Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 22, No. 0, pp.1269-1286
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Jan 2022
Received 06 Nov 2022 Revised 17 Nov 2022 Accepted 30 Nov 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.22..202211.1269

A Meta-Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Effects of Written Corrective Feedback on L2 Grammatical Accuracy in Writing

EunYoung Kang
Assistant Professor, Division of Liberal Arts, Kongju National University, Tel: (041)-521-9735 ekang@kongju.ac.kr


© 2022 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) is one of the most widely implemented teaching strategies in the second language (L2) writing classes. While the evidence about the positive effects of WCF on L2 grammatical accuracy has been reported, comparatively little is known about its long-term effects and related factors that moderate the effects. This meta-analysis aims to report and compare the short- and long-term effects of WCF on improving L2 grammatical accuracy. The data set for this study involved 25 primary studies exploring both short- and long-term effects of WCF. The study found that WCF yielded a positive effect on L2 accuracy, compared to the no-WCF condition. The overall effect of WCF was moderate (g = 0.62) on immediate posttests but fell within the small-to-moderate range (g = 0. 46) on delayed posttests. As for moderator variables, they functioned in a similar fashion depending on the two test time points. Specifically, the genre of writing tasks and types of feedback were the significant mitigating factors on the immediate and delayed posttests.

Keywords:

written corrective feedback, long-term effects, meta-analysis, L2 accuracy in writing

References

  • *References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in meta-analysis.
  • Ashwell, T. 2000. Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multi-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing 9, 227–257. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8]
  • *Bitchener, J. 2008. Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 17, 102–118. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004]
  • Bitchener, J. and D. Ferris. 2012. Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing. New York: Routledge. [https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203832400]
  • *Bitchener, J. and U. Knoch. 2010. Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 19, 207–217. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.002]
  • *Bitchener, J. and U. Knoch. 2010a. The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten-month investigation. Applied Linguistics 31, 193–214. [https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp016]
  • *Bitchener, J., S. Young and D. Cameron. 2005. The effect of different types of corrective feed- back on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 9, 227–258.
  • Borenstein, M., L. V. Hedges, J. P. T Higgins and H. R. Rothstein. 2011. Introduction to Meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
  • Borenstein, M., L. V. Hedges, J. P. T Higgins and H. R. Rothstein. 2005. Comprehensive Meta-analysis (version 2). Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
  • Cho, H. and Y. Kim. 2019. Learning Korean honorifics through individual and collaborative writing tasks and written corrective feedback. Applied Linguistics Review 13(1), 19–47. [https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2018-0075]
  • Duval, S. 2005. The trim and fill method. In H. R. Rothstein, A. J. Sutton and M. Borenstein eds., Publication Bias in Meta-analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments, 127–144. Chichester, UK: Wiley. [https://doi.org/10.1002/0470870168.ch8]
  • Ekanayaka, W. I. and R. Ellis. 2020. Does asking learners to revise add to the effect of written corrective feedback on L2 acquisition? System 94, 1-12. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102341]
  • *Ekiert, M. and K. di Gennaro. 2021. Focused written corrective feedback and linguistic target mastery: Conceptual replication of Bitchener and Knoch (2010). Language Teaching 54, 71–89. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000120]
  • Ellis, R. 2008. A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal 63(2), 97–107. [https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023]
  • *Ellis, R., Y. Sheen, M. Murakami and H. Takashima. 2008. The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System 36, 353–371. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001]
  • Fathman, A. K. and E. Whalley. 1990. Teacher response to student writing: focus on form versus content. In Kroll, B. ed., Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom, 178–190. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524551.016]
  • *Fazio, L. L. 2001. The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority- and majority-language students. Journal of Second Language Writing 10(4), 235–249. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00042-X]
  • Ferris, D. and J. Hedgcock. 2014. Teaching L2 Composition. New York: Routledge. [https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203813003]
  • Ferris, D. 2006. Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long- term effects of written error correction. In Hyland, K. and F. Hyland, eds., Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues, 81–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007]
  • Ferris, D. 2010. Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 181–201. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490]
  • Ferris, D. and B. Roberts. 2001. Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing 10, 161–184. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X]
  • *Frear, D. and Y. Chiu. 2015. The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ accuracy in new pieces of writing. System 53, 24–34. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.006]
  • Gass, S. M. and L. Selinker. 2008. Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course. New York: Routledge. [https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203932841]
  • Goo, J., G. Granena, Y. Yilmaz and M. Novella. (2015). Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. In P. Rebuschat, ed., Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages, 443–482. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.18goo]
  • Guénette, D. 2007. Is feedback pedagogically correct?: Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 16(1), 40–53. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001]
  • Kang, E. Y. and Z-H Han. 2015. The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal 99, 1–18. [https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12189]
  • Kang, E. Y. and Z-H Han. 2021. Written Corrective Feedback: Short-Term and Long-Term Effects on Language Learning. In R, M. Manchón and C..Polio, eds., The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition and Writing, 213–225. New York: Routledge. [https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429199691-23]
  • Kang, E., S. Sok, and Z. Han. 2019. Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research 23(4), 428–453. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818776671]
  • *Karim, K., and H. Nassaji 2018. The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing. Language Teaching Research 24(4), 519–539. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818802469]
  • Karim, K., and H. Nassaji. 2019. The effects of written corrective feedback. Instructed Second Language Acquisition 3(1), 28–52. [https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.37949]
  • Lipsey, M. and D. Wilson. 2001. Practical Meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Liu, Q. and D. Brown. 2015. Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of correc- tive feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 66–68. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.011]
  • *López, M. B., E. V. Steendam, D. Speelman and K. Buyse. 2018. The Differential Effects of Comprehensive Feedback Forms in the Second Language Writing Class. Language Learning 68(3), 813–850. [https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12295]
  • *Mawlawi Diab, N. 2015. Effectiveness of written corrective feedback: Does type of error and type of correction matter? Assessing Writing 24, 16–34. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.02.001]
  • *Mawlawi Diab, N. 2016. A comparison of peer, teacher and self-feedback on the reduction of language errors in student essays. System 57, 55–65. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.12.014]
  • *Mubarak, M. 2013. Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing: A Study of Practices and Effectiveness in the Bahrain Context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom.
  • Oswald, F. L., and L. Plonsky. 2010. Meta-analysis in second language research: Choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30, 85–110. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190510000115]
  • *Rassaei, E. 2019. Computer-mediated text-based and audio-based corrective feedback, perceptual style and L2 development. System 82, 97–110. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.03.004]
  • * Rummel, S. and J. Bitchener. 2015. The effectiveness of written corrective feedback and the impact Lao learners’ beliefs have on uptake. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 38(1), 66–84. [https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.38.1.04rum]
  • *Sheen, Y. 2007. The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 41, 255–283. [https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x]
  • * Sheen, Y. 2010. Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32(2), 203–234. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990507]
  • *Sheen, Y., D. Wright and A. Moldawa. 2009. Differential effects of focused and unfocused writ- ten correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System 37, 556– 569. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002]
  • *Shintani, N. and R. Ellis. 2013. The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal of Second Language Writing 22(3), 286–306. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.011]
  • *Shintani, N., R. Ellis and W. Suzuki. 2014. Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language Learning 64(1), 103–131. [https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12029]
  • *Stefanou, C. and A. Révész. 2015. Direct written corrective feedback, learner differences, and the acquisition of second language article use for generic and specific plural reference. The Modern Language Journal 99(2), 263–282. [https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12212]
  • *Suh, B. R. 2010. Written Feedback in Second Language Acquisition: Exploring the Roles of Type of Feedback, Linguistic Targets, Awareness, and Concurrent Verbalization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, U.S.A.
  • Truscott, J. 1996. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 46, 327–369. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x]
  • Truscott, J. 2007. The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing 16, 255–272. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003]
  • *Wagner, J. 2016. An Explanation of the Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback in Second-Language Acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Mason University, U.S.A [https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n4p259]
  • *Zhang, X. 2017. Reading–writing integrated tasks, comprehensive corrective feedback, and EFL writing development. Language Teaching Research 21(2), 217–240.