Written Corrective Feedback

Abstract

Written corrective feedback (WCF), also known as error feedback, error correction or grammar correction (Lee, 2004; Truscott, 1996), refers to feedback on language errors for the purpose of developing students’ written accuracy (Bitchener & Ferris, 2012; Bitchener & Storch, 2016).

Appendices

The Research Questions

• 1. What are teachers’ beliefs about comprehensive and focused WCF? What have shaped their beliefs?

• 2. Do teachers put their beliefs about comprehensive/focused WCF into practice? What discrepancies are there, if any, between their beliefs and practice, and what are the reasons for such discrepancies?

• 3. What are students’ attitudes to comprehensive WCF? What are the reasons for their preference for/dislike of comprehensive WCF?

• 4. Is focused WCF more effective than comprehensive WCF in helping students improve written accuracy?

• 5. May a combination of focused and comprehensive WCF be effective in helping students improve their accuracy in writing?

• 6. How do students respond to/engage with coded WCF? Does coded WCF help students improve written accuracy better than uncoded WCF?

• 7. Is providing correct answers for errors (i.e. direct WCF) effective in helping students improve written accuracy?

• 8. Is metalinguistic explanation supplemented with direct WCF effective in enhancing students’ written accuracy?

• 9. What problems/challenges do teachers face in giving WCF?

• 10. What roles does language awareness play in influencing teachers’ WCF?

Suggested Resources

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

This volume, which is the first of its kind to bring together the second language acquisition and writing/composition research, augments our understanding of written corrective feedback by surveying theory, research and practice on the topic. Authored by two prominent feedback researchers in the field, the book provides a state-of-the-art review of written corrective feedback, as well as a critical analysis and comprehensive synthesis of research on oral and written corrective feedback in second language acquisition, and impact of written corrective feedback in second language writing. The book also explores practical applications of written corrective feedback theory and research, ending with a chapter that addresses how writing teachers can be prepared to give written corrective feedback in language learning and composition contexts.

Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

With a focus on written corrective feedback and L2 development, this book addresses the language learning potential of written corrective feedback, advancing our understanding of the role of written corrective feedback in second language acquisition. The book brings together cognitive and sociocultural perspectives, both theoretical and empirical, and critically reviews how these two different paradigms can contribute to our understanding of key issues in the controversial topic of written corrective feedback. Specifically, the authors examine cognitive processing conditions, context-related and individual learner factors in facilitating or inhibiting the effectiveness of written corrective feedback for L2 development. The book provides useful insights for L2 writing researchers and teachers, offering them useful theoretical, methodological and pedagogical implications for research and practice.

Ferris, D. R. (2011). Treatment of error in second language student writing (2nd ed). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

This second edition of the book by Ferris examines the topic of error treatment for the benefit of second language teaching. Although intended mainly for writing teachers, the volume offers a balanced treatment of theory and practice, providing researchers with ideas for classroom research and practical implications for teachers to help them enhance their written corrective feedback practices. Common issues that plague novice and experienced writing teachers are examined in the book, such as whether teachers should respond to errors comprehensively or selectively, which errors teachers should respond to and when, and what strategies are most effective to help students improve written accuracy. The book also offers ideas about how teachers can be trained to treat errors in student writing in writing teacher preparation programmes. The discussion/analysis questions at the end of each chapter can provide practical ideas for teacher professional development workshops.

Lee, I. (2019). Teacher written corrective feedback: Less is more. Language Teaching, 52, 524–536.

This position paper addresses a central debate in the written corrective feedback literature—whether teachers should respond to all errors in student writing comprehensively, or whether they should adopt a focused approach to written corrective feedback. In the paper, Lee argues that more written corrective feedback is not better, but instead less is more. Focused written corrective feedback is recommended as “the staple approach” for L2 student writers except for proficient or advanced learners who make few errors in writing. The author begins by analyzing the problems arising from comprehensive written corrective feedback and then examines the benefits of focused written corrective feedback for teachers and students. She further scrutinizes some common arguments against focused written corrective feedback that pose impediments to its implementation and provides a critical analysis of these arguments to strengthen her case for focused written corrective feedback. The position paper concludes with suggestions about what teachers, teacher educators and researchers can do to move forward with focused written corrective feedback.

Storch, N. (2018). Written corrective feedback from sociocultural theoretical perspectives: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 51, 262–277.

This “Thinking allowed” paper is intended mainly for researchers as it sets out a relatively new research agenda for written corrective feedback, with concrete suggestions of research ideas for interested researchers. Storch begins by rightly indicating a lacuna in extant research on written corrective feedback, which is primarily experimental or quasi-experimental in nature, thus lacking ecological validity and pedagogical relevance. In her paper, she proposes a research agenda that is informed by sociocultural theory, drawing on three specific areas of the theory. The first area focuses on the zone of proximal development and scaffolding to ascertain the nature and appropriateness of written corrective feedback. The second area concerns the notion of mediating tools, such as computer-mediated feedback, to assess their effectiveness in helping students improve written accuracy. The final area draws on activity theory, focusing specifically on the contextual and individual learner factors that impinge on teachers’ provision of written corrective feedback, as well as students’ engagement with it. Each of the three areas is illustrated with examples of research tasks, with useful suggestions about research design, data collection, and data analysis.