scholarly journals The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback and Language Analytic Ability on Chinese Learners’ Explicit and Implicit Knowledge of English Articles

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Jiang ◽  
Hailing Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Implicit Knowledge ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Chinese Learners ◽  
English Articles ◽  
Explicit And Implicit Knowledge

Oral corrective feedback on written errors

2019 ◽  
Vol 171 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-279
Author(s):  
Sajad Afshari ◽  
Azizollah Dabaghi ◽  
Saeed Ketabi
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Implicit Knowledge ◽  
Oral Feedback ◽  
Oral Corrective Feedback ◽  
English Articles ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Explicit And Implicit Knowledge

Abstract The current study investigated the differential effect of two types of oral feedback – graduated oral corrective feedback (GOCF) in accordance with sociocultural theory (SCT) and supplemented direct oral corrective feedback (SDOCF) in accordance with cognitive-interactionist theory (CIT) – on Iranian pre-intermediate EFL learners’ written errors. The study used a pretest-treatment-immediate posttest-delayed posttest design with three groups. Two types of tests were employed to measure the learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of English articles. The results of the repeated measures mixed-design ANOVAs and post-hoc analyses demonstrated that while both types of feedback significantly improved both types of knowledge in the immediate posttest, a clear advantage was found for the GOCF in the long term. The findings indicate that oral feedback, especially the GOCF within SCT, could be an effective means of addressing learners’ written errors and improving their implicit knowledge.

The Empirical Evidence of the Effect of Written Corrective Feedback From Information Processing Perspective

2018 ◽  
pp. 30-56
Keyword(s):  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Theoretical Expectation ◽  
Affective Factors ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Information Processing Perspective ◽  
English Articles ◽  
Positive Effect

The theoretical perspectives reviewed in the previous chapter have led many in the field to believe that written CF can have a positive effect on L2 learning. The recent written CF studies reviewed in this chapter confirmed the theoretical expectation. However, it needs to be noted that although more explicit written CF types, such as metalinguistic explanation, direct correction, and direct correction plus metalinguistic explanation were proved to facilitate the learning of English articles and past tense for students of different proficiency levels, more research is needed to find out the correlation between the complexity and written CF type. Furthermore, whether these types of written CF could facilitate the learning of more complex language features needs to be examined. Last but not least, learner's factors, including affective factors, learning aptitude, motivation, and so on need to be investigated regarding the extent to which they may have an impact on the effect of written CF.

DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF ORAL AND WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN THE ESL CLASSROOM

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Younghee Sheen
Keyword(s):  
First Language ◽  
Corrective Feedback ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Written Corrective Feedback ◽  
Grammatical Accuracy ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
English Articles ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
And Control

This article examines whether there is any difference between the effect of oral and written corrective feedback (CF) on learners’ accurate use of English articles. To this end, the current research presents the results of a quasi-experimental study with a pretest, immediate-posttest, delayed-posttest design, using 12 intact intermediate English-as-a-second-language classes with adult learners of various first language backgrounds. Five groups were formed: oral recasts (n= 26), oral metalinguistic (n= 26), written direct correction (n= 31), written direct metalinguistic (n= 32), and control (n= 28). All four experimental groups completed two 30-min communicative narrative tasks. For the oral CF groups, students were asked to retell a story during which CF was provided. For the written CF groups, students were first asked to rewrite a story and then given CF. The acquisition of English articles was measured by means of a speeded dictation test, a written narrative test, and an error correction test. One-way ANOVAs with post hoc comparisons indicated that all CF groups, except for oral recasts, significantly outperformed the control group in the immediate and delayed posttests. These findings show that, whereas implicit oral recasts that involve article errors were not facilitative to learning, the other CF types were effective in helping learners improve the grammatical accuracy of English articles irrespective of language analytic ability. Overall, these results suggest that the degree of explicitness of both oral and written CF—rather than the medium in which the CF is provided—is the key factor that influences CF effectiveness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document