A Comparative Study of EFL Teachers’ and Intermediate High School Students’ Perceptions of Written Corrective Feedback on Grammatical Errors

Jodaie, Mina; Farrokhi, Farahman; Zoghi, Masoud

doi:10.5539/elt.v4n4p36

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(Evans, 2012) also found that direct unfocused teacher direct feedback can be effective in improving accuracy. Moreover, providing different systems of error and feedback categorization to help research the properties of language teachers' feedback outcome in student papers (Jodaie, Farrokhi, & Zoghi, 2011).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The learners’ writing progress Using Direct Feedback

Elhawwa¹,

Rukmini²,

Mujiyanto³

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Science, Education and Technology, ISET 2019, 29th June 2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Written corrective feedback plays an important aspect to increase writing accuracy. The study is to investigate the learners' progress on writing scores: before, during, and after the implementation of teacher direct feedback. The study was conducted at the L2 learners of IAIN Palangka Raya. The study is a quasi-experimental research using repeated measure design. The participants were given three times of tests: before, during and after the implementation of feedback. The data were collected through a writing test. The method of data analysis was used a one-way anova repeated measure. The findings revealed that: (1) Based on the output, there was effect for time, Wilk's Lambda= 0.056, F= 1.94, p< 0. 005, multivariate eta squared= 0.94. It was interpreted that there was significant difference on learners' writing progress the treatment. It meant that teacher direct feedback gave significant effects to learners' writing ability for both during and after the treatment and also recommended that the teachers determine the errors to be corrected, the way to correct them and involved the learners so that they could be a part of learning process.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The learners’ writing progress Using Direct Feedback

Elhawwa¹,

Rukmini²,

Mujiyanto³

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Science, Education and Technology, ISET 2019, 29th June 2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There were several empirical studies which focused on students' and teachers' perception of written corrective feedback. These studies also examined the ways to make use of students' and teachers' perceptions to enhance the effectiveness of written corrective feedback (Amrhein & Nassaji, 2010;Dowden et al, 2013;Jodaie, Farrokhi, & Zoghi, 2011;McCarthy, 2013;Evans, Hartshorn, & Tuioti, 2010;Lee, 2008;Robinson, Pope, & Holyoak, 2013;Weaver, 2006). Dowden et al (2013) suggest that teacher and students have to work closely to solve the misunderstanding or miscommunication in the process of giving feedback.…”

Section: Claim 2: Students' and Teachers' Perceptions Affect The Effementioning

confidence: 99%

Written Corrective Feedback in Writing Instruction: A Qualitative Synthesis of Recent Research

Sia¹,

Cheung²

2017

ILS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Giving written feedback to students is an important part of writing instruction. However, few studies have been conducted to investigate current trends of written corrective feedback in the secondary and university contexts. To identify and evaluate the current state of empirical evidence, we conducted a qualitative synthesis of published research that examined written corrective feedback in both English-as-the-first-language and English-as-the second/foreign-language settings. Four claims emerged in our analyses of 68 empirical studies published in journals from 2006-2016. Each claim is supported by empirical evidence. The claims are: (1) Individual differences play a part in the effectiveness of written corrective feedback; (2) Students’ and teachers’ perceptions affect the effectiveness of written corrective feedback; (3) Giving corrective feedback through technology is beneficial to students; and (4) Written corrective feedback is more effective when it is used concurrently with collaborative tasks. This meta-synthesis study sheds light on the written corrective practice of English Language teachers across different pedagogical settings and the factors that may affect student engagement in teacher written feedback. Keywords: written corrective feedback, secondary school, university

show abstract

“…Se concibe como un proceso en el cual se comunican al estudiante sus aciertos, pero especialmente sus errores, mediante símbolos, marcas, cruces, vistos y puntajes Harris, Irving & Peterson, 2008;Jodaie, Branch, Farrokhi & Zoghi, 2011;. Para los profesores, es una manera rápida y clara de identificar los errores, por ejemplo, con subrayados o círculos.…”

Section: Retroalimentación Entendida Como Correcciónunclassified

“…Por otra parte, en los estudios con profesores que se desempeñan enseñando una segunda lengua (Jodaie, Branch, Farrokhi & Zoghi, 2011;, la retroalimentación como corrección es usada de manera preferencial. Esto se comprende dada la naturaleza de la enseñan-za y la evaluación en una segunda lengua, ya que se compone en gran parte por aspectos formales y de estructura, lo cual sugiere que el contenido que se evalúa confiere algún tipo de especificidad al tipo de retroalimentación que se otorga y, por lo tanto, a las concepciones que la orientan.…”

Section: Consideraciones Finalesunclassified

Concepciones de profesores sobre retroalimentación: una revisión de la literatura

Garrido-Miranda

González

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEl artículo presenta una revisión de investigaciones empíri-cas sobre concepciones de retroalimentación de profesores en distintos niveles educativos. Para ello, se analizaron los resultados de trece estudios que fueron seleccionados entre sesenta y ocho investigaciones publicadas entre 2000 y 2015. Mediante un análisis documental, se establecieron categorías que compilaron aspectos comunes y diferencias en los estudios. Los resultados del análisis permitieron establecer tres tipos de concepciones: corrección, elogio y mejora proyectiva. Se espera que esta revisión contribuya a la comprensión de las prácticas de retroalimentación de profesores y a reducir el déficit de literatura sobre retroalimentación en el mundo hispanoparlante. Palabras claveRetroalimentación; investigación; docentes; evaluación Transferencia a la prácticaLa revisión presentada aporta variadas posibilidades de transferencia a la práctica. En el caso de las prácticas investigativas, puede utilizarse como insumo para promover la realización de estudios sobre retroalimentación en distintos niveles de escolaridad en el contexto hispanoparlante. Respecto de las prácticas educativas, los beneficios descritos sobre retroalimentación proyectiva tienen el potencial de motivar a los profesores a implementar cambios en sus prácticas que generen mejoras sustanciales en los aprendizajes de sus estudiantes. Adicionalmente, podrían permitirles reflexionar sobre los escasos efectos positivos de las fuertemente arraigadas modalidades de retroalimentación como corrección y elogio. AbstractThe article presents a review of empirical research on conceptions of feedback of teachers at different levels of education. Accordingly, we analyzed the results of thirteen studies that were selected from sixty-eight research papers published between 2000 and 2015. Based on a documentary analysis, we established categories that compiled common aspects and differences in the studies. Results of the analysis allowed to establish three types of conceptions: correction, praise and projective improvement. We hope that this review will contribute to the understanding of teacher feedback practices and reduce the deficit of literature about feedback in the Spanish-speaking world.

show abstract

A Comparative Study of EFL Teachers’ and Intermediate High School Students’ Perceptions of Written Corrective Feedback on Grammatical Errors

Cited by 27 publications

References 28 publications

The learners’ writing progress Using Direct Feedback

The learners’ writing progress Using Direct Feedback

Written Corrective Feedback in Writing Instruction: A Qualitative Synthesis of Recent Research

Concepciones de profesores sobre retroalimentación: una revisión de la literatura

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About