To reflect on the practice of corrective feedback in L2 writing: o What we do o Students’ views o What next? To reflect on the practice of corrective feedback in L2 writing: o What we do o Students’ views o What next?

’Grammar correction has no place in writing classes and should be abandoned.’ Truscott, J. (1996) ’Grammar correction has no place in writing classes and should be abandoned.’ Truscott, J. (1996)

Against o Lack of evidence to the contrary o Can be damaging o Ignores students views Truscott (1996) o Leads to simplification Sheppard (1992) & Truscott 2001 in Beuningen, De Jong & Kuiken 2012:1) Against o Lack of evidence to the contrary o Can be damaging o Ignores students views Truscott (1996) o Leads to simplification Sheppard (1992) & Truscott 2001 in Beuningen, De Jong & Kuiken 2012:1)

For Students receiving cf demonstrated improved performance Ferris & Roberts (2001), Chandler (2003), Sheen (2007), Bitchener 2008, Bitchener & Koch (2008:193), Van Beuningen, De Jong & Kuiken (2012) For Students receiving cf demonstrated improved performance Ferris & Roberts (2001), Chandler (2003), Sheen (2007), Bitchener 2008, Bitchener & Koch (2008:193), Van Beuningen, De Jong & Kuiken (2012)

Direct Correct form Reformulation Indirect Error codes Underlining/highlighting an error Marks in the margin Metalanguage Asking a question Direct Correct form Reformulation Indirect Error codes Underlining/highlighting an error Marks in the margin Metalanguage Asking a question

o Want errors checked (Leki 1991 in Hyland 1998) o Preference for indirect (Ferris & Roberts 2001 & Leki 1991 in Ferris 2010:190) o Preference for direct (Elwood & Bode 2014:339) o Preference for negative cf citing the ‘insincerity of positive comments’ (Hyland 1998) o Want errors checked (Leki 1991 in Hyland 1998) o Preference for indirect (Ferris & Roberts 2001 & Leki 1991 in Ferris 2010:190) o Preference for direct (Elwood & Bode 2014:339) o Preference for negative cf citing the ‘insincerity of positive comments’ (Hyland 1998)

Very helpful Level 2Level 3Level 4 Indirect Error codes Underlining Direct Correct form Correct sp786627

ErrorVery codes helpful L256 L3 58 L4 55 Perceived ability to correct: 80% 60% 78%100% 55%88% 54%72%

Under-Very lininghelpful L278 L3 58 L4 73 Perceived ability to correct: 80% 60% 33%67% 46%67% 36%54%

SpellingVery helpful L278 L3 67 L4 27 Perceived ability to correct 80%60% 55%66% 58%75% 73% 91%

Organ-Very isationhelpful L2100 L3 83 L4 91 Perceived ability to address 80%60% 55%77%79% 81% 90%

ContentVery helpful L289 L3 79 L4 64 Perceived ability to address 80%60% 44%77% 71%88% 63%90%

Many corrections ‘ I’m upset.’ ‘I feel demotivated a little but I feel I need to do more efforts to avoid that.’ ‘feeling bad at the beginning but it gives me an alarm that I should improve my writing more.’ ‘I feel we have someone want my benefits.’ ‘I’ll be happy because I would like to know my mistakes in brief.’ Many corrections ‘ I’m upset.’ ‘I feel demotivated a little but I feel I need to do more efforts to avoid that.’ ‘feeling bad at the beginning but it gives me an alarm that I should improve my writing more.’ ‘I feel we have someone want my benefits.’ ‘I’ll be happy because I would like to know my mistakes in brief.’

Few corrections ‘ I will think that it is going very well in my writing.’ ‘I feel good because I suppose that my writing skill has been improved.’ ‘It means my writing is good.’ ‘happy an I invite myself to dinner ’ ‘I feel the teacher don’t take my paragraph serious.’ ‘Not good as I will think I am good at English, and I will not improve my English skills.’ ‘hmmmm…good feeling but with doubts.’ ‘Lost. Not clear. Not motivated’ ‘Disappointed VERY MUCH and it makes me feel scared Few corrections ‘ I will think that it is going very well in my writing.’ ‘I feel good because I suppose that my writing skill has been improved.’ ‘It means my writing is good.’ ‘happy an I invite myself to dinner ’ ‘I feel the teacher don’t take my paragraph serious.’ ‘Not good as I will think I am good at English, and I will not improve my English skills.’ ‘hmmmm…good feeling but with doubts.’ ‘Lost. Not clear. Not motivated’ ‘Disappointed VERY MUCH and it makes me feel scared

o Adopt a gradual approach from direct to indirect o Dynamic assessment: mediated approach o Content, meaning & organisation o Follow up interviews o Teachers’ views o Consider affective factors ‘…the feedback situation has great potential for miscommunication and misunderstanding.’ Hyland (1998)

Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 17: Bitchener, J. & U. Koch. (2009 ). The Contribution of Written Corrective Feedback to Language Development: A Ten Month Investigation. Applied Linguistics: 31/2: OUP 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 12, Ellis, R. & J. Chiang. (2009). Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development. L2 Journal, UC Consortium for Language Learning & Teaching, UC Davis Elwood, J. A. (2014). Student preferences vis-à-vis teacher feedback in university EFL writing classes in Japan. System 42 (2014) Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second Language Writing Research and Written Corrective Feedback in SLA: Intersections and Practical Applications. Studies in Second Language Acauisition 32: Hyland, F. (1998). The Impact of Teacher Written Feedback on Individual Writers. Journal of Second Language Writing 7(3),

Sheen, Y. (2007). The Effect of Focused Written Corrective Feedback and Language Aptitude on ESL Learners’ Acquisition of Articles. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 41, Truscott, J. (1996). The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes. Language Learning 46:2, 327 – 369 Truscott, J. (1996). The Case for ‘The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes’: A Response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing 8(2), 111 – 122. Truscott, J. & A. Y. Hsu. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing 17: 292 – 305 Van Beuningen, C., De Jong, N. H. & F Kuiken. (2012). Evidence on the Effectiveness of Comprehensive Error Correction in Second Language Writing. Language Learning 62:1, pp1-41