The Comparative Effect of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback in Process-Based Vs. Product-Based Writing Instruction on EFL Learners` Writing Performance
الموضوعات :
ندا اوصانلو
1
(Department of English, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
Sholeh Kolahi
2
(Department of English, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
الکلمات المفتاحية: Writing Ability, Direct Feedback, Indirect Feedback, Process-Based Instruction, Product-Based Instruction, Second Language Learning,
ملخص المقالة :
This study attempted to systematically inspect the impact of direct and indirect corrective feedbacks on the writing ability of EFL learners when using product/process based instructions. To do so, 110 female EFL learners, between the ages of 15 and 18, were randomly assigned into four experimental groups to receive four different kinds of treatments, namely product-based instruction with direct feedback, product-based instruction with indirect feedback, process-based instruction with direct feedback, and process-based instruction with indirect feedback. The treatment took 10 sessions. Analyzing the results of the two writing tests (pretest and posttest) showed that direct feedback had significant effects on EFL learners' writing in process-based instruction and product-based instruction but indirect feedback failed to show any significant effect on EFL learners' writing in both process-based instruction and product-based instruction. The results also indicated that direct feedback had significantly better impact on EFL learners writing in the process-based instruction than product-based one.
Akinwamide, T. K. (2012). The influence of process approach on English as second language students’ performances in essay writing. English Language Teaching, 5 (3), 16-29.
Adam, B., (2003). Theory, culture and society. SAGE, 20(2) , 59–78. Doi: 10.1177/0263276403020002004
Aljumah, F., H. (2012). Saudi learner perceptions and attitudes towardsthe use of blogs in teaching English writing course for EFL majors at Qassim University. English Language Teaching Journal, 5(1),100-116.
Anh, P., L. (2010). The impact of indirect corrective feedback on learners` grammatical errors in EFL writing classes.Towards a Better School Journal, 21(2), 125-140.
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.
Beuningen, C., G., & De Jong, N., H., &Kuiken, F., (2005).The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners` written accuracy. Retrieved from http://dare.uva.nl/document/168926
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback.Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 102-118.
Bulut, D., &Erel, S., (2007). Error treatment in L2 writing: a comparative study of direct and indirect coded feedback in Turkish EFL context. SosyalBilimlerEnstitüsüDergisiSayı. Retrieved from http://sbe.erciyes.edu.tr/dergi/sayi_22/24-%20(397-415.%20syf.).pdf
Burton, A. (2005). Task-based language teaching for the state secondary FL classroom.Language Learning Journal. USA.
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, 267-269.
Fathman, A., &Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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 and F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Context and issues (pp. 81-104). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-184.
Foong, K.P. (1999). Teaching writing: A look at purposes, writing tasks, and implications. The English Teacher, 28. Retrieved July 31, 2006, from http://www.melta.org.my/ ET/1999/main3.html (Foong)
Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
GholamiPasand, P.&BazarmajHaghi, E., (2013). Process-product approach to writing: the effect of model essays on EFL learners’ writing accuracy.International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature. 2(1), 74-79.
Kirszber, L.G., &Mandell, S.R. (2000).Writing first: Practice in context with readings. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins.
Lyster, R., &Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 37-66.
Merrill, D. M. (1994).Instructional design theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. U.S.: Heinle&Heinle
O'Sullivan, I., & Chambers, A. (2006).Learners' writing skills in French Corpus consultation and learner evaluation.Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 49-68.
Richards, J.C., &Renandya, W.A. 2002.Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shirzad, M., Nejadansari, D. &Shirzad, H. (2015).The effects of teacher, guided, and self error correction on Iranian EFL learners’ L2 writing accuracy.Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(5), 35-47.
