User:Lorena/literature

Implications of Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching

The need of learning English as a second language nowadays requires more than just the oral or written exposition from the teacher. There are more aspects implied on the development of the second language learning and acquisition. One of the most important skills to develop in English language learning is the writing skill. Writing implies also different features from the language that provides in a second language student the ability to comprehend and understand the language. When writing a document, second language learners may commit errors, different types of errors can appear on the process of writing. The nature of these errors can be since the wrong spelling of a word, or probably the shifting of the words in a sentence, to bigger errors. Grammatical errors such as the incorrect use of the grammatical tenses or the confusion of the use of pronouns, etc. are also common mistakes that students may commit at the moment of writing a document. For these reasons, the teacher serves, besides a lead or a guide to students, as the provider of correction on the written assignments. Written corrective feedback allows students to identify their errors on writing, so teachers have to know the best way to do it, according to the students’ attitudes and also the students’ needs, in order for student to develop their strengths and also decrease their weaknesses regarding the area of writing, and therefore, through time and practice, students can increase their writing skill and become accurate writers in English as a second language. For Thesis Seminar, find literature that identifies a SPECIFIC problem you'd like to research.  You can do that by finding the research questions from direct research articles.

Written Corrective Feedback helps students to develop and improve the written accuracy on second language students.

Writing is one of the 4 Numbers under 10 are written out. skills that form the English language, as well as some other sub skills that are implied in the developing of the skill. Grammar and Vocabulary take place into the consideration of the developing of the writing skill. Writing a document carries different aspects that the English as a foreign language (EFL) students consider in order to develop an accurate document on which, besides expressing and sharing ideas effectively the student contemplates the different grammatical aspects such as spelling, punctuation, grammar and usage of the language that conform the effective writing of a document in order to achieve communication.
EFL students, as the English language apprentices are not safe of committing errors when writing a text. EFL students who wish to create a well written paper need help in understanding and avoiding mistakes in the writing process (Shoebottom, 2011). Second language teachers provide students the help that is needed in the process of writing a document. The help that EFL apprentices need is provided by the lead teacher during the class. The teacher teaches and guides the EFL students on the way of developing an accurate writing, offering the enough tools and techniques for them to manage and so they achieve the writing objective. Once students demonstrate the teacher their writing skills through a document, the teacher has the responsibility of revise the writings in order for students to know their strengths and weaknesses in the process of writing a document. Providing feedback to second language learners’ written work allows students to be aware of their learning on the second language learning process regarding the writing skill of the English language.
Written corrective feedback allows students to increase and develop the accuracy and effectiveness of writing accurately a document. Shoebottom (2010), indicates that students should also focus on some other important aspects on the writing besides the different common types of error that a student may commit when writing a text such as spelling, grammar and usage mistakes. Some other factors such as the clarity and organization of the ideas take place in the development of an accurate writing. The clarity on which the sentences on the writing express what the student wants to say demonstrates also the accuracy on the written document.
Some people Who are you referring to? believe that grammatical correction is not the best way to respond to students’ writing. These people concern more on the achievement of the communication,Use a semicolon before that is. that is, they do not pay as much attention to grammar and pronunciation mistakes for example, ash they should do it because they prefer that students commit errors instead of losing the comprehension of the ideas. People believe that the message of what the student is trying to provide is more important than the grammatical structures and punctuation rules. Try finding synonyms for nevertheless.  You use it two more times in the next section. Nevertheless, teachers mark students’ errors on their compositions in a certain way in order for students to let them know where is the error and probably how is that the error is being committed. Aliakbari and Toni (2009) demonstrate on the research that they developed regarding error correction on second language students, that learners do demand the teachers to write the correction of the mistake, not just to put a mark on it, but explain it, due to the student can figure the errors out in less time.
The role of the teacher regarding the error correction on compositions is a topic that causes controversy. While some teachers claim that the errors on students’ writing should not been marked as errors, in oder to let students to extend their ideas, no matter the errors they commit; some other teachers assume that the errors should be immediately corrected, so students figure out their errors as soon as possible in order to avoid these kind of errors in future compositions. Ferris (1995) points out that despite the perceived importance of the role of the teacher in responding to student writing, research in L2 student writing provides very little evidence that such feedback actually helps the students’ writing improve.

Direct and Indirect feedback conform the two main types of error correction on writing.

The error correction that teachers provide to students is mainly differentiated between two types of feedback, which are direct and indirect feedback. Sheen distinguishes these two types of written corrective feedback. Direct feedback refers to only correction group, that is, indicating the location of the error and providing the correct form by deleting and/or replacing the error or by adding a linguistic element. Direct feedback refers to the identification of the error or mistake on the student’s writing. After the student delivers a piece of writing for a certain assignment to the teacher, the teacher has the responsibility of revise the whole document as well as the process carried out for the elaboration of the written document. Once the teacher has identified the errors, either grammatical, regarding punctuation or usage mistakes, the teacher corrects them and replace the error for the correct response, in order for student to notice the error and let him or her to comprehend the area or situation on which the student is facing problems on the writing. Within the direct feedback, the direct metalinguistic correction group indicates the location of an error, providing the correct form, and including metalinguistic comments, which refer to all the aspects that complement the use of the language in order to explain the correct form.
On the other hand, indirect feedback refers to the recognition of the error on the student’s writing. The teacher puts a mark on the error; this mark can be the underlining of the wrong word, as well as circling it, or just a small mark next to the error. However, the teacher let the student know where the error occurs, nevertheless, the teacher does not provide the correction of the mistake, or any explanation of it, in order for student to let him or her to recognize the type of error that is committed, and so, the student analyzes by him or herself the marked word and notices how and also why the error was committed. Indirect error correction or feedback refers to the identification and mark of errors without providing the correct form. Sheen states that indirect feedback is more beneficial than direct correction because it pushes learners to engage in hypothesis testing, thereby inducing deeper internal processing. Sheen explains that direct feedback is superior to other types of indirect correction likely because a teacher’s direct correction helps ESL students internalize the correct form in a more productive way because indirect feedback, though it demands greater cognitive processing, delays confirmation of students’ hypotheses (as cited in Holdway, 2011.).
When corrective feedback in second language acquisition is done repeatedly, has beneficial effect on the language development; and therefore, corrective feedback is found to be effective. Researches on Corrective feedback in L2 writing cannot convincingly demonstrate that written corrective feedback leads to improvement in grammatical accuracy in new writing documents, as Sheen states. It may be hypothesized that whereas written direct feedback increases noticing, indirect feedback increases not only noticing but also encourages awareness-as-understanding so students develop the skill of writing accurately with the minimum help on correction from the teacher (Sheen & Ellis, 2011) Make sure to add punctuation after your citation when ending a sentence.
Direct and indirect feedback differ in a lot of circumstances from each other, nevertheless, both provide to teachers the strategies for students to identify the errors they are committing on their writings, in order for students to increase and develop their abilities on the writing process. Teachers may ask to students to deliver a second time the writing that was already corrected by them in a certain period of time, so students could be able to identify and correct the errors marked by the teacher, and also to comprehend the error itself. The teacher also provides students the necessary tools to students for monitoring the process of the writing, even when it has already been checked by the teacher, so students, in either both main types of feedback, count on the support required from the teacher.

The appropriate use and design of written corrective feedback and treatment of errors develop on second language students their writing efficiency on writing over the time.

The error correction that teachers give to students lead to the development and increasing of their writing skill through time. Feedback can provide guidance and cues as to which rule to apply in certain transfer problems. Dempsey, & Sales, (1993). Written correction feedback lead to gains in the writing skill accuracy. Moreover, the more explicit the feedback is, the bigger the benefit for students. (Sheen & Ellis, 2011). Even though, researches on the correction feedback have demonstrated that focused correction feedback will prove effectiveness in the improvement of the learner’s writing accuracy. Therefore, the authors suggest that written corrective feedback should be focused on a single feature of the language, such as spelling, grammar, etc. in order to be effective. Some other studies that have compared this two types of feedback, such as two forms of direct corrective feedback, a combination of direct and indirect correction feedback, demonstrate the effect of just one type of feedback, most notably the effects of reformulation, a technique whereby the participants’ texts are rewritten to make them sound as native-like as possible in terms of grammar and lexis while preserving their original meaning (Santos, López-Serran & Manchón, 2010).
Shrum, & Glisan, (2000) points some implications about error correction and feedback in the classroom. The firs Run spell check.  The Google Chrome browser has spell check. one of them is that students benefit most when the feedback they receive focuses on comprehensibility of the message itself, not just on accuracy of form. The authors also mention that the feedback strategies that lead to negotiation of form most effectively appear to be elicitation, clarification requests, metalinguistic feedback and repetition. Learners may not recognize teacher response as corrective in nature unless the teacher has a strategy for signaling this to the learner. The researchers also states that the classroom environment should be one in which learners are encouraged to step out of their traditional learner roles when engaging in conversational repair, so in order to focus on fluency and comprehensibility of speech, it is best to avoid trying to coerce correction of errors in speaking and to allow the interaction to develop as it would in natural discourse.
Students’ attitudes toward and preferences for teacher commentary are important variables to consider when examining the effectiveness of feedback, especially given the fact that ESL students often come to writing classes with expectations about what types of teacher feedback is appropriate and useful This which clause is one clause too many.  It makes the sentence a bit long.  Try again to paragraph more concisely. which differ markedly from teachers’ and/or native speakers’ expectations. (Brice, C.,1995). Teacher feedback should include comments that help the student to focus on negotiation of meaning.  When you use modals (should, need to, has to, etc.), it should be a citation.  Otherwise, it's your opinion and should be avoided as part of your theoretical framework.  Do a search for modals in your literature review. In order to achieve this, the teacher should provide feedback in a positive way. The teacher needs to make comments or suggestions about the assignments delivered in a way on  in</u which students’ feelings towards their effort dedicated for the task won’t be affected. Negative comments or the fact that the teacher only indicates errors on the writings, but never the positive aspects of them, <u>Review when to use commas.  You tend to overuse them. can demotivate the students on the development of the language learning process. However, students should also be made See how the passive voice makes your writing "stuffy".  Change to active voice. increasingly more responsible for their language accuracy so that their written proficiency can improve. Writing, as a productive skill, requires an accurate in-depth knowledge of the grammar system, language form, Review serial comma use.  Commas go before and</u. and sentence structure. The emphasis on accuracy is justified in the sense that it can lead to the production of structurally correct instances of second language, and to prevent inaccuracy that may result in the production of structurally erroneous sentences. (Aliakbari, & Toni, 2009). <u>Citations as evidence should follow your topic sentence.

Conclusion

Written corrective feedback is a strategy that teachers practice on second language students in order for them to notice their error when writing, and therefore, students can develop their writing skill in the English language, which causes that through time, the ability to dominate the skill, and therefore the student could be able to dominate the other main skills of the language. Your first sentence here is too long - too many clauses. Within the written corrective feedback there are distinguished two main different types of error correction which are direct feedback and indirect feedback. These two types of error correction differ in the way on which the teacher applies the correction strategies. The Review when and when not to use articles. direct feedback allows the student to identify the error and the nature of it, letting him or her to know how and why the error was committed, and also the teacher on this type of feedback provides the student with the correct form of the error committed. On the other hand, indirect feedback allows the teacher to only indicate the student the error that was committed. This correction strategy allows the student to identify the error and notice without any other type of help from the teacher, the nature of the mistake. Some authors claim that indirect feedback allows the students to develop their awareness towards the different types of errors, in order for them to take more care once in the future. However, some other author do not agree with this type of error correction technique effects, one of the main reasons for this, is that students demand the correction of the errors and also the explanation of them, in order for them to develop more precisely the writing skill. The debate of which of these two types of error correction is more effective on students will depend on the type of students and their needs, and fundamentally on the context on which learning is being carried out.

When you finish your final draft, search out all the connectors you are using.  If you detect that you are repeating the same ones, find synonyms.

Add references here.

References

Aliakbari, M. & Toni, A. (2009). On the effects of error correction strategies on the grammatical accuracy of the Iranian English learners. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(1). pp. 99-112.

Brice, C. (1995). ESL writers’ reactions to teacher commentary: A case study. (Annual meeting of the teachers of English to speakers of other languages).

Dempsey, J. & Sales, G., (1993). Interactive instruction and feedback. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational technology publications.

Ellis, R. (2009). The Typology of Written Corrective Feedback. Retrieved from http://www.anaheim.edu/content/view/645/110/

Ferris, D. (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. pp. 49-62.

Frodesen, J. (2001). Grammar in Writing. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=cmlzbS5hYy50aHxlc2wtbWFpbnN0cmVhbXxneDozZDlhYmNmNTFjNTI1Y2E

Holdway, J. (2011). Sheen-Corrective feedback. Retrieved from http://sls.hawaii.edu/~zhengd/SLSIntro/?p=3078

Sheen, Y. & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel, (Ed.) Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Volumen 2. New York: Routledge.

Shoebottom, P. (2011). A guide to learning English. Retrieved from http://esl.fis.edu/learners/advice/mistakes.htm

Santos, M., López-Serrano, S., & Manchón, R. (2010). The Differential Effect of Two Types of Direct Written Corrective Feedback on Noticing and Uptake: Reformulation vs. Error Correction. International Journal of English Studies, 10(1). pp. 131-154.

Annotated Bibliography

Aliakbari, M. & Toni, A. (2009). On the effects of error correction strategies on the grammatical accuracy of the Iranian English learners. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(1). pp. 99-112.

On this article Aliakbari and Toni review the effects on 60 Iranian students regarding the different types of error correction. The authors compare the direct and indirect feedback and the effect of coded and uncoded correction on the Iranian learners’ grammar accuracy on writing. The research focuses on the periodical process of writing development on students after receiving the different types of feedback. This research is useful to my action research project because it establishes the different methods used by the researches and how was it analyzed. The limitation of this article is that the application of the study was on students of a completely different context, since it was realized on another country. The researchers demonstrate that indirect coded error correction has a bigger impact on grammar accuracy on the students than uncoded error correction and even also on direct feedback. This article will be part of my research due to the differentiation that is done by the authors on the error correction on students’ writings.

Brice, C. (1995). ESL writers’ reactions to teacher commentary: A case study. (Annual meeting of the teachers of English to speakers of other languages).

In this case study, the researches concern about three different second language students effect and response to corrective feedback. The research was carried out using direct observation on students, and also there were recorded the interviews to the students and their reactions towards their feedbacks on their compositions. The researcher focuses mainly on the reactions and responses of the students during the three feedback sections, and on the progress that was being developed on their writing proficiency because of the received feedback. The article explains the specific reactions on these students to the feedback, and for this reason, it is going to be useful on my research in order to be aware of these kinds of reactions and know how to manage them. The limitation of the article is that it is a case study, so no generalizations can be created regarding the process of corrective feedback. As the authors mention on the article, each person has different learning styles and consequently, different reactions to feedback, so this will help on my research to know them in a more detailed way.

Dempsey, J. & Sales, G., (1993). Interactive instruction and feedback. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational technology publications.

This book contains the different aspects and characteristics of corrective feedback in second language teaching. The book focuses on the role of feedback on the second language class, as well as its design and adaptation of the instructional feedback according to students. The book also considers alternate approaches to feedback in programmed instruction. Besides the book contains some researches realized regarding the field of feedback with the purpose of demonstrate which kind of feedback is more convenient foe second language students, and also how to apply accurately the feedback to learners. The book will help on my research since they are described the definitions and explanations of each characteristic of corrective feedback on second language students.

Ellis, R. (2009). The Typology of Written Corrective Feedback. Retrieved from http://www.anaheim.edu/content/view/645/110/
This is a fragment of a seminar given by Rod Ellis about the typology of written corrective feedback at Anaheim University. The author comments that writing is so important because it is hard to achieve a certain level of competence in English writing. Ellis talks on the video about how a second language learner reacts to written corrective feedback, and how corrective feedback helps students to avoid these kinds of errors in the future. The part of the seminar that Ellis provides focuses on the types of error correction on second language students, and for this reason, it will helps on my research; however, it won’t be part of my basis in my research.

Encyclopedia of American Education. (2011). Response to intervention (RTI). Retrieved from http://american-education.org/1807-response-to-intervention-rti.html

In this article, the author mentions an approach of the identification and treatment of learning disabilities called Response to intervention. This approach is focused on preschoolers either with or without learning disabilities. The Response to intervention emphasizes on how a child fails to respond to an intervention and on the treatment of this by the teacher. This approach indicates that teacher must encourage students on continuing their tasks according to the specific difficulty or problem that the child is facing. This topic analyses in a different way the main subject of my research and it is important to know another perspective of the error correction, however, it is limited on children mainly with disabilities, for that reason, it won’t be part of my research basis.

Ferris, D. (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. pp. 49-62.

In this article Ferris differentiates the two main types of error correction which are Direct and Indirect feedback in respect to second language teaching. The author states two research questions: do students who receive error correction produce more accurate texts than those who receive no error feedback?, and do students who revive error corrections improve in accuracy over time? The researcher focuses on the probable periodical results of this research. If in the results, direct correction is more important for the learning, then indirect corrected students will write better than the others. This article will help on my research because the researcher compares the periodical writing on students who have received direct and indirect feedback. In the article, the author mentions that results may vary according to the subjects and their different characteristics, so it can be the main limitation for the research. Even tough, the author makes a clear differentiation between these two different types of error correction, which is going to be useful on my personal research on students' writings.

Frodesen, J. (2001). Grammar in Writing. Retrieved from: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=cmlzbS5hYy50aHxlc2wtbWFpbnN0cmVhbXxneDozZDlhYmNmNTFjNTI1Y2E

In this article, the author makes reference to the two main different types of feedback in writing, explaining the differences between them and providing also diverse techniques on error detection and therefore, error correction. The author also mentions how error correction provided by the teacher can help the students to analyze these errors, while the teacher suggests effectively strategies for the improvement of the writing. for this reason, this article will help on the developing of my research because it does not only contains information about the different types of feedback, but also, the author, in this article provides different strategies for teachers to use when correcting grammar on English as a second language learners.

Holdway, J. (2011). Sheen-Corrective feedback. Retrieved from http://sls.hawaii.edu/~zhengd/SLSIntro/?p=3078

The article is a review of the Sheen’s “The effects of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learner’s acquisition of articles”. For this reason, the author summarizes the main ideas of Sheen regarding feedback, since the definition and distinction of direct and indirect feedback. And the author also mentions briefly the principal results achieved on Sheen’s research regarding this topic. Because this is a review of a research, it will help on my research due to the main aspects and most important points to deal on the research are considered on the article.

Santos, M., López-Serrano, S., & Manchón, R. (2010). The Differential Effect of Two Types of Direct Written Corrective Feedback on Noticing and Uptake: Reformulation vs. Error Correction. International Journal of English Studies, 10(1). pp. 131-154.

In this article, the researchers analyze the effects of two forms of direct corrective feedback on noticing and uptake on EFL students’ compositions. The research was realized to eight secondary students on three stages which are redaction, comparison and revision. In the writing task, noticing was operationalized as the amount of corrections during the comparison, while uptake was defined as the revisions in the students’ revised texts. The authors explain how individual differences make students process the corrective feedback in their writings. The limitation of this article is that it is focused on secondary students, which possess a different behavior and learning method than adult people. The researchers also comment than further investigation on the field is needed, even tough, it will support some aspects of my research.

Sheen, Y. & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel, (Ed.) Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Volumen 2. New York: Routledge.  

In this chapter of Hinkel’s handbook of research in second language, the authors define the two main different types of error correction or feedback, and also they compare them. In the chapter it is also included a taxonomy for oral correction, between implicit and explicit feedback, and for written correction, between direct and indirect feedback. In the book some questions are tried to be answered regarding the sociocultural aspect of error correction, such as if the errors should be corrected, how should be corrected and who should correct errors. This chapter of the book compares both oral and written corrective feedback, thus, in a certain way, it can be useful on my research, however, since my research focuses on written feedback, a part of this chapter won’t be considered.

Shoebottom, P. (2011). Understanding writing mistakes. Retrieved from http://esl.fis.edu/learners/advice/mistakes.htm

On this article there are explained the different kinds of errors that English as a second language students may commit when writing a document. Besides the explanations of the 4 main different errors on writing, the author provides some esercises and activities to practice on the distinction of these errors. Moreover the author offers some pieces of advice in order for writer to avoid mistakes when writing a document. For this reason, this article will help on my research due to the clear explanations that are given by the author regarding the topic of this investigation.

Shrum, L. & Glisan, E. (2000). Teacher's handbook: contextualized language instruction. Boston: Beth Kramer.  

Some chapters of Shrum and Glisan’s book are dedicated to the presentation of oral and written corrective feedback on second language students. it describes the different types of feedback for second language students according to the goals on writing. Sometimes, the goal of a text is focused more on the meaning that the form, which is grammar, and some other times it is the opposite. This book also considers the reactions of students to the feedback absence. The definitions of these conditions of the different types of actions regarding feedback on students in writing will be considered on my research due to the different perspective of the authors towards the topic of feedback.

Feedback

• Word count 1,201, you need approximatly 2,500 words.  If you need further feedback after completing your literature review, come by my office. Add your conclusion (250 words), introduction (250 words), and references making sure they are alphabetized (reference section and annotated bibliography) and make sure you have the same references in both the reference section and annotated bibliography.  Work on your introduction, making sure that you state a problem in the first paragraph and that you include a thesis statement in your second paragraph that links to your problem.  The reasons section of your thesis statement will be your topics you cover in each of the three sections of your literature review.  Click here to see some helpful videos.  Link your conclusion to your thesis statement and summarize the main points that you've previously discussed. Remember not to include any new information in your conclusion. Also, discuss future implications and ideas for further research related to your topic.   --Bnleez 17:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
• Review APA and your use of bold text. Also, only double space between references. --Bnleez 13:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC)