Investigating Learner Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback in a Thai Higher Education Context

Abstract

The current study investigated EFL learners’ preferences for written corrective feedback (WCF) and the rationale for their preferences. A mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative data collection, was used to explore this phenomenon. The data were collected using an internet-based questionnaire and a semi-structured interview. The questionnaire was utilized to gather quantitative information from 93 Thai EFL students at a Bangkok-based Rajabhat University, while the interview collected qualitative data from ten respondents who were willing to be interviewed. The findings indicated that Thai EFL undergraduate students, on the whole, appreciated receiving WCF in several forms. The most desired type of WCF was direct feedback, while feedback given to learners regarding global errors was not favourable. Additionally, the rationale for the students’ WCF preferences included: 1) clarity of feedback in pointing out the grammatical errors and the proper forms; 2) feedback resulting in improvement of the written text in the amended version; and 3) feedback resulting in better writing scores. The outcomes of this study may encourage Thai EFL teachers, as well as teachers in similar EFL situations, to deliver more precise types of WCF on learners’ faults in writing and utilise a chosen WCF method to involve students in learning to write

Written Corrective Feedback in the ESL Classroom: A Systematic Analysis of Teachers' Beliefs, Students' Perceptions, and Preferences

“…14 Jinowat & Wiboolyasarin (2022) • The study's participants perceived direct feedback as advantage because they wanted higher final grades. • Students wanted teachers to help them eliminate mistakes.…”

“…• Teachers felt direct correction may help students increase writing accuracy, but time restrictions stopped them from spotting all grammar mistakes. 14 Jinowat & Wiboolyasarin (2022) • Teachers used feedback mechanisms and monitored written work that contained error-free texts. • Teachers are uncertain which written corrective feedback students prefer.…”

“…Based on the scrutinized literature, teachers are firm in their belief that a purposeful and meticulous approach to delivering written corrective feedback is essential for enhancing student learning. Teachers employ systematic and strategic feedback mechanisms to meticulously review and rectify errors in their student's written work, as evidenced by the research conducted by (Jinowat and Wiboolyasarin, 2022). Consequently, the criteria for evaluation should remain flexible and adaptable, contingent upon the students' acquired skills.…”

“…Additionally, students believe it is part of a teacher's role to help them understand their errors and expect teachers to guide them in rectifying their mistakes. They perceive teachers as being accountable for providing guidance and are eager for their assistance in eliminating errors (Jinowat & Wiboolyasarin, 2022;Soleimani & Rahimi, 2021).…”

“…The data for this table have been collated from all the research articles that underwent review. Direct feedback, which entails students receiving immediate, personalised commentary from their teachers on their errors, has proven to be the most preferred feedback modality among students (Jinowat & Wiboolyasarin, 2022;Ganapathy et al, 2020b;Wei & Cao, 2020). What holds the utmost importance for students is the swift and specific responses addressing their writing errors, emphasising immediate grammar corrections (Susanti, 2020).…”