TY - JOUR
T1 - The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing
AU - Karim, Khaled
AU - Nassaji, Hossein
N1 - Funding Information:
We are grateful to Professor Frank Boers, the co-editor of Language Teaching Research, and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments on earlier drafts of this article. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2018.
PY - 2020/7/1
Y1 - 2020/7/1
N2 - This study investigated the short-term and delayed effects of comprehensive written corrective feedback (WCF) on L2 learners’ revision accuracy and new pieces of writing (i.e., the transfer effect of feedback). Three types of feedback were compared: direct feedback and two types of indirect feedback that differed in their degree of explicitness (i.e., underlining only and underlining+metalinguistic cues). Fifty-three intermediate level learners of English as a second language (ESL) were divided randomly into four groups: One direct, two indirect, and a control group. Students produced three pieces of writing from different picture prompts and revised them over a three-week period. Each group also produced a new piece of writing two weeks later. The study included seven sessions: Writing 1, revision of Writing 1, Writing 2, revision of Writing 2, Writing 3, revision of Writing 3, and Writing 4 (delayed writing). The results showed that all the three feedback groups significantly outperformed the control group in revision tasks. Some short-term accuracy improvements were also found on new pieces of writing for direct and underlining+metalinguistic feedback, but the effects were largely non-significant.
AB - This study investigated the short-term and delayed effects of comprehensive written corrective feedback (WCF) on L2 learners’ revision accuracy and new pieces of writing (i.e., the transfer effect of feedback). Three types of feedback were compared: direct feedback and two types of indirect feedback that differed in their degree of explicitness (i.e., underlining only and underlining+metalinguistic cues). Fifty-three intermediate level learners of English as a second language (ESL) were divided randomly into four groups: One direct, two indirect, and a control group. Students produced three pieces of writing from different picture prompts and revised them over a three-week period. Each group also produced a new piece of writing two weeks later. The study included seven sessions: Writing 1, revision of Writing 1, Writing 2, revision of Writing 2, Writing 3, revision of Writing 3, and Writing 4 (delayed writing). The results showed that all the three feedback groups significantly outperformed the control group in revision tasks. Some short-term accuracy improvements were also found on new pieces of writing for direct and underlining+metalinguistic feedback, but the effects were largely non-significant.
KW - SLA
KW - comprehensive corrective feedback
KW - direct and indirect feedback
KW - focused feedback
KW - unfocused feedback
KW - written corrective feedback
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058698292&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058698292&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1362168818802469
DO - 10.1177/1362168818802469
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85058698292
SN - 1362-1688
VL - 24
SP - 519
EP - 539
JO - Language Teaching Research
JF - Language Teaching Research
IS - 4
ER -