The Use of Models as Written Corrective Feedback in English as a Foreign Language (EFL)Writing

Abstract

The language learning potential of writing has been an underresearched topic in the English as a foreign language (EFL) context. The present study investigates what Basque-Spanish EFL teenage learners (n = 60) notice when writing a composition in response to visual stimuli in a three-stage writing task including output, comparison, and delayed revision. The present study also explores how this noticing and feedback processing affects their subsequent revisions. The findings revealed that participants noticed mainly lexical problems, although they also paid attention to content features. Moreover, more proficient learners and guided learners noticed more features. A qualitative analysis of the results indicated that, overall, learners had a negative attitude toward writing and modeling, but those with more positive beliefs incorporated more items in subsequent revisions. A number of implications for research and pedagogy will be discussed.

EFL Students' Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback: Do Error Types, Language Proficiency, and Foreign Language Enjoyment Matter?

“…For example, Hanaoka (2007) showed that WCF was more likely to direct the attention of Japanese learners of English to lexical errors but not to other types of errors. Similar findings were observed in the study of García Mayo and Labandibar (2017) conducted with Spanish learners of English. In the study of Simard et al (2015), although learners could notice WCF triggered by lexical errors, they sometimes wrongly interpreted teachers' intention of correcting word choice errors as spelling errors.…”

Direct and Indirect Feedback in the L2 English Development of Writing Skills

“…However, the direct CF group benefitted more from teacher"s written CF over time. These results go hand in hand with earlier works on the higher positive effect of direct CF when compared to indirect CF on written accuracy (Ellis et al, 2008;García Mayo and Labandibar, 2017;Sarvestani and Pishkar, 2015).…”

“…Thus, provided that CF on Primary Education L2 English students" writing skills is not a sufficient way by itself to improve their written accuracy, oral discussions on specific grammar structures, lexical topics or text coherence techniques should also be taken into account. The use of other CF techniques such as the use of model texts is also a very interesting topic for further analysis (Coyle et al, 2018;García Mayo and Labandibar, 2017).…”

“…Two main issues have been investigated with regards to the use of CF in the development L2 writing skills, namely, (a) what kind of CF has proved to be the most effective to help L2 students" written output (Coyle and Roca De Larios, 2014;García Mayo and Labandibar, 2017;Ismail et al, 2008;Sarvestani and Pishkar, 2015); and bwhat kind of feedback is most effective at low L2 levels (Coyle and Roca De Larios, 2014;García Mayo and Labandibar, 2017). Coyle and Roca De Larios (2014), investigated the role played by two forms of CF, error correction and model texts, on L2 English children aged 10 to 12 (26 boys and 20 girls) from a Spanish primary school.…”

“…García Mayo and Labandibar (2017), also examined the role played by model texts as an implicit way of increasing participants" error awareness. The use of models has been claimed to push learners to actively identify and understand mistakes.…”