Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol 2, No 6 (2011), 1430-1434, Nov 2011

Teacher Correction or Word Processors: Which Is a Better Option for the Improvement of EFL Students’ Writing Skill?

Fatemeh Behjat


Computers have found their way into language classrooms. It seems machines are slowly taking over from teachers all tedious working which must be done with error in language classes, all the repetitive and time-consuming jobs that make machines of teachers (Kenning, 1990). One of the ways of using computers in language classrooms is word processors to help students in writing mechanics and grammar. This study was done to see if there is any significant difference in the Iranian EFL learners’ writing when they use a word processor. For this purpose, a number of 60 sophomore EFL students at Shiraz Islamic Azad University were chosen. Two topics were assigned to write two paragraphs about. It was considered as the pretest. Then, participants were divided into two groups. For treatment, the subjects practiced paragraph writing. In the first group, the teacher corrected the papers, and in the second, the students used the word processor for making corrections. Finally, another paragraph writing test was given to them. The comparison between the students’ scores showed that there was a significant difference in the final performance of the two groups. Therefore, this study supports the idea that word processors improve the EFL learners’ writing mechanics.


CALL (Computer-Assisted Language Learning); word processor; writing skill; foreign language learning; teacher-correction


Boswood, T. (1999). New ways of using computers in language teaching. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Quarterly.

Brown, D. H. (2001). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy.2nd ed. London: Longman.

Elbow, P. (1992). “Peer sharing and peer response”. In: The writer’s craft (teacher’s edition).Evanston, IL: McDougal, Little & Company

Ferris, D. (2002). “Teaching students to self-edit”. In: Methodology in language teaching: an anthology of current practice. J.C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (eds). Cambridge: CUP.

Hansen-Smith, E. (2001). “Computer-assisted language learning”. In The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. R. Carter and D. Nunan (eds). Cambridge: CUP.

Hardisty, D. and Windeatt, S. (1989). CALL: computer assisted language learning. Oxford: OUP.

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.

Holmes, M. and Kidd, K. (1982). Computers in use: using computers in language classroom. Oxford: OUP.

Jones, C. and Fortescan, J. (1987). Language, learners, and computers. TESOL Quarterly, 24 (2), pp.307-9.

Kenning, T. (1990). Languages and machines. New York: Addison Westey pub.

Leech, G. and Candlin, C.N. (1986). Computers in English language teaching and research. Harlow: Longman.

Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York: Basic Books.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. Translated from la psychologie de l’ intelligence translated by M. Piercy and DE. Berlyne. London: Rutledge and Kegan Paul.

Reinders, H. (2007). Big brother is helping you: supporting self-access language learning with a student monitoring system. System,35(1), pp. 93-111.

Rivers, W. (1968). Teaching foreign language skills. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago press.

Sudkamp, A.T. (1988). Languages and machines. New York: Addison Westey publishing company.

Turkle, D.A. (1984). An example of the use of micro-computers in foreign language learning and teaching from high school for the academically talented. TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), pp. 69-90.

Warschauer M. (1996). "Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction". In Fotos S. (ed.) Multimedia language teaching, Tokyo: Logos International: 3-20.

Full Text: PDF

Journal of Language Teaching and Research (JLTR, ISSN 1798-4769)

Copyright @ 2006-2014 by ACADEMY PUBLISHER – All rights reserved.