Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-pcn4s Total loading time: 0.389 Render date: 2022-05-28T01:05:51.192Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Written corrective feedback in L2 writing: Connors & Lunsford (1988); Lunsford & Lunsford (2008); Lalande (1982)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2015

Dana Ferris*
Affiliation:
University Writing Program, University of California, Davis, USAdrferris@ucdavis.edu

Abstract

Written corrective feedback (CF) has been the most heavily researched topic in second language (L2) writing over the past 20 years. As a recent research timeline article in this journal (Ferris 2012; see also Bitchener & Ferris 2012) shows, studies of error correction in student writing have crossed disciplines (composition and rhetoric, foreign language studies, applied linguistics) and have utilized a range of research paradigms, including descriptive text analysis, quasi-experimental designs, and quantitative and qualitative classroom research. This article highlights two landmark studies on this topic, both from the 1980s, representing two of these research traditions. It explains why replication of these two studies would further advance our knowledge about written CF and makes specific suggestions about how the replications should be completed.

Type
Replication Studies
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing 9.3, 227258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bitchener, J. & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2010a). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten-month investigation. Applied Linguistics 31.2, 193214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2010b). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 19.4, 207217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 12.3, 267296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaney, S. J. (1999). The effect of error types on error correction and revision. California State University, Sacramento, Department of English: M.A. thesis.Google Scholar
Cohen, A. D. & Robbins, M. (1976). Toward assessing interlanguage performance: The relationship between selected errors, learners’ characteristics, and learners’ expectations. Language Learning 26.1, 4566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connors, R. & Lunsford, A. A.. (1988). Frequency of formal errors in current college writing, or Ma and Pa Kettle do research. College Composition and Communication 39.4, 395409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M. & Takashima, H.. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System 36.3, 353371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eskey, D. E. (1983). Meanwhile, back in the real world. . .Accuracy and fluency in second language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 17, 315323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2004). The ‘grammar correction’ debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime. . .?). Journal of Second Language Writing 13, 4962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts & issues. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 81104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, 181201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2011). Treatment of error in second language student writing (2nd edn). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing studies (Research timeline). Language Teaching 45.4, 446459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. & Roberts, B. J. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing 10.2, 161184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A. & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing 22, 307329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, L. (2001). For Kyla: What does the research say about responding to ESL writers? In Silva, T. & Matsuda, P. K. (eds.), On second language writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 7390.Google Scholar
Harap, H. (1930). The most common grammatical errors. English Journal 19.6, 440446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haswell, R. H. (1983). Minimal marking. College English 45, 600604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendrickson, J. M. 1980. The treatment of error in written work. The Modern Language Journal 64.2, 216221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System 31, 217230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. The Modern Language Journal 75.3, 305313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lalande, J. F. II (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal 66.2, 140149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals 24.3, 203218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lunsford, A. A. & Lunsford, K. J. (2008). ‘Mistakes are a fact of life’: A national comparative study. College Composition and Communication 59.4, 781806.Google Scholar
Porte, G. (2012). Introduction. In Porte, G. (ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 118.Google Scholar
Reid, J. M. (1994). Responding to ESL students’ texts: The myths of appropriation. TESOL Quarterly 28, 273292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robb, T., Ross, S. & Shortreed, I.. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly 20.1, 8393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, B. J. (1999). Can error logs raise more than consciousness? The effects of error logs and grammar feedback on ESL students’ final drafts. California State University, Sacramento, Department of English: M.A. thesis.Google Scholar
Santa, T. (2006). Dead letters: Error in composition, 1873–2004. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Semke, H. (1984). The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals 17.3, 195202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaughnessy, M. P. (1977). Errors and expectations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 41.2, 255283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, N. & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners’ processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, 303334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 46, 327369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Beuningen, C., de Jong, N. H. & Kuiken, F.. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning 62.1, 141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. M. (1981). The phenomenology of error. College Composition and Communication 32.2, 152168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Written corrective feedback in L2 writing: Connors & Lunsford (1988); Lunsford & Lunsford (2008); Lalande (1982)
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Written corrective feedback in L2 writing: Connors & Lunsford (1988); Lunsford & Lunsford (2008); Lalande (1982)
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Written corrective feedback in L2 writing: Connors & Lunsford (1988); Lunsford & Lunsford (2008); Lalande (1982)
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *