Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol 3, No 1 (2012), 11-22, Jan 2012
doi:10.4304/jltr.3.1.11-22

Written Error Feedback from Perception to Practice: A Feedback on Feedback

Reza Norouzian, Ali Akbar Khomeijani Farahani

Abstract


Several aspects of written error feedback contexts have been simply overlooked or have remained on the sidelines, partly due to controversies over its long-lasting efficacy. The few studies conducted on the subject, though, failed in imparting key factors at work. This study sought to take learners' and teachers' written feedback perceptions as well as teachers’ actual feedback practices into account to judiciously inspect two major areas of written feedback contexts; firstly, examining potential areas of mismatch between teachers' and learners' perceptions of teachers' error feedback practices and secondly, discovering the possible misfits between teachers' perception of their feedback practices and their actual feedback performance. To this end, 60 participants including 45 students from English classes with a focus on writing and 15 of their teachers were selected and asked to separately fill in teacher and student comprehensive questionnaires. Then, at the end of the course, an actual error correction task was corrected by the teachers and finally, they were orally interviewed. The results indicated four certain mismatch areas between teachers' and learners' views on (1) teachers' manners of marking, (2) use of error codes, (3) awareness of error selection principle and (4) effectiveness of teachers’ error feedback practices. Moreover, four conspicuous areas of misfits between teachers' perception of (1) their manners of error marking (comprehensive vs. selective), (2) manners of feedback provision (direct vs. indirect), (3) use of error codes (4) amount of errors selected and their actual feedback performance were found. The implications are discussed.


Keywords


perception; written error feedback; comprehensive marking; selective marking; direct feedback; indirect feedback

References


Belanoff, P., & Dickson, M. (eds.). (1991). Portfolios: process and product. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Brandl, K. (1995). Strong and weak students' preferences for error feedback. Modern Language Journal, 79(2), 194-211.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05431.x

Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Education.

Caulk, N. (1994). Comparing teacher and students responses to written work. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 181-188.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587209

Cohen, A. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in second language learning (pp. 57–69). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Cohen, A. & Cavalcanti, M. (1990). Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In M. Long & J. Richards (Series Eds.) & B. Kroll (Vol. Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (3rd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Conrad, S. M., & Goldstein, L. M. (1999). ESL students revision after teacher-written comments: Text, contexts, individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, (8), 147-180.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80126-X

Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing. University of Nottingham. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates publishers. Mahwah, New Jersey.

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Eskey, D. E. (1983). Meanwhile, back in the real world … Accuracy and fluency in second language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 315-323.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586663

Ferris, D. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33–35.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587804

Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-184.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X

Ferris, D. (2002). Responding to student errors: Issues and strategies. In D. Ferris (Ed.), Treatment of error in second language student writing (pp. 49–76). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Frantzen, D. (1995). The effects of grammar supplementation on written accuracy in an intermediate Spanish content course. Modern Language Journal, 79, 329-344.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb01108.x

Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G., & Holton, J. (2004). Remodeling Grounded Theory. Qualitative Social Research, 5(2), 1-17.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

Hamp-Lyons, L., & Condon, W. (2000). Assessing the portfolio: principles for practice, theory and research. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

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, 287–308.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01612.x

Horowitz, D. (1986). Process not product: Less than meets the eye. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 141- 144.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586397

Hyland, K. (1990). Providing productive feedback. ELT Journal, 44(4), 279-285
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/44.4.279

Komura, K. (1999). Student response to error correction in ESL classrooms. Unpublished master’s thesis, California State University, Sacramento.

Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66, 140-149.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x

Lee, I. (1997). ESL learners' performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for teaching. System, 25, 465-477.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00045-6

Lee, I. (2003). L2 writing teachers' perspectives, practices and problems regarding error feedback. Assessing Writing, 8, 216-237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2003.08.002

Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 285-312.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.08.001

Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 69-85.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.10.001

Lee, I. (2009). Ten mismatches between teachers' beliefs and written feedback practice. ELT journal, 63, 13-22.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn010

Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 57-68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203-218.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x

Montgomery, J. L., & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher-written feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 82–99.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.04.002

Muncie, J. (2000). Using written teacher feedback in EFL composition classroom. ELT Journal, 54(1), 47-53.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/54.1.47

Purves, A. C. (1992). Reflections on research and assessment in writing compositions. Research in the Teaching of English, 26(1), 106-122.

Radecki, P., & Swales, J. (1988). ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16, 355–365.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(88)90078-4

Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 229-258.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586828

Reid, J. (1994). Responding to ESL students' texts: The myths of appropriation. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 273-292.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587434

Rennie, C. (2000). Error feedback in ESL writing classes: What do students really want? Unpublished master’s thesis, California State University, Sacramento.

Richards, J. C., & Rogers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667305

Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83-93.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586390

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.

Semke, H. (1984). The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals 17, 195-202.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x

Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 292-305.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003

Warschauer, M., Turbee, L., & Roberts, B. (1996). Computer learning networks and student empowerment. System, 24, 1-14.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(95)00049-P

Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 16,195–209.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586792

Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 195-202.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586773


Full Text: PDF


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

Copyright @ 2006-2012 by ACADEMY PUBLISHER – All rights reserved.