High-school EFL students' perceptions on teacher written corrective feedback

Article Sidebar

 PDF 
Published Dec 22, 2021
DOI https://doi.org/10.29035/ucmaule.61.11

Main Article Content

Eliana Berardo
Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0030-4261
Pedro Luis Luchini
Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7692-8361

Abstract

There has been a shift in focus in the theoretical discussions on written corrective feedback. Nowadays, it is less common to challenge its overall effectiveness. Researchers tend to focus on the amount and the type of feedback provided, as these aspects are believed to determine its effectiveness. In addition to the psycholinguistic perspectives that take into account different language acquisition theories, the affective aspect of student-teacher interaction should also be considered. The way students interpret written corrective feedback will be determined, to a great extent, by their expectations. The present study looks into the preferences of two groups of high-school students of English as a foreign language in Mar del Plata, Argentina, as to the quantity and quality of written corrective feedback they receive. These two groups of students had different levels of English competence. This helped determine whether these differences in L2 command had an impact on their preferences and expectations as regards written corrective feedback. The results showed that both groups recognized the value of teacher feedback as a learning tool, and preferred to receive non-targeted feedback. Likewise, the more advanced students turned out to be more receptive to the use of questions and imperatives in their teachers' comments.


Article Details

Issue
No 61 (2021): UCMaule
Section
Estudios
References

Amrhein, H. R. & Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: what do students and teachers prefer and why. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 95-127. https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/article/view/19886

Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Ellis, N. C., Holland, J., Ke, J., Larsen-Freeman, D. & Schoenemann, T. (2009). Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning, 59, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00533.x 





Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 102-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004


Bitchener, J. (2012). Written corrective feedback for L2 development: Current knowledge and future research. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 855-860. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43267894 


Burke, D. & Pieterick, J. (2010). Giving students effective written feedback. Open University Press.


Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023


Ellis, R. (2015). Grammar teaching for language learning. Babylonia, 2(14), 10-15. http://babylonia.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/2014-2/Ellis.pdf 


Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M. & Takashima, H. (2008). The Effects of Focused and Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback in an English as a Foreign Language Context. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 353-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001


Ferris, D., Pezone, S., Tade, C. & Tinti, S. (1997). The Case for Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes: A Response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ844661.pdf 


Ferris, D. (1999) “The Case for Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes: A Response to Truscott (1996)”. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6 


Ferris D. (2002). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. University of Michigan Press.


Ferris, D., Liu, H., Sinha, A., Senna, M. (2012). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009 


Gass, S. (2018). Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner. Routledge.


Iravani, H., Hemmati, F. & Ahmadpoor, F. (2014). The Impact of EFL Teachers’ Comment Types on Students’ Revision. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 7(3), 326-338.


López Casoli, M. y Berardo, E. (2016). El modo imperativo como forma de devolución sobre la escritura en inglés como lengua extranjera. En Castro, A., Agüero, G., Raffo, C., Gonzalez de Gatti, M. M., Romano, M. E., Actas del I Congreso Internacional Lenguas-Migraciones-Culturas. (176-187). http://hdl.handle.net/11086/4567 


López Casoli, M. y Berardo, E. (2018) El proceso de devolución sobre la escritura académica en inglés: percepciones de docentes universitarios. Revista Brasileira de Ensino Superior, 4(2), 84-102. https://doi.org/10.18256/2447-3944.2018.v4i2.2462


Machado, C., Lucas, S. y Berardo, E. (noviembre, 2015). La influencia del feedback comprensivo y selectivo en el proceso de escritura en Inglés como lengua extranjera. Trabajo presentado en JELENS, XV Jornadas y I Congreso Latinoamericano de Enseñanza de Lenguas Extranjeras en el Nivel Superior, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina.


Montgomery, J.L., & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher-written feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 82–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.04.002


Muñoz Muñoz, B. C. (2017). Contribución del feedback correctivo escrito indirecto en el aprendizaje del morfema -s de verbos en inglés en tercera persona singular, en estudiantes de enseñanza básica. Literatura y Didáctica (Universidad Católica Silva Heríquez), 35, 275-296. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0716-58112017000100273 


Rashtchi, M., & Mirshahidi, S. (2011). The Primacy of Teacher Imperative Commentaries in the Improvement of Iranian English Majors’ Writing Ability. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, l3(1), 119-150. https://ijals.usb.ac.ir/article_81.html


Sotoudehnama, E. & Molavi, M. (2014). The Effects of Teachers’ Written Comment Types and Iranian EFL Learners’ Attitudes. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 11(4), 21-51. http://www.asiatefl.org/main/main.php?inx_journals=42&inx_contents=388&main=6&sub=5&submode=3&PageMode=JournalView&s_title=-The_Effects_of_Teachers_Written_Comment_Types_and_Iranian_EFL_Learners_Attitudes 


Sugita, Y. (2006). The Impact of Teachers’ Comment Types on Students’ Revisions. ELT Journal, 60(1), 34-40. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci079


Tajik, L., Fakhari, M., Hashamdar, M. & Zadeh Habib, S. (2016). Three Types of Comments on Content: Teacher vs. Peer Feedback. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 7(4), 141-166. https://tesl.shirazu.ac.ir/article_3656.html 


Truscott, J. (1996). The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x 


Truscott, J. (1999). The Case for “The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes”: A Response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6 


Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 337–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.05.002 


Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003





How to Cite
Berardo, E., & Luchini, P. (2021). High-school EFL students’ perceptions on teacher written corrective feedback. UCMaule, (61), 11-33. https://doi.org/10.29035/ucmaule.61.11

Información de la Licencia
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.