EFL Learners’ Perceptions and Preferences of Written Corrective Feedback: A Case Study of Iranian EFL learners
محورهای موضوعی : Second Language Educationسمانه ایماندار 1 , Mohammad Taghi Farvardin 2 , Seyed Foad Ebrahimi 3
1 - دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بوشهر
2 - The Department of English, Ahvaz Campus, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran
3 - the Department of English, Shadegan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shadegan, Iran
کلید واژه: written corrective feedback, EFL writing, learner perceptions, feedback types, qualitative research,
چکیده مقاله :
This qualitative study investigated EFL learners' perceptions and preferences regarding written corrective feedback (WCF) in academic writing. Twenty intermediate-level university students were purposively selected based on their sustained exposure to teacher feedback over six months. Semi-structured interviews explored learners' experiences with different feedback types and perception. Thematic analysis revealed five key findings: (1) Learners distinguished between explicit and implicit feedback, preferring direct corrections for complex grammar but indirect cues for vocabulary; (2) Metalinguistic feedback was valued when accompanied by explanations, though excessive coding caused anxiety; (3) Focused feedback on specific error types was deemed more practical than comprehensive corrections; (4) Digital feedback was praised for clarity, while handwritten notes were perceived as more personal; (5) Reformulations helped learners acquire native-like expressions, but required explicit comparisons to original errors. Results demonstrated WCF's multifaceted role in enhancing grammatical accuracy, lexical sophistication, writing confidence, and self-editing skills. Participants particularly valued feedback that balanced correction with explanation, targeted persistent errors, and provided positive reinforcement. The study highlights the need for differentiated feedback strategies that consider learners' cognitive styles and affective responses. These findings offer practical implications for optimizing WCF practices in second language writing instruction.
This qualitative study investigated EFL learners' perceptions and preferences regarding written corrective feedback (WCF) in academic writing. Twenty intermediate-level university students were purposively selected based on their sustained exposure to teacher feedback over six months. Semi-structured interviews explored learners' experiences with different feedback types and perception. Thematic analysis revealed five key findings: (1) Learners distinguished between explicit and implicit feedback, preferring direct corrections for complex grammar but indirect cues for vocabulary; (2) Metalinguistic feedback was valued when accompanied by explanations, though excessive coding caused anxiety; (3) Focused feedback on specific error types was deemed more practical than comprehensive corrections; (4) Digital feedback was praised for clarity, while handwritten notes were perceived as more personal; (5) Reformulations helped learners acquire native-like expressions, but required explicit comparisons to original errors. Results demonstrated WCF's multifaceted role in enhancing grammatical accuracy, lexical sophistication, writing confidence, and self-editing skills. Participants particularly valued feedback that balanced correction with explanation, targeted persistent errors, and provided positive reinforcement. The study highlights the need for differentiated feedback strategies that consider learners' cognitive styles and affective responses. These findings offer practical implications for optimizing WCF practices in second language writing instruction.
Al Hilali, T. S., & McKinley, J. (2021). Exploring the socio-contextual nature of workplace writing: Towards preparing learners for the complexities of English L2 writing in the workplace. English for Specific Purposes, 63, 86–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2021.03.005
Alsamadani, H. A. (2017). The effectiveness of using online blogging for students’ individual and group writing. International Education Studies, 11(1), 58–68.
Amrhein, H. R., & Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do students and teachers prefer and why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13, 95–127.
Ashrafi, S., & Foozunfar, M. (2018). The effects of oral, written feedback types on EFL learners’ written accuracy: The relevance of learners’ perceptions. Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on English Language Studies: Applied Linguistics Perspectives on EFL, 2–22. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10968.60169/1
Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 702–726. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818770921
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp016
Böttcher, E. (2011). Assessment for learning: The role of feedback. Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL, 11(1), 48–49. https://doi.org/10.7916/salt.v11i1.1416
Brown, A. (2009). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 46–60.
Brown, D. (2012). The written corrective feedback debate: Next steps for classroom teachers and practitioners. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 861-867. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.63
Ćeman, A., & Dubravac, V. (2019). Corrective feedback in second language acquisition. Journal of Education and Humanities, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.14706/jeh2019213
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267–96.
Chen, S., Nassaji, H., & Liu, Q. (2016). EFL learners’ perceptions and preferences of written corrective feedback: A case study of university students from Mainland China. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-016-0010-y
Choi, S. Y., & Li, S. (2012). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in a child ESOL classroom. RELC Journal, 43, 331–351.
Chong, S. W. (2020). Written corrective feedback practices of an experienced ESL primary teacher: An ecological perspective. TESOL Journal, 11(3), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.509
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
Diab, R. L. (2005). EFL university students‟ preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 38(1), 27–51. http://hdl.handle.net/10725/2796
Ellis, R. (Ed.). (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn023
Ellis, R. (2010). A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335–349. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990544
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Preemptive focus on form in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 407–432.
Elwood, J. A., & Bode, J. (2014). Student preferences vis-à-vis teacher feedback in university EFL writing classes in Japan. System, 42, 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.023
Esmaeeli M., & Sadeghi, K. (2020). The effect of direct versus indirect focused written corrective feedback on developing EFL learners‟ written and oral skills. Language Related Research, 11(5), 89–124. https://doi.org/10.29252/LRR.11.5.124
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short-and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81–104). Cambridge University Press.
Ferris, D. R. (2011). Treatment of error in second language student writing. University of Michigan Press.
Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing studies. Language Teaching, 45(4), 446–459.
Ferris, D. (2015). Written corrective feedback in L2 writing: Connors & Lunsford (1988); Lunsford & Lunsford (2008); Lalande (1982). Language Teaching, 48(4), 531–544.
Gholami, L. (2022). Incidental CF provision for formulaic vs. non-formulaic errors: EFL teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Awareness, 31(1), 21–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2021.1943421
Göçen, G. (2019). The effect of creative writing activities on elementary school students’ creative writing achievement, writing attitude and motivation. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15, 1032–1044. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.631547
Graham, S. (2006). Writing. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 457–478). Erlbaum.
Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 77, 81–112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Jodaie, M., Farrokhi, F., & Zoghi, M. (2011). A comparative study of EFL teachers' and intermediate high school students' perceptions of written corrective feedback on grammatical errors. English Language Teaching, 4(4), 36–48. https://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/13353
Kaivanpanah, S., Alavi, S. M., & Sepehrinia, S. (2015). Preferences for interactional feedback: Differences between learners and teachers. The Language Learning Journal, 43, 74–93.
Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2015). ESL students’ perceptions towards written corrective feedback: What type of feedback do they prefer and why? The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 4, 5–25.
Kartchava, E., & Ammar, A. (2014). Learners’ beliefs as mediators of what is noticed and learned in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 86–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.101
Kim, H. R., & Bowles, M. (2020). How deeply do second language learners process written corrective feedback? Insights gained from think-alouds. TESOL Quarterly, 53(4), 913–938. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.522
Kim, Y. J., Choi, B., Kang, S., Kim, B., & Yun, H. (2020). Comparing the effects of direct and indirect synchronous written corrective feedback: Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 53, 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12443
Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66(2), 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x
Lasagabaster, D. and Sierra, J.M. (2005) Error correction: Students’ versus teachers’ perceptions. Language Awareness 14, 112–127.
Legard, R., Keegan, J., & Ward, K. (2003). In-depth interviews. In J. Ritchie & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (pp. 138-169). Sage.
Lee, E. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41, 217–230.
Lee, I. (2013). Research into practice: Written corrective feedback. Language Teaching, 46(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000390
Liberty, L. M., & Conderman, G. (2018). Using the self-regulated strategy development model to support middle-level writing. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 91, 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2018.1426303
Lim, S. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2020). Efficacy of written corrective feedback in writing instruction: A meta-analysis. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 24(3), 1–26. https://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume24/ej95/ej95a3/
Li, S., & Vuono, A. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 84, 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, 1–40.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497.
Mao, S. S., & Crosthwaite, P. (2019). Investigating written corrective feedback: (Mis)alignment of teachers’ beliefs and practice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 46–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.05.004
Mao, Z., & Lee, I. (2020). Feedback scope in written corrective feedback: Analysis of empirical research in L2 contexts. Assessing Writing, 45, 100469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100469
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2002). The qualitative researcher's companion. Sage.
Mohebbi, H. (2021). 25 years on, the written error correction debate continues: An interview with John Truscott. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 6(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-021-00110-9
Mustafa, R. F. (2012). Feedback on the feedback: Sociocultural interpretation of Saudi ESL learners’ opinions about writing feedback. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n3p3
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411–452.
Nguyen, H. D., & Ramnath, R. (2016). Students‟ reactions to teacher written feedback in their compositions at An Giang university, Vietnam. The New English Teacher, 10(1), 42–54. http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.php/newEnglishTeacher/article/view/1344/1505
Niu, R., & You, X. (2020). Effects of indirect corrective feedback with and without written languaging on L2 written accuracy: A multitask intervention study. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29, 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00488-8
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.
Patra, I., Alazemi, A., Al-Jamal, D., & Gheisari, A. (2022). The effectiveness of teachers’ written and verbal corrective feedback (CF) during formative assessment (FA) on male language learners’ academic anxiety (AA), academic performance (AP), and attitude toward learning (ATL). Language Testing in Asia, 12(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00169-2
Polio, C. (2012). The relevance of second language acquisition theory to the written error correction debate. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 375–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.004
Ranta, L., & Lyster, R. (2007). A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback sequence. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 141–160). Cambridge University Press.
Rasool, U., Mahmood, R., Aslam, M. Z., Barzani, S. H., & Qian, J. (2023). Perceptions and preferences of senior high school students about written corrective feedback in Pakistan. Sage Open, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231187612
Rasool, U., Qian, J., & Aslam, M. Z. (2024). Understanding the significance of EFL students’ perceptions and preferences of written corrective feedback. Sage Open, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241256562
Saeli, H. (2019). Teachers‟ practices and students‟ preferences: Grammar-centered written corrective feedback in Iran. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 7(1), 46–70. http://relp.khuisf.ac.ir/article_663422.html
Saragih, N. A., Madya, S., Siregar, R. A., & Saragih, W. (2021). Written corrective feedback: Students’ perception and preferences. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 8(2), 676–690.
Sarandi, H. (2020). Mixed CF and the acquisition of third person’ -s’. The Language Learning Journal, 48(4), 402–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2017.1400579
Schulz, R. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA-Colombia. Modern Language Journal, 85, 244–258.
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8, 263–300.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301–322). Oxford University Press.
Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 593–610). Routledge.
Simard, D., Guénette, D., & Bergeron, A. (2015). L2 learners’ interpretation and understanding of written corrective feedback: Insights from their metalinguistic reflections. Language Awareness, 24(3), 233–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2015.1076432
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129
Storch, N. (2018). Written corrective feedback from sociocultural theoretical perspectives: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 51(2), 262–277. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000034
Trabelsi, S. (2019). The perceptions and preferences of general foundation program students regarding written corrective feedback in an Omani EFL context. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 10(1), 91–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.10n.1p.91
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327–369. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
Truscott, J. (2020). The efficacy of written corrective feedback: A critique of a meta-analysis. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341453398
Vattøy, K.-D., & Smith, K. (2019). Students’ perceptions of teachers’ feedback practice in teaching English as a foreign language. Teaching and Teacher Education, 85, 260–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.06.024
Wang, H. C. (2009). Taiwanese students' perceptions of writing commentaries: Revisiting culture. The International Journal of Language Society and Culture, 28(2), 82–91.
Xu, Z. (2023). Metacognition in language teaching and research: A conversation with professor Lawrence Jun Zhang. RELC Journal, 54(1), 300–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231157497
Yang, J. (2016). Learners’ oral corrective feedback preferences in relation to their cultural background, proficiency level and types of error. System, 61, 75–86.
Yu, K. W., Mincieli, L., & Zipser, N. (2021). How student evaluations of teaching affect course enrollment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(5), 779–792. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1808593
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Zhang, L. J., & Cheng, X. (2021). Examining the effects of comprehensive written corrective feedback on L2 EAP students’ linguistic performance: A mixed-methods study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 54, 101043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.101043
Zhang Z., Hyland K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004
Zumbrunn, S., Marrs, S., & Mewborn, C. (2016). Toward a better understanding of student perceptions of writing feedback: A mixed methods study. Reading and Writing, 29(2), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9599-3
Zou, B., & Lambert, J. (2017). Feedback methods for student voice in the digital age. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(5), 1081–1091. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12522
