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
  • Task repetition and corrective feedback via models and direct corrections among young EFL writers: Draft quality and task motivation

Task repetition and corrective feedback via models and direct corrections among young EFL writers: Draft quality and task motivation

Hanne Roothooft
Amparo Lázaro-Ibarrola
Bram Bulté
2025
Language Teaching Research
29-3
1311-1344
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.117…
artículo
estudio experimental
estudio empírico
feedback/retroalimentación
expresión escrita
enseñanza a niños
motivación
enfoque por tareas
enseñanza/aprendizaje de lenguas
factores afectivos

Second language (L2) writing research has demonstrated that young learners discuss linguistic issues, make use of feedback, and show a generally positive disposition toward writing tasks. However, many issues deserve further investigation. Regarding task implementation, few studies have been conducted with young learners writing individually, and few have compared different feedback types. Also, the focus of analysis has mostly been placed on students’ discussions; little is known about aspects such as draft quality and task motivation. To address these gaps, draft quality and task motivation were measured in 75 learners (aged 10–12 years) engaged in a three-stage writing task. They were divided into a task repetition group (n = 21), a group that received feedback via direct corrections (n = 30), and a group that received feedback via model texts (n = 24). Students’ drafts improved very slightly in complexity with task repetition; they significantly improved in accuracy with direct corrections, and also in lexical diversity and text quality with models. Task motivation remained high throughout the writing cycle in the task repetition group, where students found the task easy. However, it dropped slightly with direct corrections and – especially before the final draft, with models – which students deemed conducive to learning but difficult. Some pedagogical guidelines are discussed.

  • Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Enviar publicación

Contenidos relacionados

  • Why only feedback? Including feed up and feed forward improves non-linguistic aspects of L2 writing
  • Task modality and language-related episodes in young learners: An attempt to manage accuracy and editing
  • One size does not fit all: Distinct patterns of growth mindset and motivation underlying feedback-seeking behaviors of adolescent L2 writers
  • “ChatGPT is the companion, not enemies”: EFL learners’ perceptions and experiences in using ChatGPT for feedback in writing
  • ‘All my effort in writing the first draft was wasted!’: Engagement with supervisory feedback on undergraduate theses
  • Conceptualizing self-regulated reading-to-write in ESL/EFL writing and investigating its relationships to motivation and writing competence
Sobre Todoele Índice Publica Contacto: todoele@gmail.com
Política de privacidad Créditos