Written Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996)
Linguistic errors are pervasive in second language (L2) students’ writing. Depending on their gravity, the errors may cause a minor degree of irritation to the reader or even lead to total communication breakdown. As such, errors have always been a major concern to both students and teachers, and er...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Columbia University Libraries
2015-04-01
|
| Series: | Working Papers in Applied Linguistics and TESOL |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8JT0277/download |
| _version_ | 1818507664881090560 |
|---|---|
| author | Yuan-Yuan Meng |
| author_facet | Yuan-Yuan Meng |
| author_sort | Yuan-Yuan Meng |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Linguistic errors are pervasive in second language (L2) students’ writing. Depending on their gravity, the errors may cause a minor degree of irritation to the reader or even lead to total communication breakdown. As such, errors have always been a major concern to both students and teachers, and error correction has also assumed a central position in language teaching. Students generally expect that their errors will be pointed out and dealt with by their teachers. For instance, in a study on students’ attitudes toward corrective feedback (CF) in college-level English writing classes, Leki (1991) surveyed 100 English as a Second Language (ESL) students, asking them such questions as how concerned they were with their written errors, what they thought were the most important features in their writing that the teacher should attend to, and what they looked at when receiving a graded paper from the teacher. The results of the survey indicated that the students believed that good writing should be error-free, and the majority wanted all their written errors to be corrected. For L2 teachers, providing written CF on student writing has long been an essential practice. In fact, “grammar correction is something of an institution” (Truscott, 1996, p. 327) in L2 writing courses. Despite the fact that correcting students’ written errors is a time-consuming ordeal, and the endeavor is “fraught with uncertainty about its long-term effectiveness” (Ferris, 1999, p. 1), most L2 teachers have continued to slave over students’ errors in one form or another. As confirmed by a recent study on practitioners’ perspectives, the majority of teachers believe that students need CF and that written CF is overall an effective pedagogical practice (Evans et al., 2010). |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-10T22:21:17Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-694951342d5a431b9bd9b99838700d88 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2576-2907 2576-2907 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-10T22:21:17Z |
| publishDate | 2015-04-01 |
| publisher | Columbia University Libraries |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Working Papers in Applied Linguistics and TESOL |
| spelling | doaj.art-694951342d5a431b9bd9b99838700d882022-12-22T01:31:19ZengColumbia University LibrariesWorking Papers in Applied Linguistics and TESOL2576-29072576-29072015-04-01132698410.7916/D8F19BBFWritten Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996)Yuan-Yuan Meng0Teachers College, Columbia UniversityLinguistic errors are pervasive in second language (L2) students’ writing. Depending on their gravity, the errors may cause a minor degree of irritation to the reader or even lead to total communication breakdown. As such, errors have always been a major concern to both students and teachers, and error correction has also assumed a central position in language teaching. Students generally expect that their errors will be pointed out and dealt with by their teachers. For instance, in a study on students’ attitudes toward corrective feedback (CF) in college-level English writing classes, Leki (1991) surveyed 100 English as a Second Language (ESL) students, asking them such questions as how concerned they were with their written errors, what they thought were the most important features in their writing that the teacher should attend to, and what they looked at when receiving a graded paper from the teacher. The results of the survey indicated that the students believed that good writing should be error-free, and the majority wanted all their written errors to be corrected. For L2 teachers, providing written CF on student writing has long been an essential practice. In fact, “grammar correction is something of an institution” (Truscott, 1996, p. 327) in L2 writing courses. Despite the fact that correcting students’ written errors is a time-consuming ordeal, and the endeavor is “fraught with uncertainty about its long-term effectiveness” (Ferris, 1999, p. 1), most L2 teachers have continued to slave over students’ errors in one form or another. As confirmed by a recent study on practitioners’ perspectives, the majority of teachers believe that students need CF and that written CF is overall an effective pedagogical practice (Evans et al., 2010).https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8JT0277/downloadEnglish languageStudy of languageTeaching languageAbility testingSecond language acquisitionSLAHigher educationFeedbackForeign speakersEducationWriting english languageApplied linguisticsWritten feedbackEnglish as a second languageESLCorrective feedbackCFSecond languageL2 |
| spellingShingle | Yuan-Yuan Meng Written Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996) Working Papers in Applied Linguistics and TESOL English language Study of language Teaching language Ability testing Second language acquisition SLA Higher education Feedback Foreign speakers Education Writing english language Applied linguistics Written feedback English as a second language ESL Corrective feedback CF Second language L2 |
| title | Written Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996) |
| title_full | Written Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996) |
| title_fullStr | Written Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996) |
| title_full_unstemmed | Written Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996) |
| title_short | Written Corrective Feedback: A Review of Studies since Truscott (1996) |
| title_sort | written corrective feedback a review of studies since truscott 1996 |
| topic | English language Study of language Teaching language Ability testing Second language acquisition SLA Higher education Feedback Foreign speakers Education Writing english language Applied linguistics Written feedback English as a second language ESL Corrective feedback CF Second language L2 |
| url | https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8JT0277/download |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yuanyuanmeng writtencorrectivefeedbackareviewofstudiessincetruscott1996 |