Selective Direct and Indirect Feedback on Grammatical Error Reduction
Keywords:
Education, Error Correction, Selective Direct Feedback, Selective Indirect Feedback
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare two feedback strategies - Selective Direct Feedback (SDF) and Selective Indirect Feedback (SIF) - in reducing grammatical errors in the writing of senior high school Humanities and Social Science students. The participants were 120 senior high school Humanities and Social Science students whose essays were evaluated for grammatical errors before and after receiving SDF and SIF from their teacher. The results showed that both SDF and SIF led to a significant decrease in grammatical errors in the students' writing. However, the reductions in errors were not significantly different between the two feedback methods.
References
1. Abdul, M. I. (2014). The effectiveness of indirect error correction feedback on the quality of students’ writing. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 5(2), 244-257.
2. Acharya, A. S., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., & Nigam, A. (2013). Sampling: Why and how of it. Indian Journal of Medical Specialties, 4(2), 330-333.
3. Afrin, S. (2016). Writing Problems of Non-English Major Undergraduate Students in Bangladesh: An Observation. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 04, 104-115.
4. Alamis, M. M. (2010). Evaluating students' reactions and responses to teachers' written feedback. Philippine ESL Journal, 5(1), 40-57.
5. Al-Buainain, H. (2011). Students' Writing Errors in EFL: A Case Study. QNRS Repository, 2011(1), 2601.
6. Alfonso, V. S., & City, T. (2016). Common Errors Committed by Freshman Education Students in their Written English Compositions and their Relationship to some Selected Variables.
7. Ali, Z., & Bhaskar, S. B. (2016). Basic statistical tools in research and data analysis. Indian journal of anesthesia, 60(9), 662.
8. Aliakbari, M., & Toni, A. (2009). On the Effects of Error Correction Strategies on the Grammatical Accuracy of the Iranian English Learners. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 99-112.
9. Alimohammadi, B., & Nejadansari, D. (2014). Written corrective feedback: focused and unfocused. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(3), 581.
10. Alroe, M. J. (2011). Error correction of L2 students’ texts–theory, evidence, and pedagogy. Asian EFL Journal Professional Teaching Articles.
11. Andersson, S. (2015). Comprehensive or Selective Feedback, that is the Question. A Literature Review Focusing on Writing Strategies in an EFL/ESL Classroom.
12. Arif, A., Shah, S.H., Fakhra, & Ali, A.I. (2020). An Investigation on Academic Writing Problems Encountered by Undergraduate Students of Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Sanghar Campus. Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics.
13. Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of second language writing, 9(3), 227-257.
14. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207-217.
15. 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(3), 267-296.
16. Chkotua, M. (2012). Foreign language learners’ errors and error correction in writing class. Journal of Education, 11-15.
17. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Los Angeles: University of Nebraska–Lincoln.
18. Diab, R. (2006). EFL university students’ preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 27-51.
19. Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371.
20. Erel, S., & Bulut, D. (2007). Error treatment in L2 writing: A comparative study of direct and indirect coded feedback in Turkish EFL context. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Sayı, 22(1), 397-415.
21. Eslami, E. (2014). The effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback techniques on EFL students’ writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 445-452.
22. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
23. Farrokhi, F., & Sattarpour, S. (2011). The Effects of Focused and Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback on Grammatical Accuracy of Iranian EFL Learners. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 1(12).
24. Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Retrieved January 05, 2016, from https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=0bKRAgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
25. Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161–184
26. Gatcho, A. R., & Ramos, E. T. (2020). Common Writing Problems and Writing Attitudes among Freshman University Students in Online Learning Environments: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Translation and Language Studies, 1(1), 49–66.
27. Greenslade, T. A., & Felix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2006). Error correction and learner perceptions in L2 Spanish writing. In Selected Proceedings of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Language (pp. 185-194).
28. Habibi, A., Wachyunni, S., & Husni, N.H. (2017). Students’ Perception on Writing Problems: A Survey at One Islamic University in Jambi. Ta'dib: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam.
29. Hamouda, A. (2011). A study of students and teachers' preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128.
30. Harmer, J. (1998). How to teach English. Longman.
31. Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
32. Hashemnezhad, H., & Mohammadnejad, S. (2012). A Case for Direct and Indirect Feedback: The Other Side of Coin. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 230-239.
33. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.
34. Hendrickson, J. M. (1980). Error Correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory, Research and Practice. In K. Croft (Ed.), Readings on English as a Second Language (pp. 153-173). Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.
35. Hosseiny, M. (2014). The role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback in improving Iranian EFL students’ writing skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 668-674.
36. Huang, J. (2002). Error analysis in English teaching: A review of studies. Journal of Chung-San Girls' Senior High School, 2(2), 19-34.
37. Hyland, F. (2006). The Impact of Teacher Written Feedback on Individual Writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 255-286.
38. Jalaluddin, M. (2015). Role of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback in improvement of Hindi students’ writing skills. American International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences.
39. Jimena, E. D., Tedjaatmadja, H. M., & Tian, M. (2005). Error correction: A bridge to grammatical accuracy in L2 writing. In International Conference on Language and Communication and Culture: “Dialogs and Contexts in Focus. Bangkok.
40. Kothari, C. (2004). Research Methodology Methods and Techniques (Second Revised Edition). India. Retrieved October 09, 2017, from http://www.modares.ac.ir/uploads/Agr.Oth.Lib.17.pdf (Two-way ANOVA in SPSS Statistics, 2013)
41. Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285-312.
42. Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, 1-16.
43. Magno, C., & Amarles, A. (2011). Teachers’ feedback practices in second language academic writing classrooms. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 6(2).
44. Maysuroh, S., Maryadi, L.I., & Supiani (2017). Students’ English Writing Process and Problems: A Case Study at Hamzanwadi University.
45. Pan, Y. C. (2010). The effect of teacher error feedback on the accuracy of ELF student writing. TEFLIN Journal, 1(1), 57-77.
46. Perera, N. (2018). The role of error. Retrieved September 2018, from TKT Cambridge: https://www.tktcambridge.com/module-one/the-role-of-error/
47. Sivaji, K. (2012). The effect of direct and indirect error correction feedback on the grammatical accuracy of ESL writing of undergraduates.
48. Truscott, J. (2001). Selecting errors for selective error correction. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 27(2), 93-108.
49. Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255-272.
50. Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy.
51. Walliman, N. (2017). Research methods: The basics. Routledge.
52. Wang, P. (2010). Dealing with English majors' written errors in Chinese universities. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(3), 194-205.
53. Yapin, J., Haiying, C., & Yukuo, W. (2010). The problems and the countermeasures of college English writing teaching. 2010 International Conference on Education and Management Technology, 574-577.
2. Acharya, A. S., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., & Nigam, A. (2013). Sampling: Why and how of it. Indian Journal of Medical Specialties, 4(2), 330-333.
3. Afrin, S. (2016). Writing Problems of Non-English Major Undergraduate Students in Bangladesh: An Observation. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 04, 104-115.
4. Alamis, M. M. (2010). Evaluating students' reactions and responses to teachers' written feedback. Philippine ESL Journal, 5(1), 40-57.
5. Al-Buainain, H. (2011). Students' Writing Errors in EFL: A Case Study. QNRS Repository, 2011(1), 2601.
6. Alfonso, V. S., & City, T. (2016). Common Errors Committed by Freshman Education Students in their Written English Compositions and their Relationship to some Selected Variables.
7. Ali, Z., & Bhaskar, S. B. (2016). Basic statistical tools in research and data analysis. Indian journal of anesthesia, 60(9), 662.
8. Aliakbari, M., & Toni, A. (2009). On the Effects of Error Correction Strategies on the Grammatical Accuracy of the Iranian English Learners. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 99-112.
9. Alimohammadi, B., & Nejadansari, D. (2014). Written corrective feedback: focused and unfocused. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(3), 581.
10. Alroe, M. J. (2011). Error correction of L2 students’ texts–theory, evidence, and pedagogy. Asian EFL Journal Professional Teaching Articles.
11. Andersson, S. (2015). Comprehensive or Selective Feedback, that is the Question. A Literature Review Focusing on Writing Strategies in an EFL/ESL Classroom.
12. Arif, A., Shah, S.H., Fakhra, & Ali, A.I. (2020). An Investigation on Academic Writing Problems Encountered by Undergraduate Students of Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Sanghar Campus. Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics.
13. Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of second language writing, 9(3), 227-257.
14. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207-217.
15. 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(3), 267-296.
16. Chkotua, M. (2012). Foreign language learners’ errors and error correction in writing class. Journal of Education, 11-15.
17. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Los Angeles: University of Nebraska–Lincoln.
18. Diab, R. (2006). EFL university students’ preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 27-51.
19. Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371.
20. Erel, S., & Bulut, D. (2007). Error treatment in L2 writing: A comparative study of direct and indirect coded feedback in Turkish EFL context. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Sayı, 22(1), 397-415.
21. Eslami, E. (2014). The effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback techniques on EFL students’ writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 445-452.
22. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
23. Farrokhi, F., & Sattarpour, S. (2011). The Effects of Focused and Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback on Grammatical Accuracy of Iranian EFL Learners. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 1(12).
24. Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Retrieved January 05, 2016, from https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=0bKRAgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
25. Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161–184
26. Gatcho, A. R., & Ramos, E. T. (2020). Common Writing Problems and Writing Attitudes among Freshman University Students in Online Learning Environments: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Translation and Language Studies, 1(1), 49–66.
27. Greenslade, T. A., & Felix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2006). Error correction and learner perceptions in L2 Spanish writing. In Selected Proceedings of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Language (pp. 185-194).
28. Habibi, A., Wachyunni, S., & Husni, N.H. (2017). Students’ Perception on Writing Problems: A Survey at One Islamic University in Jambi. Ta'dib: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam.
29. Hamouda, A. (2011). A study of students and teachers' preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128.
30. Harmer, J. (1998). How to teach English. Longman.
31. Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
32. Hashemnezhad, H., & Mohammadnejad, S. (2012). A Case for Direct and Indirect Feedback: The Other Side of Coin. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 230-239.
33. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.
34. Hendrickson, J. M. (1980). Error Correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory, Research and Practice. In K. Croft (Ed.), Readings on English as a Second Language (pp. 153-173). Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.
35. Hosseiny, M. (2014). The role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback in improving Iranian EFL students’ writing skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 668-674.
36. Huang, J. (2002). Error analysis in English teaching: A review of studies. Journal of Chung-San Girls' Senior High School, 2(2), 19-34.
37. Hyland, F. (2006). The Impact of Teacher Written Feedback on Individual Writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 255-286.
38. Jalaluddin, M. (2015). Role of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback in improvement of Hindi students’ writing skills. American International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences.
39. Jimena, E. D., Tedjaatmadja, H. M., & Tian, M. (2005). Error correction: A bridge to grammatical accuracy in L2 writing. In International Conference on Language and Communication and Culture: “Dialogs and Contexts in Focus. Bangkok.
40. Kothari, C. (2004). Research Methodology Methods and Techniques (Second Revised Edition). India. Retrieved October 09, 2017, from http://www.modares.ac.ir/uploads/Agr.Oth.Lib.17.pdf (Two-way ANOVA in SPSS Statistics, 2013)
41. Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 285-312.
42. Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, 1-16.
43. Magno, C., & Amarles, A. (2011). Teachers’ feedback practices in second language academic writing classrooms. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 6(2).
44. Maysuroh, S., Maryadi, L.I., & Supiani (2017). Students’ English Writing Process and Problems: A Case Study at Hamzanwadi University.
45. Pan, Y. C. (2010). The effect of teacher error feedback on the accuracy of ELF student writing. TEFLIN Journal, 1(1), 57-77.
46. Perera, N. (2018). The role of error. Retrieved September 2018, from TKT Cambridge: https://www.tktcambridge.com/module-one/the-role-of-error/
47. Sivaji, K. (2012). The effect of direct and indirect error correction feedback on the grammatical accuracy of ESL writing of undergraduates.
48. Truscott, J. (2001). Selecting errors for selective error correction. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 27(2), 93-108.
49. Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255-272.
50. Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners’ written accuracy.
51. Walliman, N. (2017). Research methods: The basics. Routledge.
52. Wang, P. (2010). Dealing with English majors' written errors in Chinese universities. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(3), 194-205.
53. Yapin, J., Haiying, C., & Yukuo, W. (2010). The problems and the countermeasures of college English writing teaching. 2010 International Conference on Education and Management Technology, 574-577.
Published
2023-11-20
How to Cite
[1]
N. Navarro, A.L., S. Caballo, J.H. and A. Ngo, C.G. 2023. Selective Direct and Indirect Feedback on Grammatical Error Reduction. International Journal on Integrated Education. 6, 11 (Nov. 2023), 82-93. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17605/ijie.v6i11.4958.
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
In submitting the manuscript to the International Journal on Integrated Education (IJIE), the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- The publication has been approved by the author(s) and by responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
License and Copyright Agreement
Authors who publish with International Journal on Integrated Education (IJIE) agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the International Journal on Integrated Education (IJIE) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the International Journal on Integrated Education (IJIE) published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
1.png)
