Since the publication of Truscott’s paper in 1996 arguing against the effectiveness of grammar correction in second language (L2) writing, there has been an ongoing debate regarding the effectiveness of written corrective feedback (WCF) in the field of second language acquisition (SLA). This debate has continued due to conflicting research results from research examining short-term effects of WCF and scarcity of research investigating its long-term effects (Ferris, 2004, 2006). Using a mixed-method research design, this study investigated the effects of direct and indirect WCF on students’ revision accuracy of the same piece of writing as well as its transfer effects on new pieces of writing over time. The present study also investigated the differential effects of direct and indirect CF on grammatical and non-grammatical errors. Using a stimulated recall strategy, the study further explored students’ perception and attitude regarding the types of feedback they received. Fifty-three intermediate level English-as-a-second-language (ESL) students were divided randomly into four groups: direct, underlining only, Underlining+meta- linguistic, and a control group. Students produced three pieces of writings from three different picture prompts and revised those over a three-week period. To examine the delayed effects of feedback on students’ writing skills, each group was also asked to produce a new piece of writing two weeks later. The results demonstrated that all three feedback groups significantly outperformed the control group with respect to revision accuracy in all three writing tasks. WCF did not have any significant delayed transfer effects on improving students’ writing skills. Short-term transfer effects on overall accuracy, however, were found for Underlining+metalinguistic CF, but not for other feedback types. In terms of grammatical and non-grammatical accuracy, only Direct CF displayed significant short-term transfer effects on improving grammatical accuracy. These findings suggest that while Direct CF was successful in improving short-term grammatical accuracy, both direct and indirect CF has the potential to improve accuracy in writing. The findings also clarify that no single form of CF can be effective in addressing all types of linguistic errors. Findings from the qualitative study demonstrated that different aspects of direct and indirect CF helped learners in different ways to successfully attend to different types of CF. In the case of Direct CF, learners who successfully corrected errors believed that the explicit information or correction was useful for them. They believed that it helped them understand what errors they made and helped them remember the corrections. Learners who were successful in correcting errors from indirect CF in the form of underlining and in the form of underline in combination with metalinguistic CF indicated that these two types of indirect CF helped them notice the errors, think about the errors, guess the correct form(s) or feature(s) and also remember the correction. The findings also indicated that both grammatical and non-grammatical errors could be difficult for learners to correct from indirect CF if they do not have sufficient L2 proficiency. Findings from the qualitative study also indicated that while learners considered both direct and the two indirect CF as useful, indirect CF in the form of underlining together with metalinguistic CF was preferred by a majority of learners as it provided valuable information about the errors made as well as promoting thinking and better understanding. / Graduate / 0290 / khaledk@uvic.ca

I denna kvalitativa intervjustudie har fyra gymnasielärare delat med sig av sina uppfattningar om användningen av skrivande och skriftlig korrigerande feedback som ett sätt att utveckla elevers grammatiska korrekthet. Studien visar att deltagarna anser att det är viktigt att integrera grammatikundervisningen med skrivande då det bland annat möjliggör individualisering. Vidare framkommer det att det finns ett större fokus på att rätta lokala fel än globala, och att omfattningen av feedback bör baseras på elevers kunskapsnivå. Lärarnas feedbackstrategier påverkas också av elevers kunskapsnivåer, men även felets komplexitet. Slutligen betonar lärarna att för att den skriftliga korrigerande feedbacken ska vara effektiv behöver eleverna få tid till att bearbeta den.

Previous studies have shown that written corrective feedback (CF) addressing errors can help students to improve their language accuracy. In order to improve students' vocabulary skills, studies suggest that less explicit corrective feedback methods are more successful than more explicit ones. This small-scaled study tried to investigate what CF methods are used by three teachers concerning vocabulary errors in students' written assignments, what method is preferred by the teachers and the students in their classes and why, whether the students have to post-edit the essays after the teacher has given them feedback and finally, whether the students and their teachers believe they improve their vocabulary after the given feedback. The results show that all teachers used a varied set of corrective feedback types. The written corrective feedback method preferred by teachers in this study are underline and underline and describe. The method preferred by students are underline and describe and direct correction. In order for the feedback to be effective, the students need to work with the given corrective feedback. / Tidigare studier har visat att skriftlig korrigerande feedback som gäller språkfel kan hjälpa eleverna att förbättra sin språkriktighet. Studier tyder på att de mindre explicita korrigerande feedbackmetoderna är mer framgångsrika, när det gäller att förbättra elevernas ordförråd. Den här studien undersökte vilka feedbackmetoder på vokabulärfel i skriftliga texter tre lärare använder, vilken metod som föredras av lärarna och deras elever, om eleverna bearbetar sina texter utifrån lärarens feedback och slutligen, om eleverna och deras lärare tror att eleverna lär sig ny vokabulär utifrån lärarens feedback. Resultaten visar att alla lärare använde en varierad uppsättning av korrigerande feedbackmetoder. Den skriftliga korrigerande feedbackmetod som föredras av lärarna i denna studie är understrykning och understrykning med förklaring. Den metod som föredras av eleverna är understrykning med beskrivning och direkt korrigering. För att feedback ska vara effektiv måste eleverna bearbeta den feedback de fått av läraren.