Get started
Work

Writing in a Task-Based Individualized Curriculum: Effectiveness of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback

Year: 2020
Type: dissertation
Abstract: The effects of written corrective feedback have been extensively investigated for various domains of instructed second language acquisition with many studies demonstrating clear benefits (e.g.Riazi, Shi & Haggerty, 2018).However, there are still many unresolved questions about how written corrective feedback is best applied in classroom contexts (e.g., Bitchener, 2008;Chandler, 2003;Ferris, 1995;Benson & DeKeyser, 2018).Studies have found conflicting results in terms of what types of written corrective feedback may be more effective and lead to greater language learning (e.g., Bitchener, 2018;Ferris, 2006;Hartshorn et al., 2010; Manchón, 2011).There is a clear need for research targeting howThe study found that the indirect-feedback-with-metalinguistic-explanations group exhibited greater depth of processing overall when compared to the direct written corrective feedback group.The indirect-feedback-with-metalinguistic-explanations group demonstrated significantly higher mean accuracy in the delayed posttest for the patterned, rules-based target of the particle le.Think-aloud responses and focus group data suggest that the problem-solving challenge inherent in indirect feedback with metalinguistic explanations may have caused students to exert themselves more and was connected to achieving awareness at the level of understanding (Schmidt, 1990), while direct written corrective feedback was frequently only processed at the level of noticing (Leow, in press).This study provides insights into the effects of direct written corrective feedback versus indirect feedback with metalinguistic explanations.The dissertation concludes with implications for classroom practices and future research.
Author: Xue Ma
Language: English
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W3116942429
Cites: 138
Cited by: 3
Related to: 10