No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

For more than a decade now, a great deal of research has been done on the topic of written corrective feedback (CF) in SLA and second language (L2) writing. Nonetheless, what those research efforts really have shown as well as the possible implications for practice remain in dispute. Although L2 writing and SLA researchers often examine similar phenomena in similar ways, they do not necessarily ask the same questions. SLA-focused researchers investigate whether written CF facilitates the acquisition of particular linguistic features. In contrast, L2 writing researchers generally emphasize the question of whether written CF helps student writers improve the overall effectiveness of their texts. Understanding these differences in starting points is important because it provides a possible explanation for the confl icting methodologies and conclusions of various reviews on this , for their helpful feedback on earlier drafts of this article. I am also grateful for the helpful comments made on an earlier version by two anonymous SSLA reviewers. All errors and omissions remain my own.

In this study, the author examined over 1,600 marginal and end comments written on 110 first drafts of papers by 47 advanced university ESL students, considering both the pragmatic goals for and the linguistic features of each comment. She then examined revised drafts of each paper to observe the influence of the first‐draft commentary on the students' revisions and assess whether the changes made in response to the teacher's feedback actually improved the papers. A significant proportion of the comments appeared to lead to substantive student revision, and particular types and forms of commentary appeared to be more helpful than others. The results suggest several important implications for L2 writing instruction and for future studies on a vital but surprisingly neglected topic.

Research in L1 and L2 student writing has suggested that teacher response to student compositions is most effective when it is given on preliminary rather than final drafts of student essays (Freedman, 1987; Krashen, 1984). One area of research in L1 and L2 composition is the assessment of student reactions to the feedback they receive from their teachers (Cohen & Cavalcanti, 1990; Hedgcock & Lefkowitz, 1994; Leki, 1991; McCurdy, 1992). However, most previous studies of ESL student response to their teachers' written comments on their essays have been undertaken in single‐draft, rather than multiple‐draft, contexts. In this study, 155 students in two levels of a university ESL composition program responded to a survey very similar to the ones utilized by Cohen (1987) and McCurdy (1992) in single‐draft settings. The results of the survey indicated that students pay more attention to teacher feedback provided on preliminary drafts (vs. final drafts) of their essays; that they utilize a variety of strategies to respond to their teachers' comments; that they appreciate receiving comments of encouragement; and that, overall, they find their teachers' feedback useful in helping them to improve their writing. Responses also showed that students had a variety of problems in understanding their teachers' comments, suggesting that teachers should be more intentional in explaining their responding behaviors to their students.