Advertisement

Using Corrective Feedback on Writing to Enhance Vietnamese Learners’ Autonomy

  • Nhu Luan PhamEmail author
  • Noriko Iwashita
Chapter
Part of the International Perspectives on English Language Teaching book series (INPELT)

Abstract

To offset a traditional view of power dynamics between teachers and students in Vietnam, this chapter demonstrates how innovative teachers promoted learner autonomy in their university writing classes. The introduction of indirect corrective feedback stimulated improvements not only in learners’ grammatical accuracy in writing but also their independent decision-making and responsibility. This chapter covers implications for syllabus design, course content, and classroom teaching techniques that can increase learner autonomy.

References

  1. 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.Google Scholar
  2. Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  3. Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benson, P. (2013). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  5. Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 102–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. 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, 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dang, T. T. (2010). Learner autonomy in EFL studies in Vietnam: A discussion from sociocultural perspective. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Ferris, D., & 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.Google Scholar
  11. Goldstein, L. (2006). Feedback and revision in second language writing: Contextual, teacher, and student variables. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp.185–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Harman, K., & Nguyen, T. N. B. (2010). Reforming teaching and learning in Vietnam’s higher education system. In G. Harman, M. Hayden & T. N. Pham (Eds.), Reforming higher education in Vietnam: Challenges and priorities (pp. 65–86). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  14. Humphreys, G., & Wyatt, M. (2014). Helping Vietnamese university learners to become more autonomous. ELT Journal, 68(1), 52–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Le, Q. X. (2013). Fostering learner autonomy in language learning in tertiary education: An intervention study of university students in Ho Chi Minh city. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  16. Nguyen, T. C. L. (2009). Learner autonomy and EFL learning at the tertiary level in Vietnam. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
  17. Nguyen, T. N. (2014). Learner autonomy in language learning: Teachers’ beliefs. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.Google Scholar
  18. Pham, T. K. D. (2015). Different forms of corrective feedback and their effects on L2 students’ writing accuracy: A case study. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3(1), 10–17.Google Scholar
  19. Yeh, S.-W., & Lo, J.-J. (2009). Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback. Computer and Education, 52, 882–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Banking Academy of VietnamHanoiVietnam
  3. 3.School of Languages and CulturesThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations