Teachers’ Focused Corrective Feedback in High School Learners’ Composition

Yafei Xiao

doi:10.54691/zhv5b055

Authors

Yafei Xiao

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/zhv5b055

Keywords:

Written corrective feedback, students’ engagement, error logs, revision, collaborative learning.

Abstract

Writing is one of the most important skills in English, through which students can express their inner thoughts by the correct use of grammar, the accurate use of vocabulary and the well organized structure, which can be seen as the epitome of learners’ language ability. However, it is no denying that writing is a weak point for many students, wherein they make various grammar mistakes, leading to the low quality of their writing. Fortunately, with the development of process-oriented writing approach, the written corrective feedback has been proved to be an effective way to improve the writing accuracy for students. This paper aims to provide effective strategies for teachers when giving written corrective feedback, and thus improve students’writing ability.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Cheng, X. L., & Zhang, L. J. (2022). Teachers helping students improve their writing in English as a foreign language (EFL) through written feedback: The case of native and nonnative English-speaking teachers ’beliefs. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(804313), 1–14.

[2] Ekanayaka, W.I., Ellis, R., Does asking learners to revise add to the effect of written corrective

[3] Feedback on L2 acquisition? System, https: // doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.system. 2020.102341. Ellis, R. (1994). The Study ofSecond Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford: Oxford UP.

[4] Ellis, R. et al. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System [J], 36(3), 353-371.

[5] Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal [J], 63(2), 97-107.

[6] Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing Composition Errors: An Experiment. Modern Language Journal [J], 60(2), 140-149.

[7] Lee, I. (2017). Classroom writing Assessment and Feedback in L2 School Context. Springer. Long, M. (1996). Handbook of second language acquisition [M]. San Diego: Academic Press.

[8] Jiang, L., Yu, S., & Wang, C. (2022). Second language writing instructors ’ feedback practice in response to automated writing evaluation: A sociocultural perspective. System, 93(102302), 1–12.

[9] Schmidt, R. (1990). The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics [J], 1 1(2), 129-1 58.

[10] Shitani, N., Ellis, R. (2013)The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners ’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal ofSecond Language Writing. 22(3), 286-306.

[11] Syed Muhammad Mujtaba, et ra.(2021) Individual and collaborative processing of written corrective feedback affects second language writing accuracy and revision. Assessing Writing, 50(100566). 1-10.

[12] Wing Man Erica Lau, et ra (2024). Error logs in the second language classroom: Exploring the relationship between learner engagement with written corrective feedback and improvements in writing accuracy. System. 123(103329)

[13] Yang, et ra.(2023). Understanding the impact of teacher feedback on EFL students' use of

[14] self-regulated writing strategies. Journal Of Second Language Writing,60(101015), 1-10.

[15] Zhang, L. J., & Cheng, X. L. (2021). Examining the effects of comprehensive written corrective feedback on L2 EAP students ’ linguistic performance: A mixed-methods study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 49(101043), 1–15.

[16] Zhang, Z. (2021). Promoting student engagement with feedback: insights from collaborative pedagogy and teacher feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. DOI: 10. 1080/02602938.2021.1933900.

[17] Zhang, Z., & Hyland, K. (2022). Fostering student engagement with feedback: An integrated approach. Assessing Writing, 51, (100586). 1-5.