2.3 The discussions on the effectiveness of corrective feedback 2

2.4 The explicitness of feedback 3

2.4.1 Researches on the explicitness of feedback 3

2.4.2 The definition of the explicitness of feedback 4

2.4.3 The measurement of the effects of feedback 4

3. Method 5

3.1 Subjects 5

3.2 Design and procedures 5

3.3 Statistical analysis 7

4. Results 8

4.1 The analysis of the initial composition 8

4.2 The analysis on efficacy of four feedback methods 8

4.3 The analysis on whether four feedback methods help to accuracy in students composition 10

5. Conclusion and limitations 12

6. Implications for practice 14

References 15

1. Introduction

The effect of teachers’ corrective feedback on the correction of grammar error in second language writing has been continually discussed by researchers. About this issue, an overall consensus has been made that corrective feedback from teachers does contribute to the improvement of L2 student writing accuracy over time (Ferris & Roberts, 2001). However, one issue which has not been adequately examined is how explicit error feedback should be in order to help students to correct their compositions. By reviewing the previous study, the researcher found that the explicitness of feedback is usually defined from the form of the feedback and the degree of information conveyed by feedback. However, as Zhu and Wang (2005) pointed, the previous measurement of the explicitness of feedback neglects the internal experience of ESL learners; hence new measurement like “the identification ratio” should be introduced.

In this case, this paper will further investigate the effect of teacher’s corrective feedback on the correction of grammar error in English writing from three dimensions, that is, error ratio, identification ratio, and correction ratio.

2. Theoretical basis

2.1 The definition of corrective feedback

The corrective feedback in second language writing can be defined as input from a reader to a writer with the effect of providing information to the writer for revision. In other words, it is the comments, questions, and suggestions a reader gives a writer to produce ‘reader-based prose’ as opposed to writer-based prose (Keh, 1990). Through corrective feedback, the writer learns where he or she has misled or confused the reader by not supplying enough information, illogical organization, lack of development of ideas, or something like inappropriate word-choice or tense. Then, according to corrective feedback, the writer will make proper correction. 

There are three major areas of feedback as revision: peer feedback, conferences as feedback, and teachers’ comment as feedback.