1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 38, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 38, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study examines the effects of indirect corrective feedback and positive affective teacher comments on English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ writing accuracy in new writings and revisions. Four intact classes of EFL students ( = 231) were randomly assigned to four groups: (1) Indirect-coded corrective feedback (ICCF), (2) ICCF + positive teacher comments, (3) Indirect non-coded corrective feedback (INCCF), (4) INCCF + positive teacher comments. Two-way factorial ANOVAs investigated the effects of indirect CF (ICCF or INCCF) and the presence or absence of positive teacher comments on students’ writing accuracy in new writings and in revisions. Results revealed that, beginning with similar levels of writing accuracy and attitudes toward writing feedback, groups provided positive teacher comments significantly outperformed the groups not provided positive comments in both new writings and revisions. There was no significant difference for the type of corrective feedback provided, nor was there a significant interaction effect. This study provides evidence that teacher encouragement through positive affective comments can have a significant impact on students’ writing acquisition. The paper concludes with implications for EFL writing instruction.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22061.fan
2024-12-20
2025-11-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/resla.22061.fan
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alikbaris, M., & Toni, A.
    (2009) On the effects of error correction strategies on the grammatical accuracy of the Iranian English learners. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 99–112.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alraimi, K. M., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P.
    (2014) Understanding the MOOCs continuance. The role of openness and reputation. Computers and Education, 801, 28–38. 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.006 [Google Scholar]
  3. Amin, M-Y. M., & Saadatmanesh, S.
    (2018) Discovering the effectiveness of direct versus indirect corrective feedback on EFL learners’ writings: a case of an Iranian context. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 5(2), 171–181.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Azizi, M., & Nemati, M.
    (2018) Motivating the unmotivated: Making teacher corrective feedback work. Issues in Language Teaching, 7(1), 87–110.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Baleghizadeh, S., & Dadashi, M.
    (2011) The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on students’ spelling errors. Profile, 12(1), 129–137.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Beason, L.
    (1993) Feedback and revision in writing across the curriculum classes. Research in the Teaching of English, 27(4), 395–422. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40171241. 10.58680/rte199315397
     https://doi.org/10.58680/rte199315397 [Google Scholar]
  7. Belcher, D., & Hirvela, A.
    (2005) Writing the qualitative dissertation: What motivates and sustains commitment to a fuzzy genre?Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(3), 187–205. 10.1016/j.jeap.2004.07.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.07.010 [Google Scholar]
  8. Blankenship, K. L., Wegener, D. T., & Murray, R. A.
    (2015) Values, Inter-Attitudinal Structure, and Attitude Change: Value Accessibility Can Increase a Related Attitude’s Resistance to Change. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(12), 1739–1750. 10.1177/0146167215609063
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215609063 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bruning, R. H., & Kauffman, D. F.
    (2016) Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. InC. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp.160–173). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Burgers, C., Eden, A., Van Engelenburg, M. D., Buningh, S.
    (2015) How feedback boosts motivation and play in a brain-training game. Computers in Human Behavior, 481, 94–103. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.038
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.038 [Google Scholar]
  11. Carless, D., & Boud, D.
    (2018) The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 431, 1315–1325. 10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354 [Google Scholar]
  12. 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, 121, 267–296. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(03)00038‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cho, K., Schunn, C., & Charney, D.
    (2006) Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260–294. 10.1177/0741088306289261
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088306289261 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Daiker, D.
    (1989) Learning to praise. InC. Anson (Ed.), Writing and response (pp.103–113). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Duijnhouwer, H., Prins, F. J., & Stokking, K. M.
    (2010) Progress feedback effects on students’ writing mastery goal, self-efficacy beliefs, and performance. Educational Research and Evaluation, 161, 53–74. 10.1080/13803611003711393
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611003711393 [Google Scholar]
  17. Elliot, A. J., Faler, J., McGregor, H. A., Campbell, W. K., Sedikides, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M.
    (2000) Competence valuation as a strategic intrinsic motivation process. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(7), 780–794. 10.1177/0146167200269004
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200269004 [Google Scholar]
  18. Enginarlar, H.
    (1993) Student response to teacher written feedback in EFL writing. System, 211, 193–204. 10.1016/0346‑251X(93)90041‑E
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(93)90041-E [Google Scholar]
  19. Erel, S., & Bulut, D.
    (2007) Error treatment in L2 writing: A comparative study of direct and indirect coded feedback in Turkish EFL context. Erciyes University Journal of Social Sciences, 221, 397–415.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Erkan, D. Y., & Saban, A. İ.
    (2011) Writing performance relative to writing apprehension, self-efficacy in writing, and attitudes towards writing: A correlational study in Turkish tertiary-level EFL. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 13(1), 164–192
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Evans, S., & Green, C.
    (2007) Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 3–17. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.11.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  22. Feng, Y., & Feng, Y. H.
    (2019) Online teaching + flipped classroom + online correction: An experimental teaching reform of college English writing course in China. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(1), 63–77. 10.5281/zenodo.3356019
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3356019 [Google Scholar]
  23. Ferris, D. R.
    (1995) Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 291, 33–53. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3587804. 10.2307/3587804
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587804 [Google Scholar]
  24. (1997) The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL QUARTERLY, 31(2), 315–339. 10.2307/3588049
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3588049 [Google Scholar]
  25. Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S.
    (1998) Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, & practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Ferris, D. R.
    (2010) Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 321, 181–201. 10.1017/S0272263109990490
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490 [Google Scholar]
  27. Ferris, D. R., & Kurzer, K.
    (2019) Does error feedback help L2 writers? Latest evidence on the efficacy of written corrective feedback. InK. Hyland (Ed), Second language writing (pp.106–124). 10.1017/9781108693974
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108693974 [Google Scholar]
  28. Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M.
    (2013) Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 221, 307–329. 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  29. Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. J.
    (2001) Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?Journal of Second Language Writing, 101, 161–184. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(01)00039‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X [Google Scholar]
  30. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H.
    (2012) How to design and evaluate research in education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Goldstein, L. M.
    (2005) Teacher written commentary in second language writing classrooms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 10.3998/mpub.6737
     https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.6737 [Google Scholar]
  32. Guo, Q., & Barrot, J. S.
    (2019) Effects of Metalinguistic Explanation and Direct Correction on EFL Learners’ Linguistic Accuracy. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 35(3), 261–276. 10.1080/10573569.2018.1540320
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2018.1540320 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hale, E.
    (2018) Academic praise in conferences: A key for motivating struggling writers. The Reading Teacher, 71(6), 651–658. 10.1002/trtr.1664
     https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1664 [Google Scholar]
  34. Han, Y., & Hyland, F.
    (2019) Academic emotions in written corrective feedback situations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 381, 1–13. 10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  35. Han, Y., & Xu, Y. T.
    (2019) Student feedback literacy and engagement with feedback: A case study of Chinese undergraduate students. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–16. 10.1080/13562517.2019.1648410
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1648410 [Google Scholar]
  36. Haswell, R. H.
    (1983) Minimal marking. College English, 45(6). 600–604. 10.58680/ce198313616
     https://doi.org/10.58680/ce198313616 [Google Scholar]
  37. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H.
    (2007) The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. 10.3102/003465430298487
     https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487 [Google Scholar]
  38. Huang, J., & Zhang, W. X.
    (2014) The impact of the integrated feedback on students’ writing revision. Journal of Chinese Foreign Language, 11(1), 51–56. 10.13564/j.cnki. Issn. 1672–9382 2014 01.011
     https://doi.org/10.13564/j.cnki [Google Scholar]
  39. Hyland, F., & Hyland, K.
    (2001) Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 101, 185–212. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(01)00038‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00038-8 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hyland, K.
    (2003) Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 121, 17–29. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(02)00124‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00124-8 [Google Scholar]
  41. Ji, X. L.
    (2015) Error correction in college EFL writing instruction: Students’ expectations and correction effects. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 12(1), 117–140.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Kadmiry, M.
    (2021) The Comparison between the Process-oriented Approach and the Product-oriented Approach in Teaching Writing: The Case of Moroccan EFL Students in Preparatory Classes for the Grandes Ecoles. Arab World English Journal, 12 (1) 198–214. 10.24093/awej/vol12no1.14
     https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no1.14 [Google Scholar]
  43. Karim, K., & Nassaji, H.
    (2018) The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on English-as-a-second-language (ESL) students’ writing. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. 10.1177/1362168818802469
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818802469 [Google Scholar]
  44. Kormos, J.
    (2012) The role of individual differences in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 211, 390–403. 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lalande, J. F.
    (1982) Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 661, 140–149. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1982.tb06973.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x [Google Scholar]
  46. Lam, R.
    (2015) Understanding EFL Students’ Development of Self-Regulated Learning in a Process-Oriented Writing Course. TESOL Journal, 6(3), 527–553. 10.1002/tesj.179
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.179 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lee, I.
    (2007) Assessment for learning: Integrating assessment, teaching, and learning in the ESL/EFL writing classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(1), 199–213. Retrieved fromhttps://muse.jhu.edu/article/231771. 10.3138/cmlr.64.1.199
     https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.64.1.199 [Google Scholar]
  48. Leki, I.
    (1991) The preference of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Writing Annals, 24(3), 203–218. 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1991.tb00464.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x [Google Scholar]
  49. Llosa, L., Beck, S. W., & Zhao, C. G.
    (2011) An investigation of academic writing in secondary schools to inform the development of diagnostic classroom assessments. Assessing writing, 16(4), 256–273. 10.1016/j.asw.2011.07.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  50. Li, S. F., & Vuono, A.
    (2019) Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 841, 93–109. 10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006 [Google Scholar]
  51. Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K.
    (2009) I really need feedback to learn: Students’ perspectives on the effectiveness of the differential feedback messages. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 211, 347–367. 10.1007/s11092‑009‑9082‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-009-9082-2 [Google Scholar]
  52. Liu, Q. D.
    (2016) Effectiveness of coded corrective feedback in the development of linguistic accuracy in L2 writing: Impact of error types and learner attitudes (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (10130907)
  53. Mahfoodh, O. H. A.
    (2017) “I feel disappointed”: EFL university students’ emotional responses towards teacher written feedback. Assessing Writing, 311, 53–72. 10.1016/j.asw.2016.07.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  54. Mahfoodh, O. H. A., & Pandian, A.
    (2011) A qualitative case study of EFL students’ affective reactions to and perceptions of their teachers’ written feedback. English Language Teaching, 41, 14–27. 10.5539/elt.v4n3p14
     https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p14 [Google Scholar]
  55. Mallick, R., Kathard, H., Borhan, A. S. M., Pillay, M., & Thabane, L.
    (2018) A cluster randomised trial of a classroom communication resource program to change peer attitudes towards children who stutter among grade 7 students. Trials, 191: 664. 10.1186/s13063‑018‑3043‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-3043-3 [Google Scholar]
  56. Mohamed, M., & Zouaoui, M.
    (2014) EFL writing hindrances and challenges: The case of second year students of English at Djillali Liabes. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(3), 149–156. 10.5901/jesr.2014.v4n3p149
     https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2014.v4n3p149 [Google Scholar]
  57. Mujtaba, S. M., Parkash, R., & Nawaz, M. W.
    (2019) Do indirect coded corrective feedback and teachers short affective comments improve the writing performance and learners uptake?Reading & Writing Quarterly. 10.1080/10573569.2019.1616638
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1616638 [Google Scholar]
  58. Muth’im, A., & Latief, M. A.
    (2014) The effectiveness of indirect error correction feedback on the quality of students’ writing. Arab World English Journal, 5(2), 244–257. Retrieved fromeprints.unlam.ac.id/id/eprint/951
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P.
    (2002) Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 371, 91–105. 10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4 [Google Scholar]
  60. Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I.
    (1986) Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 201, 83–95. 10.2307/3586390
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3586390 [Google Scholar]
  61. Ruegg, R.
    (2018) The effect of peer and teacher feedback on changes in EFL students’ writing self-efficacy. The Language Learning Journal, 46(2), 87–102. 10.1080/09571736.2014.958190
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.958190 [Google Scholar]
  62. Saliu-Abdulahi, D., Hellekjær, G. O., & Hertzberg, F.
    (2017) Teachers’ (formative) feedback practices in EFL writing classes in Norway. Journal of Response to Writing, 3(1): 31–55
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Salteh, M. A., & Sadeghi, K.
    (2012) Teachers’ corrective feedback in L2 writing revisited: Concerns against and suggestions for its employment. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(3), 375–383.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Sampson, A.
    (2012) Coded and uncoded error feedback: Effects on error frequencies in adult Colombian EFL learners’ writing. System, 401, 494–504. 10.1016/j.system.2012.10.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  65. Schmidt, R.
    (2001) Attention. InP. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003 [Google Scholar]
  66. Schultz, J. M.
    (1996) The uses of poetry in the foreign language curriculum. French Review, 691, 920–932.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Seker, M., & Dincer, A.
    (2014) An insight to students’ perceptions on teacher feedback in second language writing classes. English Language Teaching, 71, 73–83. 10.5539/elt.v7n2p73
     https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n2p73 [Google Scholar]
  68. Semke, H.
    (1984) The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 171, 195–202. 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.1984.tb01727.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x [Google Scholar]
  69. Sheppard, K.
    (1992) Two feedback types: Do they make a difference?RELC Journal, 231, 103–110. 10.1177/003368829202300107
     https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829202300107 [Google Scholar]
  70. Sivaji, K.
    (2012) The effect of direct and indirect error correction feedback on the grammatical accuracy of ESL writing of undergraduates. Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences, 81, 78–94.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Srichanyachon, N.
    (2012) Teacher written feedback for L2 learners’ writing development. Silpakorn University Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, 12(1), 7–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Straub, R.
    (1997) Students’ reactions to teacher comments: A exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 311, 91–119. 10.58680/rte19973873
     https://doi.org/10.58680/rte19973873 [Google Scholar]
  73. Sweller, J.
    (2010) Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 221, 123–138. 10.1007/s10648‑010‑9128‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5 [Google Scholar]
  74. Tan, K. E., & Manochphinyo, A.
    (2017) Improving grammatical accuracy in Thai learners’ writing: Comparing direct and indirect written corrective feedback. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 14(3), 430–442. 10.18823/asiatefl.2017.14.3.4.430
     https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2017.14.3.4.430 [Google Scholar]
  75. Tang, C., & Liu, Y-T.
    (2018) Effects of indirect coded corrective feedback with and without short affective teacher comments on L2 writing performance, learner uptake and motivation. Assessing Writing, 351, 26–40. 10.1016/j.asw.2017.12.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2017.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  76. Treglia, M. O.
    (2008) Feedback on feedback: Exploring student responses to teachers’ written commentary. Journal of Basic Writing, 27(1), 105–137. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/43443857
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Truscott, J.
    (1996) The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 461, 327–369. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1996.tb01238.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x [Google Scholar]
  78. Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y. P.
    (2008) Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of second language writing, 17(4), 292–305. 10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  79. Tsao, J. J., Tseng, W. T., & Wang, C. C.
    (2017) The effects of writing anxiety and motivation on EFL college students’ self-Evaluative judgments of corrective feedback. Psychological Reports, 120(2), 219–241. 10.1177/0033294116687123
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294116687123 [Google Scholar]
  80. Van Beuningen, C. G.
    (2011) The effectiveness of comprehensive corrective feedback in second language writing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands. Available at: dare.uva.nl/en/record/374645 (accessedSeptember 2019).
  81. Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F.
    (2012) Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 621, 1–41. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00674.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00674.x [Google Scholar]
  82. Weng, F., Ye, S. X. & Xue, W.
    The Effects of Peer Feedback on L2 Students’ Writing Motivation: An Experimental Study in China. Asia-Pacific Edu Res (2022) 10.1007/s40299‑022‑00669‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00669-y [Google Scholar]
  83. Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J.
    (2020) The power of feedback revisited: A metaanalysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 101, 1–14. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087 [Google Scholar]
  84. Xie, Q.
    (2019) Error analysis and diagnosis of ESL linguistic accuracy: Construct specification and empirical validation. Assessing Writing, 411, 47–62. 10.1016/j.asw.2019.05.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  85. Yu, S. L., Zhou, N., Zheng, Y., Zhang, L. M., Cao, H. J., & Li, X. M.
    (2019) Evaluating student motivation and engagement in the Chinese EFL writing context. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 621, 129–141. 10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.06.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  86. Zacharias, N. T.
    (2007) Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 381, 38–52. 10.1177/0033688206076157
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206076157 [Google Scholar]
  87. Zarrinabadi, N., & Rezazadeh, M.
    (2020) Why only feedback? Including feed up and feed forward improves non-linguistic aspects of L2 writing. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. 10.1177/1362168820960725
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820960725 [Google Scholar]
  88. Zhao, H.
    (2018) New insights into the process of peer review for EFL writing: A process-oriented socio-cultural perspective. Learning and Instruction, 581, 263–273. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.07.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.07.010 [Google Scholar]
  89. (2010) Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing, 151, 3–17. 10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  90. Zheng, Y., & Yu, S.
    (2018) Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 371, 13–24. 10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22061.fan
Loading
Effects of indirect corrective feedback and teacher encouragement on EFL students’ writing accuracy
Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 38, 654 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.22061.fan
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22061.fan
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22061.fan
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): actitudes hacia la retroalimentación; affective teacher comments; comentarios afectivos; EFL; EFL students; Indirect corrective feedback; instrucción de escritura; precisión de escritura; process-oriented writing instruction; retroalimentación correctiva indirecta; student attitudes toward feedback; writing accuracy

Most Cited

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