The Impact Students’ Preferences Have on Written Corrective Feedback Effectiveness
Keywords:
written corrective feedback, students’ preferences, acquisition, grammatical accuracyAbstract
Although written corrective feedback (WCF) has been shown to promote linguistic accuracy among L2 learners, the debate regarding its effectiveness remains open due to differing results. In this respect, individual preferences have been identified as crucial factors that must be comprehensively researched as they could mediate the effect of a WCF treatment. Although this conjecture has attracted researchers’ attention, it remains an underexplored variable as the existent studies have primarily focused on the strategies learners prefer and how these align with teachers’ responses to written texts; however, there is a lack of a more experimental approach to observing this phenomenon. Thus, this quantitative research, with a pre/posttest design, aimed to determine the effectiveness of WCF when the treatment is tailored to learners’ preferences. The sample consisted of 61 Pedagogy in English students from a Chilean university. Students’ preferences for WCF were collected through a questionnaire. Then, the participants were divided into a control group and two experimental groups: direct plus metalinguistic explanation and indirect plus metalinguistic clarification. Each experimental group was composed of students who had selected the feedback strategy they received and those who had not. Results indicate that both experimental groups significantly outperformed the control group, but no statistically significant differences were found between them. Additionally, no significant relationship was found between tailoring the feedback strategies to students’ preferences and the effectiveness of any type of feedback, which is substantial in an educational context since considering student preferences does not always have a positive impact on the learning process.
Downloads
References
AMRHEIN, H.; NASSAJI, H. Written Corrective Feedback: What Do Students and Teachers Think is Right and Why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 13, n. 2, p. 95–127, 2010.
ATKINSON, D.; TARDY C. SLW at the Crossroads: Finding a Way in the Field. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 42, p. 86–93, 2018.
BEUNINGEN, C. van; DE JONG, N.; KUIKEN, F. Evidence on the Effectiveness of Comprehensive Error Correction in Second Language Writing. Language Learning, v. 62, n. 1, p. 1–41, 2012.
BITCHENER, J.; FERRIS, D. Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing. New York, NY: Routledge, 2012. 232p.
BITCHENER, J.; KNOCH, U. The Value of Written Corrective Feedback for Migrant and International Students. Language Teaching Research, v. 12, n. 3, p. 409–431, 2008.
BITCHENER, J. Why Some L2 Learners Fail to Benefit From Written Corrective Feedback. In: NASSAJI, K.; KARTCHAVA, E. (ed.). Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning: Research, Theory, Applications, Implications. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis, 2017. p. 129–140.
CHEN, S.; NASSAJI, H.; LIU, Q. EFL Learners’ Perceptions and Preferences of Written Corrective Feedback: A Case Study of University Students From Mainland China. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, v. 1, n. 5, p. 1–17, 2016.
DEMBO, M.; HOWARD, L. Advice About the Use of Learning Styles: A Major Myth in Education. Journal of College Reading and Learning, v. 37, n. 2, p. 101–109, 2007.
DIAB, N. Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback: Does Type of Error and Type of Correction Matter? Assessing Writing, v. 24, p. 16–34, 2015.
ELLIS, R. A Typology of Written Corrective Feedback Types. ELT Journal, v. 63, n. 2, p. 97–107, 2009.
ELLIS, R. Epilogue: A Framework for Investigating Oral and Written Corrective Feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 32, n. 2, p. 335–349, 2010.
ELLIS, R.; BARKHUIZEN, G. Analyzing Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 416 p.
ELWOOD, J.; BODE, J. Student Preferences vis-à-vis Teacher Feedback in University EFL Writing Classes in Japan. System, v. 42, n. 1, p. 333–343, 2014.
FERRIS, D. Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing Studies. Language Teaching, v. 45, n. 4, p. 446–459, 2012.
FREAR, D.; CHIU, Y. The Effect of Focused and Unfocused Indirect Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Accuracy in New Pieces of Writing. System, v. 53, p. 24–34, 2015.
GAN, Z.; AN, Z.; LIU, F. Teacher Feedback Practices, Student Feedback Motivation, and Feedback Behavior: How Are They Associated With Learning Outcomes? Frontiers in Psychology, v. 12, p. 1–14, 2021.
GHANI, M.; ASGHER, T. Effects of Teacher and Peer Feedback on Students’ Writing at Secondary Level. Journal of Educational Research, v. 15, n. 2, p. 84–98, 2012.
GOLDSCHNEIDER, J.; DEKEYSER, R. Explaining the “Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition” in English: A Meta-Analysis of Multiple Determinants. Language Learning, v. 55, n. 1, p. 27–77, 2005.
GUO, X.; YANG, Y. Effects of Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Third-Person Singular Form and the Mediating Role of Cognitive Style. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, v. 47, n. 4, p. 841–858, 2018.
HAN, Y. Mediating and Being Mediated: Learner Beliefs and Learner Engagement With Written Corrective Feedback. System, v. 69, p. 133–142, 2017.
HU, G. Culture and Peer Feedback. In: HYLAND, K.; HYLAND, F. (ed.). Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. p. 45–63.
HYLAND, K.; HYLAND, F. Feedback on Second Language Students’ Writing. Language Teaching, v. 39, n. 2, p. 83–101, 2006.
IRWIN, B. Written Corrective Feedback: Student Preferences and Teacher Feedback Practices. IAFOR Journal of Language Learning, v. 3, n. 2, p. 35–58, 2018.
KARIM, K.; NASSAJI, H. ESL Students’ Perceptions of Written Corrective Feedback: What Type of Feedback Do They Prefer and Why? The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, v. 4, n. 1, p. 5–25, 2015.
KARIM, K.; NASSAJI, H. The Effects of Written Corrective Feedback. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, v. 3, n. 1, p. 28–52, 2019.
LEE, I. Understanding Teachers’ Written Feedback Practices in Hong Kong Secondary Classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 17, n. 2, p. 69–85, 2008.
LEE, I. Utility of Focused/Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback Research for Authentic L2 Writing Classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 49, p. 1–7, 2020.
LIU, Q.; WU, S. Same Goal, Different Beliefs: Students’ Preferences and Teachers’ Perceptions of Feedback on Second Language Writing. Journal of Writing Research, v. 11, n. 2, p. 299–330, 2019.
MIAO, Y.; BADGER, R.; ZHEN, Y. A Comparative Study of Peer and Teacher Feedback in a Chinese EFL Writing Class. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 15, p. 179-200, 2006.
MOZGALINA, A. More or Less Choice? The Influence of Choice on Task Motivation and Task Engagement. System, v. 49, p. 120–132, 2015.
MUÑOZ, B. Contribución del feedback correctivo escrito indi-recto en el aprendizaje del morfema –s de verbos en inglés en tercera persona singular, en estudiantes de enseñanza básica. Literatura y Lingüística, v. 35, n. 1, p. 275-296, 2017.
MUÑOZ, B.; FERREIRA, A. El feedback correctivo escrito indirecto en el aprendizaje de la forma comparativa de adjetivos en inglés. Logos, v. 27, n. 1, p. 73-89, 2017.
MUÑOZ, B.; ORTIZ, M.; SÁEZ, K. Preferencias y opiniones de estudiantes de un programa de Pedagogía en Inglés con distinto nivel de competencia lingüística acerca del tratamiento de los errores en la escritura en LE: estudio de caso en una universidad chilena. Literatura y Lingüística, v. 47, p. 279-306, 2023.
MUÑOZ, B.; SÁEZ, K. El feedback correctivo escrito indirecto en el tratamiento de la concordancia sujeto-verbo en tercera persona singular entre estudiantes de Inglés como LE. Alpha, v. 49, p. 275-290, 2019.
ORTIZ, M. Uso de la retroalimentación correctiva focalizada indirecta con claves metalingüísticas en la adquisición del sufijo -s en la tercera persona del singular en inglés, en estudiantes de un programa de formación pedagógica en EFL de una universidad chilena. Revista Folios, v. 44, p. 127–136, 2016.
RUMMEL, S.; BITCHENER, J. The Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback and the Impact Lao Learners’ Beliefs Have on Uptake. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, v. 38, n. 1, p. 64–82, 2015.
SAELI, H.; CHENG, A. Student Writers’ Affective Engagement With Grammar-Centred Written Corrective Feedback: The Impact of (Mis)Aligned Practices and Perceptions. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 22, n. 2, p. 109–132, 2019.
SCHMIDT, R. Attention, Awareness, and Individual Differences in Language Learning. In: CLS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE (CLaSIC), 4., 2010, Singapore. Proceedings […]. Singapore: National University of Singapore/ Centre for Language Studies, 2010. p. 721–737.
SCHULZ, R. Cultural Differences in Student and Teacher Perceptions Concerning the Role of Grammar Instruction and Corrective Feedback: USA-Colombia. Modern Language Journal, v. 85, n. 2, p. 244–258, 2001.
SHEEN, Y. Corrective Feedback, Individual Differences and Second Language Learning. New York, NY: Springer Verlag, 2011. 216 p.
SHINTANI, N.; ELLIS, R.; SUZUKI, W. Effects of Written Feedback and Revision on Learners’ Accuracy in Using Two English Grammatical Structures. Language Learning, v. 64, n. 1, p. 103–131, 2014.
SINHA, T.; NASSAJI, N. ESL Learners’ Perception and its Relationship With the Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 32, n. 1, p. 41–56, 2022.
STORCH, N.; WIGGLESWORTH, G. Learners Processing, Uptake, and Retention of Corrective Feedback on Writing: Case Studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 32, n. 2, p. 303–334, 2010.
SUZUKI, W.; NASSAJI, H.; SATO, K. The Effects of Feedback Explicitness and Type of Target Structure on Accuracy in Revision and New Pieces of Writing. System, v. 81, p. 135–145, 2019.
VAN DER KLEIJ, F. Comparison of Teacher and Student Perceptions of Formative Assessment Feedback Practices and Association With Individual Student Characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education, v. 85, n. 1, p. 175–189, 2019.
ZHANG, L.; CHENG, X. Examining the Effects of Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback on L2 EAP Students’ Linguistic Performance: A Mixed-Methods Study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, v. 54, p. 1–15, 2021.
ZHANG, T.; CHEN, X.; HU, J.; KETWAN, P. EFL Students’ Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback: Do Error Types, Language Proficiency, and Foreign Language Enjoyment Matter? Frontiers in Psychology, v. 12, p. 1–12, 2021.
ZHANG, T. The Effect of Focused Versus Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback on the Development of University-Level Learners’ Explicit and Implicit Knowledge in an EFL Context. 2018. Thesis (Doctorate on Philosophy) – The University of Sydney, Sidney, 2018.
ZHANG, Z.; HYLAND, K. Student Engagement With Teacher and Automated Feedback on L2 Writing. Assessing Writing, v. 36, p. 90–102, 2018.
ZHENG, Y.; YU, S. Student Engagement With Teacher Written Corrective Feedback in EFL Writing: A Case Study of Chinese Lower-Proficiency Students. Assessing Writing, v. 37, p. 13–24, 2018.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Belén Carolina Muñoz Muñoz, Marisol A. Mora Castillo, Marcos A. Riveros
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Autores de artigos publicados pela RBLA mantêm os direitos autorais de seus trabalhos, licenciando-os sob a licença Creative Commons BY Attribution 4.0, que permite que os artigos sejam reutilizados e distribuídos sem restrição, desde que o trabalho original seja corretamente citado.
