Volume 168, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This study investigated the effects of comprehensive feedback on learners’ grammatical accuracy during text revision and in new writing tasks in light of proficiency level. It also sought to determine to what extent learners’ proficiency level plays a role in their feedback preferences and attitudes towards the feedback. The participants were 52 low proficiency and 39 high proficiency foreign language university learners, who were randomly assigned to a direct corrective feedback, a metalinguistic feedback with rule reminders, and a self-correction group. All learners wrote four compositions and completed a questionnaire after the treatment to elicit their attitudes towards the feedback and their feedback preferences. Results showed that the treatment effectively enhanced both low and high proficiency learners’ immediate grammatical accuracy and accuracy improvement. Also, a relation between proficiency level and learners’ attitudes towards the feedback as well as an association between proficiency level and learners’ feedback preferences were found.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Amrhein, H. R. , & Nassaji, H.
    (2010) Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers think is right and why?Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics/Revue Canadienne de Linguistique Appliquee, 13(2), 95–127.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Belcher, D. , & Liu, J.
    (2004) Conceptualizing discourse/responding to text. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 3–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bitchener, J.
    (2008) Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102–118. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2012) A reflection on “the language learning potential” of written CF. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 348–363. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bitchener, J. , & Ferris, D.
    (2012) Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bitchener, J. , & Knoch, U.
    (2008) The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409–431. doi: 10.1177/1362168808089924
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168808089924 [Google Scholar]
  7. (2009) The value of a focused approach to written corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 63(3), 204–211. doi: 10.1093/elt/ccn043
    https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn043 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2010a) Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207–217. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2010b) The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193–214. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp016
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp016 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bitchener, J. , & Storch, N.
    (2016) Written corrective feedback for L2 development (Vol.96). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bouwer, R. , Béguin, A. , Sanders, T. , & van den Bergh, H.
    (2014) Effect of genre on the generalizability of writing scores. Language Testing, 32, 83–100. doi: 10.1177/0265532214542994
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214542994 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bruton, A.
    (2009) Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were…. System, 37(4), 600–613. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.09.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chandler, J.
    (2003) The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267–296. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(03)00038‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Creswell, J. W.
    (2008) Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd edition). Princeton, NJ: Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Creswell, J. W. , & Clark, V. L.
    (2011) Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Second edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. De Leeuw, E. D. , & Dillman, D. A.
    (2008) International handbook of survey methodology. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Diab, N.
    (2015) Effectiveness of written corrective feedback: Does type of error and type of correction matter?Assessing Writing, 24, 16–34. doi: 10.1016/j.asw.2015.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  19. Diab, R. L.
    (2005a) EFL university students’ preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 38(1), 27–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2005b) Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canada Journal, 23(1), 28–43. doi: 10.18806/tesl.v23i1.76
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v23i1.76 [Google Scholar]
  21. Ellis, R.
    (2009) Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1). Retrieved fromescholarship.org/uc/item/2504d6w3.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 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, 36(3), 353–371. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  23. Enginarlar, H.
    (1993) Student response to teacher feedback in EFL writing. System, 21(2), 193–204. doi: 10.1016/0346‑251X(93)90041‑E
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(93)90041-E [Google Scholar]
  24. Evans, N. W. , Hartshorn, K. J. , McCollum, R. M. , & Wolfersberger, M.
    (2010) Contextualizing corrective feedback in second language writing pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 445–463. doi: 10.1177/1362168810375367
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375367 [Google Scholar]
  25. Evans, N. W. , James Hartshorn, K. , & Strong-Krause, D.
    (2011) The efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback for university-matriculated ESL learners. System, 39(2), 229–239. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2011.04.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.04.012 [Google Scholar]
  26. Ferris, D.
    (2006) Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp.81–104). New York NY: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2004) The “Grammar Correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime …?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 49–62. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005 [Google Scholar]
  28. (1999) The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–11. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(99)80110‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2010) Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181–201. doi: 10.1017/S0272263109990490
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490 [Google Scholar]
  30. Ferris, D. & Hedgcock, J. S.
    (2005) Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice (2nd edition). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ferris, D. , Liu, H. , Sinha, A. , & Senna, M.
    (2013) Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307–329. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  32. Ferris, D. , & Roberts, B.
    (2001) Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(01)00039‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X [Google Scholar]
  33. Field, A.
    (2013) Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Groenendijk, T. , Janssen, T. , Rijlaarsdam, G. , & van den Bergh, H.
    (2013) Learning to be creative. The effects of observational learning on students’ design products and processes. Learning and Instruction, 28, 35–47. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  35. Guénette, D.
    (2007) Is feedback pedagogically correct?Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(1), 40–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Hamouda, A.
    (2011) A study of students and teachers’ preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(3). doi: 10.5539/elt.v4n3p128
    https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p128 [Google Scholar]
  37. Hedgcock, J. , & Lefkowitz, N.
    (1996) Some input on input: Two analyses of student response to expert feedback in L2 writing. The Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 207–308. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1996.tb01612.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01612.x [Google Scholar]
  38. Hedgcock, J. S. , & Lefkowitz, N.
    (1994) Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(2), 141–163. doi: 10.1016/1060‑3743(94)90012‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4 [Google Scholar]
  39. Hyland, F.
    (1988) The Impact of Teacher Written Feedback on Individual Writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 255–286. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(98)90017‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90017-0 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hyland, K. , & Hyland, F.
    (2006b) Interpersonal aspects of response: Constructing and interpreting teacher written feedback. InFeedback in ESL writing: Contexts and Issues (pp.206–224). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524742.013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.013 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2006) Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83. doi: 10.1017/S0261444806003399
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399 [Google Scholar]
  42. Incecay, V. , & Dollar, Y. K.
    (2011) Foreign language learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3394–3398. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.307
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.307 [Google Scholar]
  43. James, C.
    (1998) Errors in Language Use: Exploring error analysis. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kang, E. , & Han, Z.
    (2015) The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1–18. doi: 10.1111/modl.12189
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12189 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lee, I.
    (2005) Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think?TESL Canada Journal, 22(2), 1–16. doi: 10.18806/tesl.v22i2.84
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v22i2.84 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2008) Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3), 144–164. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2013) Research into practice: Written corrective feedback. Language Teaching, 46(1), 108–119. doi: 10.1017/S0261444812000390
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000390 [Google Scholar]
  48. Leki, I.
    (1991) The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1991.tb00464.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x [Google Scholar]
  49. (2006) “You cannot ignore”: L2 graduate students’ response to discipline-based written feedback. InFeedback in ESL writing: Contexts and Issues (pp.266–285). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524742.016
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.016 [Google Scholar]
  50. Liu, Q. , & Brown, D.
    (2015) Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 66–81. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.011 [Google Scholar]
  51. Loewen, S. , Li, S. , Fei, Thompson A. , Nakatsukasa, K. , Ahn, S. , & Chen, X.
    (2009) Second Language Learners’ Beliefs about Grammar Instruction and Error Correction. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 91–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00830.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00830.x [Google Scholar]
  52. Manchón, R. M.
    (2011) Situating the learning-to-write and writing-to-learn dimensions of L2 writing. In R. Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (Vol.31, pp.3–14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.31.03man
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.31.03man [Google Scholar]
  53. McMartin-Miller, C.
    (2014) How much feedback is enough?: Instructor practices and student attitudes toward error treatment in second language writing. Assessing Writing, 19, 24–35. doi: 10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.003 [Google Scholar]
  54. Murphy, L. , & Roca de Larios, J.
    (2011) Feedback in second language writing: An introduction. Retrieved from digitum.um.es/xmlui/handle/10201/23409
  55. Nunan, D.
    (1986) Communicative language teaching: The learner’s view. Retrieved from eric.ed.gov/?id=ED273092
  56. Oladejo, J. A.
    (1993) Error correction in ESL: Learner’s preferences. TESL Canada Journal, 10(2), 71–89. doi: 10.18806/tesl.v10i2.619
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v10i2.619 [Google Scholar]
  57. Ortega, L.
    (2012) Epilogue: Exploring L2 writing–SLA interfaces. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 404–415. <doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  58. Polio, C.
    (2012) The relevance of second language acquisition theory to the written error correction debate. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 375–389. <doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  59. Qi, D. S. , & Lapkin, S.
    (2001) Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(4), 277–303. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(01)00046‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00046-7 [Google Scholar]
  60. Radecki, P. M. , & Swales, J. M.
    (1998) ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16(3), 355. doi: 10.1016/0346‑251X(88)90078‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(88)90078-4 [Google Scholar]
  61. Saito, H.
    (1994) Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46–70. doi: 10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633 [Google Scholar]
  62. Sampson, A.
    (2012) “Coded and uncoded error feedback: Effects on error frequencies in adult Colombian EFL learners’ writing.” System, 40(4), 494–504. <doi: 10.1016/j.system.2012.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  63. Schulz, R. A.
    (1996) Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29(3), 343–364. doi: 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1996.tb01247.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01247.x [Google Scholar]
  64. (2001) Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA: Colombia. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244–258. doi: 10.1111/0026‑7902.00107
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00107 [Google Scholar]
  65. Semke, H. D.
    (1984) Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17(3), 195–202. doi: 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1984.tb01727.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x [Google Scholar]
  66. Sheen, Y.
    (2007) The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255–283. doi: 10.2307/40264353
    https://doi.org/10.2307/40264353 [Google Scholar]
  67. Sheen, Y. , Wright, D. , & Moldawa, A.
    (2009) Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System, 37(4), 556–569. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  68. Shintani, 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 of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 286–306. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.011 [Google Scholar]
  69. Shintani, N. , Ellis, R. , & Suzuki, W.
    (2014) Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures: Effects of written feedback and revision. Language Learning, 64(1), 103–131. doi: 10.1111/lang.12029
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12029 [Google Scholar]
  70. Storch, N.
    (2010) Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Storch, N. , & Wigglesworth, G.
    (2010a) Learners’ processing, uptake and retention of corrective feedback on writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 303–334. doi: 10.1017/S0272263109990532
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990532 [Google Scholar]
  72. Swain, M. , & Lapkin, S.
    (2002) Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3–4), 285–304. doi: 10.1016/S0883‑0355(03)00006‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00006-5 [Google Scholar]
  73. Swain, M.
    (2006) Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced language proficiency. InAdvanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp.95–108). New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Truscott, J.
    (1996) The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1996.tb01238.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x [Google Scholar]
  75. (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. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(99)80124‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80124-6 [Google Scholar]
  76. Truscott, J. , & Hsu, A. Y.
    (2008) Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292–305. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  77. van Beuningen, C. , De Jong, N. H. , & Kuiken, F.
    (2008) The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy. ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 279–296.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. (2012) Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in Second Language Writing: Effectiveness of comprehensive CF. Language Learning, 62(1), 1–41. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00674.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00674.x [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error