| 1 |
A three-stage model for implementing focused written corrective feedback
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
FACTORS INFLUENCING EFL STUDENTS’ UTILISATION OF TEACHER WRITTEN FEEDBACK
|
|
|
|
In: TEFLIN Journal, Vol 33, Iss 1, Pp 98-122 (2022) (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Written Corrective Feedback, Working Memory, and the Development of Explicit and Implicit Knowledge of English Plurals ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
The Role of Individual Preferences in the Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in an English for Academic Purposes Writing Course
|
|
|
|
In: Australian Journal of Teacher Education (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Assessing Writing in French-as-a-Foreign-Language: Teacher Practices and Learner Uptake
|
|
|
|
In: Languages; Volume 6; Issue 4; Pages: 210 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Student engagement with teacher written feedback on IELTS Writing Task 2 rehearsal essays
|
|
Pearson, WS. - : University of Exeter, 2021. : Graduate School of Education, 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
Can a ‘pedagogical’ spellchecker improve spelling accuracy in L2 Spanish?
|
|
Blazquez-Carretero, Miguel; Woore, Robert. - : University of Hawaii National Foreign Language Resource Center, 2021. : Center for Language & Technology, 2021. : (co-sponsored by Center for Open Educational Resources and Language Learning, University of Texas at Austin), 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
Focused direct corrective feedback: Effects on the elementary English learners’ written syntactic complexity
|
|
|
|
In: Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol 7, Iss 1, Pp 132-150 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Am I Promoting Feedback Cycle and Sociomaterial Learning?
|
|
|
|
In: Issues in Language Studies, Vol 10, Iss 1 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
Written Comments on Undergraduate Theses Written in Spanish as a First Language and English as a Foreign Language
|
|
|
|
In: Signum: Estudos da Linguagem, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 52-68 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Omani EFL writing instructors’ attitudes and reported and actual practices towards written corrective feedback in first year foundation programmes
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
There is a large body of theoretical research and empirical studies that investigated written corrective feedback. However, this area has been limited to only three empirical studies in higher education institutions in the Omani context (e.g. Al- Bakri, 2015; Al Ajmi, 2015 ; AlBadwawi, 2011) and one at Omani public schools (Al-Harrasi, 2019). The current study is a mixed method study which explores English as a Foreign Language foundation year writing instructors’ practice and attitudes on written corrective feedback at tertiary institutions in the Omani context. The study also examines writing instructors’ actual written response to learners’ essays. Further, it examines whether instructors’ written response is determined by learners’ level of language proficiency in English. In doing so, it aims to provide a deeper understanding of the current views and practices of WCF in the Omani context. For its framework for analysis, the study draws on statistical analysis of an online survey distributed among 174 EFL writing instructors at six higher education institutions in Oman. It also draws on content analysis and quantitative findings of a sample of 96 students’ essays from four different English language proficiency level classes at one higher education institution. The study reveals that the instructors applied unfocused direct written corrective feedback in addition to other types of written corrective feedback. However, content analysis of teacher written response on the sample of 96 written assignments showed that instructors implemented unfocused but indirect written corrective feedback. Further, instructors’ written response to students’ essays was determined by learners’ level of language proficiency in English; beginner students received more direct written corrective feedback while intermediate, upper intermediate and advanced students received metalinguistic written corrective feedback in the form of error codes and grammatical explanation of rules and how to use them in writing. Moreover, instructors’ written commentary on students’ essays focused on grammar and mechanism rather than the content of the essays. In addition, the majority of teacher commentary whether end comments or text-based comments was in the form of evaluative expressions. The study came up with a number of recommendations for policy makers, writing instructors and future researchers. Moreover, I propose a model to maximise teacher written corrective feedback and achieve sustainable feedback.
|
|
Keyword:
EFL writing instructors; First year Foundation Programme; Omani higher education institutions; written corrective feedback
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10871/123675
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 12 |
An Inquiry into Effective Written Feedback from EFL Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives at a Saudi University
|
|
Albogami, M. - : University of Exeter, 2020. : School of Education, 2020
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 13 |
Validating written feedback in clinical formative assessment
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 14 |
Less is more? The impact of written corrective feedback on corpus-assisted L2 error resolution
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 15 |
THE TEACHERS’ BELIEFS IN TEACHER WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON THE STUDENTS' WRITING
|
|
|
|
In: Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature, Vol 5, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 16 |
The Effects of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedbacks on the Business Communication Texts of Technical University Students in Ghana
|
|
|
|
In: Applied Linguistics Research Journal, Vol 4, Iss 2, Pp 25-39 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 17 |
Written corrective feedback in English compositions: Teachers’ practices and students’ expectations
|
|
|
|
In: English Language Teaching Educational Journal, Vol 3, Iss 2, Pp 95-107 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 18 |
The effects of different types of written corrective feedback on students’ texting mistakes
|
|
|
|
In: English Language Teaching Educational Journal, Vol 3, Iss 3, Pp 174-187 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 19 |
Students’ preferences and teachers’ beliefs towards written corrective feedback
|
|
|
|
In: ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching, Vol 9, Iss 1, Pp 85-95 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
