Dynamic written corrective feedback is a strategy that raises student awareness of the patterned errors they make in their writing. Teacher feedback provides the location and type of error made in the form of error codes. Multiple studies have shown it to significantly improve the grammatical accuracy of student writing. This research examines the effects of the frequency of teacher feedback, on student written accuracy, fluency, and complexity whether daily or every-other-day. The total number of minutes students write for is also questioned since it is directly related to the amount of feedback students receive. This is done to make the process more manageable for teachers, as well as determine the optimum volume and feedback frequency that can be processed and benefit students. Findings suggest that 20 minutes of writing a week has the potential to significantly improve accuracy no matter how the time is divided. Fluency also has the potential to improve significantly if students are writing for 5 minutes and receiving feedback daily. As previous research on daily 10-minute writing has suggested that only accuracy will improve, this study is instrumental in highlighting specific modifications that can be made to the DWCF process that increase the potential for development of both accuracy and fluency.

This study investigates the effectiveness of dynamic written corrective feedback (DWCF) for intermediate learners of Korean as a foreign language (KFL) compared to traditional types of written corrective feedback. DWCF is an innovative method of providing written corrective feedback on students' writing that has primarily been used in English as a second language (ESL) settings. It aims to improve learners' linguistic accuracy and requires multilayered interaction between teachers and students. Although DWCF has been effectively used to increase linguistic accuracy in various ESL settings, it has not yet been widely applied to other language learning settings. This study demonstrates the extent to which DWCF increases the linguistic accuracy of intermediate KFL learners and determines DWCF's impact on fluency and complexity. The treatment group (n = 9) was managed with DWCF and the control group (n = 10) wrote six essays over a 12-week period. The pre- and post-test results were analyzed to determine differences in linguistic accuracy, fluency, and complexity between the two groups. A mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA revealed that the treatment group's accuracy significantly increased compared to the control group, whereas there was no significant difference in fluency or complexity for either group. Limitations and suggestions for future research are discussed in the conclusion.

Grammatical accuracy in second language (L2) writing is one of the key issues that English as a Second Language (ESL) learners struggle with, both in intensive English language programs and continuing after their university matriculation. Numerous instructional methodologies exist that center around the concept of error correction—how can or should ESL instructors correct grammatical errors in L2 students' writing to best facilitate improvements in written linguistic accuracy? Error correction in L2 writing has been a controversial issue for over a decade (e.g., Ferris, 1999; Truscott, 1996), and in an effort to contribute to an understanding of this controversial topic, this study investigated an innovative method of error correction known as dynamic written corrective feedback (WCF). For 15 weeks, 24 students at the Brigham Young University (BYU) English Language Center (ELC) received a form of dynamic WCF dramatically modified from Hartshorn's (2008) original method with the objective of increased practicality. These students produced a 30-minute pretest and posttest essay, and researchers calculated the complexity, accuracy, and fluency of each pretest and posttest. Data from the current study is compared against data from Hartshorn (2008), which found dynamic WCF to be successful in improving accuracy after carrying out similar research. The results validate previous findings and confirm that dynamic WCF is an effective approach to error correction, even when dramatically modified.

This study investigated the efficacy of dynamic written corrective feedback (DWCF) on intermediate-high students' writing accuracy when compared to a traditional grammar instruction approach. DWCF is an innovative written corrective feedback method that requires a multifaceted process and interaction between the teacher and the students in order to help the students improve their writing accuracy. The central principle of DWCF is that feedback should be manageable, meaningful, timely, and constant. The research question was raised based on the positive effects of DWCF found in advanced-low and advanced-mid proficiency level students (Evans et al., in press; Evans, Hartshorn, & Strong-Krause, 2009; Hartshorn, 2008; Hartshorn et al., in press). Similar to previous studies, this study attempted to examine the effectiveness of DWCF in terms of proficiency level. It further explored students' perspectives and attitudes towards DWCF. Two groups of ESL students participated in this study: a control group (n=18) that was taught using a traditional grammar instruction method, and a treatment group (n=35) that was taught using a DWCF approach. The findings in this study revealed that both methods improved the intermediate-high students' linguistic accuracy in writing. However, the findings of this study suggest that the instruction utilizing DWCF is preferable to traditional grammar instruction when it comes to improving intermediate-high students' writing accuracy for two reasons: first, DWCF was slightly more effective than the traditional grammar instruction used, and second, students strongly preferred the instruction using DWCF to traditional grammar instruction. The findings of this study further validate other work suggesting the positive effects found in advanced proficiency levels. This study indicates that ESL learners benefit from manageable, meaningful, timely, and constant error feedback in improving their linguistic accuracy in writing. Furthermore, this study suggests the desirability of applying DWCF to other contexts.