John Bitchener | Auckland University of Technology (AUT)
This article presents the results of a study examining the effectiveness of written corrective feedback (CF) on the simple past tense and the impact beliefs may have on students’ uptake of the feedback they receive. A seven-week study was carried out with 42 advanced EFL learners in Vientiane, Laos. Students’ beliefs about written CF were first collected, after which they were assigned to either the control group or to groups that received written CF according to their feedback preferences. Students produced four pieces of writing (pre-test, post-test and two delayed post-tests) that responded to four different narrative prompts. The targeted grammatical feature was the simple past tense. The study found that the three feedback groups showed significant improvement in the use of the targeted feature while the control group did not. Furthermore, the results seemed to indicate that beliefs might have impacted on the extent to which the Lao students improved their linguistic accuracy because the students who received their preferred type of feedback were more successful at eliminating the targeted errors than the ones who did not.
(1990) Class, codes and control 4: The structuring of pedagogic discourse. London: Routledge.
Crew, G., & Rogers, G.
(1992) Lucy’s bay. Nundah, Australia: Jam Roll Press.
Hathorn, L., & Rogers, G.
(1994) Way home. Sydney: Red Fox.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T.
(1996) Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T.
(2006) Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Nikolajeva, M., & Scott, C.
(2000) The dynamics of picturebook communication. Children’s Literature in Education, 31(4), 225–239.
Cited by
Cited by 23 other publications
Barrot, Jessie S.
2023. Using automated written corrective feedback in the writing classrooms: effects on L2 writing accuracy. Computer Assisted Language Learning 36:4 ► pp. 584 ff.
Bitchener, John
2019. The Intersection between SLA and Feedback Research. In Feedback in Second Language Writing, ► pp. 85 ff.
Bitchener, John
2021. Written Corrective Feedback. In The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching, ► pp. 207 ff.
Borràs, Judith & Sonia López-Serrano
2023. “How Can I Correct What I Don't Know?”. In New Approaches to the Investigation of Language Teaching and Literature [Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design, ], ► pp. 60 ff.
Breslin, Dermot
2021. Finding collective strength in collective despair; exploring the link between generic critical feedback and student performance. Studies in Higher Education 46:7 ► pp. 1312 ff.
Brown, Dan, Qiandi Liu & Reza Norouzian
2023. Effectiveness of written corrective feedback in developing L2 accuracy: A Bayesian meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research► pp. 136216882211473 ff.
2019. Online Tools for Feedback Engagement in Second Language Learning. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 9:1 ► pp. 58 ff.
Chen, Yuan-shan, Hui-Tzu Hsu & Hsuan-Yu Tai
2023. The relative effects of corrective feedback and language proficiency on the development of L2 pragmalinguistic competence: the case of request downgraders. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 0:0
Cheng, Xiaolong & Lawrence Jun Zhang
2021. Sustaining University English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Writing Performance through Provision of Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback. Sustainability 13:15 ► pp. 8192 ff.
Fan, Ning
2023. Exploring the Effects of Automated Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Students’ Writing Quality: A Mixed-Methods Study. SAGE Open 13:2
Han, Ye
2017. Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and learner engagement with written corrective feedback. System 69 ► pp. 133 ff.
Hassan, Mehmood Ul, Mehwish Malghani & Kinza Ali Zai
2021. EXPLORING UNDERGRADUATE EFL LEARNERS’ BELIEFS ABOUT WCF AND THEIR IMPACT ON IMPROVING WRITING SKILLS IN PAKISTANI UNIVERSITIES. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews 9:3 ► pp. 1430 ff.
Jiang, Lianjiang, Shulin Yu, Nan Zhou & Yiqin Xu
2023. English Writing Instruction in Chinese Students’ Experience: A Survey Study. RELC Journal 54:1 ► pp. 37 ff.
Li, Shaofeng & Saeed Roshan
2019. The associations between working memory and the effects of four different types of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 45 ► pp. 1 ff.
Rastgou, Ali
2022. How feedback conditions broaden or constrain knowledge and perceptions about improvement in L2 writing: A 12-week exploratory study. Assessing Writing 53 ► pp. 100633 ff.
Reynolds, Barry Lee & Xiaofang Zhang
2022. Medical School Students’ Preferences for and Perceptions of Teacher Written Corrective Feedback on English as a Second Language Academic Writing: An Intrinsic Case Study. Behavioral Sciences 13:1 ► pp. 13 ff.
SIA, Pei Fen Dawn & Yin Ling CHEUNG
2017. WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN WRITING INSTRUCTION: A QUALITATIVE SYNTHESIS OF RECENT RESEARCH. Issues in Language Studies 6:1
Sinha, Tara Shankar & Hossein Nassaji
2022. ESL learners’ perception and its relationship with the efficacy of written corrective feedback. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 32:1 ► pp. 41 ff.
Thi, Nang Kham & Marianne Nikolov
2022. How Teacher and Grammarly Feedback Complement One Another in Myanmar EFL Students’ Writing. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 31:6 ► pp. 767 ff.
Tian, Lili & Yu Zhou
2020. Learner engagement with automated feedback, peer feedback and teacher feedback in an online EFL writing context. System 91 ► pp. 102247 ff.
Yu, Shulin, Lianjiang Jiang & Nan Zhou
2020. Investigating what feedback practices contribute to students’ writing motivation and engagement in Chinese EFL context: A large scale study. Assessing Writing 44 ► pp. 100451 ff.
Zhang, Tiefu
2021. The effect of highly focused versus mid-focused written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge development. System 99 ► pp. 102493 ff.
Zhang, Tiefu, Xuemei Chen, Jiehui Hu & Pattarapon Ketwan
2021. EFL Students' Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback: Do Error Types, Language Proficiency, and Foreign Language Enjoyment Matter?. Frontiers in Psychology 12
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.