, 5–10. Retrieved from http://www.aila.info/download/publications/review/AILA11.pdf

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Interpersonal aspects of response: Constructing and interpreting teacher written feedback. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 206–224). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2018). The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing. Language Teaching Research, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818802469

Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationships of types of written feedback to the development of second language writing skills. Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 305–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05359.x

Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2007). Sociocultural theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 201–224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lantolf, J. P., Thorne, S. L., & Poehner, M. E. (2015). Sociocultural theory and second language development. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 207–226). New York, NY: Routledge.

Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001

Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.10.001

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 438–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Lyster, R., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott’s ‘What’s wrong with oral grammar correction’’.’ Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 457–467. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.55.4.457

Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

McLaughlin, B. (1990). “Conscious” versus “unconscious” learning. TESOL Quarterly, 24(4), 617–634. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587111

Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (5th. ed.). Berkshire, England: Open University Press.

Phakiti, A. (2010). Analysing quantitative data. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Continuum companion to research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 39–49). New York, NY: Continuum Companions.

Polio, C., Fleck, C., & Leder, N. (1998). “If only I had more time”: ESL learners’ changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(1), 43–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90005-4

Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586390

Sachs, R., & Polio, C. (2007). Learners’ uses of two types of written feedback on a L2 writing revision task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(01), 67–100. https://doi.org/10.10170S0272263107070039

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129

Schmidt, R. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 206–226. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002476

Schmidt, R. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. Aila Review, 11, 11–26. Retrieved from http://www.aila.info/download/publications/review/AILA11.pdf

Schmidt, R. W. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning and teaching (pp. 1–63). Honolulu, HI: University of Honolulu.

Schmidt, R. W. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Semke, H. D. (1984). The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17(3), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x

Sheen, Y. (2010a). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(02), 203–234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990507

Sheen, Y. (2010b). Introduction: The role of oral and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(02), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990489

Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System, 37(4), 556–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002

Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23(1), 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829202300107

Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2013). The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 286–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.011

Shintani, N., Ellis, R., & Suzuki, W. (2014). Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language Learning, 64(1), 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12029

Soltanpour, F., & Valizadeh, M. (2018). Revision-mediated and attention-mediated feedback: Effects on EFL learners’ written syntactic accuracy. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(4), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.4p.83

Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2010). Second language acquisition. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (2nd ed.), (pp. 108–123). Abingdon, Oxon: Hodder Education.

Stefanou, C., & Révész, A. (2015). Direct written corrective feedback, learner differences, and the acquisition of second language article use for generic and specific plural reference. Modern Language Journal, 99(2), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12212

Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29–46. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/3424315.pdf

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 64–81). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Swain, M. (1991). French immersion and its offshoots: Getting two for one. In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Foreign language acquisition: Research and the classroom (pp. 91–103). Lexington, MA: Heath.

Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Gook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/16.3.371

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x

Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6

Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 337–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.05.002

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003

Truscott, J. (2009). Arguments and appearances: A response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 59–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.09.001

Truscott, J. (2010). Some thoughts on Anthony Bruton’ s critique of the correction debate. System, 38(2), 329–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.03.014

Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003

Van Beuningen, C. G. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1–27. Retrieved from http://revistas.um.es/ijes/article/view/119171

Van Beuningen, C. G. (2011). The effectiveness of comprehensive corrective feedback in second language writing. Oisterwijk: Boxpress.

Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.156.24beu

Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00674.x

VanPatten, B. (2015). Input processing in adult SLA. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed.), (pp. 113–134). New York, NY: Routledge.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.11n.1p.17

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




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

2010-2020 (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.