Teacher-initiated vs. student-initiated written corrective feedback in EFL writing

2023

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.56040/bana2012
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

With the popularity of student-centered pedagogy in language education, research on alternative feedback strategies to supplement teacher written corrective feedback (WCF) has flourished in different contexts. Such research, however, has viewed alternative feedback strategies as initiated, deployed, and controlled by teachers, paying little attention to students’ capability in identifying and correcting their linguistic errors on their own. The current study adopts a quasi-experimental design to investigate the impact of a student-initiated feedback intervention on undergraduate students’ error identification and correction ability at a major university in Oman. To this end, two groups of first-year students (n = 63) from two different sections of an essay writing course were assigned to a control group, who received the traditional teacher feedback, and an experimental group, who consulted alternative sources of feedback on their own. Analysis of the data from pre-test and post-test tasks revealed that while both groups significantly improved their scores on different error correction attempts over a 16-week semester, the source of feedback did not lead to significant between-group differences in the scores. Furthermore, qualitative data indicated that, despite some challenges, students drew on a variety of sources and resources to reduce linguistic errors in their writing.