Inicio
todoELE
  • Inicio
  • Materiales
    • πŸ“‹ Actividades
    • πŸ“ Conjugación
    • πŸ“Š Corpus
    • πŸ“” Diccionarios
    • βœ… Evaluación
    • βš™οΈ Gramática
    • πŸ“— Manuales
    • ✍️ Ortografía
    • πŸ“… Programación
    • πŸ—£οΈ Pronunciación
    • πŸ“ Recursos
    • πŸ”€ Vocabulario
    • πŸ’» Herramientas digitales
  • Formación
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía
    • πŸ‘₯ Congresos
    • πŸŽ“ Cursos
    • 🏫 Centros
    • 🏒 Organizaciones
    • πŸ“° Revistas
    • 🌍 Atlas de ELE
  • Trabajo
    • πŸ’Ό Ofertas de trabajo
    • ℹ️ Trabajo - Recursos
  • En la red
    • 🌐 Sitios ELE
    • πŸ“° Agregador
    • πŸ“§ Formespa
  • IA
    • ✨ Nuevos contenidos
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía IA
    • 🧰 Herramientas IA
    • πŸ’¬ Prompts
    • πŸ§ͺ Experiencias IA
    • 🌐 Sitios web IA
    • πŸ“° Actualidad IA
  • Comunidad
    • πŸ“° Actualidad ELE
    • 😊 Anécdotas ELE
    • πŸ“ Blog
    • πŸ“ŒTablón de anuncios
  • Buscar

Ruta de navegación

  • Inicio
  • Bibliografia
  • The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing

The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing

Khaled Karim
Hossein Nassaji
2020
Language Teaching Research
24-4
519-539
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.117…
artículo
estudio experimental
estudio empírico
feedback/retroalimentación
expresión escrita
análisis de errores
enseñanza/aprendizaje de lenguas

This study investigated the short-term and delayed effects of comprehensive written corrective feedback (WCF) on L2 learners’ revision accuracy and new pieces of writing (i.e., the transfer effect of feedback). Three types of feedback were compared: direct feedback and two types of indirect feedback that differed in their degree of explicitness (i.e., underlining only and underlining+metalinguistic cues). Fifty-three intermediate level learners of English as a second language (ESL) were divided randomly into four groups: One direct, two indirect, and a control group. Students produced three pieces of writing from different picture prompts and revised them over a three-week period. Each group also produced a new piece of writing two weeks later. The study included seven sessions: Writing 1, revision of Writing 1, Writing 2, revision of Writing 2, Writing 3, revision of Writing 3, and Writing 4 (delayed writing). The results showed that all the three feedback groups significantly outperformed the control group in revision tasks. Some short-term accuracy improvements were also found on new pieces of writing for direct and underlining+metalinguistic feedback, but the effects were largely non-significant.

  • Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Enviar publicación

Contenidos relacionados

  • A comparative study of the impact of focused vs. comprehensive corrective feedback and revision on ESL learners’ writing accuracy and quality
  • The effects of direct written corrective feedback and comparator texts on the complexity and accuracy of revisions and new pieces of writing
  • Beyond Correction: The Role of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback in Shaping EFL Students’ Emotions and Revision Behavior
  • From error correction to strategy support: AI-powered metacognitive scaffolding in assessing EFL writing performance and self-regulatory engagement
  • Task repetition, synchronous written corrective feedback and the learning of Korean grammar: A classroom-based study
  • Scaffolding student engagement with written corrective feedback: Transforming feedback sessions into learning affordances
Sobre Todoele Índice Publica Contacto: [email protected]
Política de privacidad Créditos