The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between students’ cognitive engagement with written corrective feedback (WCF) and their revision behavior. Based on the assumption that different levels of cognitive involvement are linked to learners’ use of the feedback, we investigated how different post-feedback activities (i.e., reading, copying, and explaining the feedback) would affect second language writers’ behavioral engagement with WCF during the revision phase. Ninety-eight students were divided into three experimental groups and one control group. Experimental groups performed one of the three post-feedback activities before revising their original writing. The participants’ revision behavior was examined by their uptake of WCF. Additionally, the change in writing quality between the first and the revised drafts was investigated. Results showed that activities that promote deeper cognitive processing generally led to higher uptake of WCF in revision. The effects of post-feedback activities, however, varied for error types. All the post-feedback activities were effective in improving the quality of writing.

The study investigates whether differences in metalinguistic information contained in written corrective feedback (CF) mediate its effectiveness for second language (L2) development. To address this, metalinguistic CF was distinguished into three types in terms of how specific its metalinguistic information was. They were then compared among themselves and with non-metalinguistic direct CF in their efficacy for short- and long-term development of explicit and implicit L2 knowledge. The target features for written CF were the English articles, and explicit and implicit knowledge were measured by the error correction test and dictogloss writings by 93 EFL learners respectively. The results suggest that, for both explicit and implicit L2 knowledge, metalinguistic CF was beneficial for short-term development only when it had high levels of specific information while it was effective for long-term development regardless of its type. The findings are discussed from the perspective of SLA theory, and their pedagogical implications and suggestions for future research are put forth.

The present study aimed at investigating the effects of the two types of teacher feedback―direct corrective feedback (DCF) and metalinguistic explanation (ME)―on the development of EFL learners’ knowledge of the English indefinite article and on their use of it in writing. For this study, 58 college students classified into three groups (two experimental groups and one control group) took the error correction test and performed three writing tasks. The results of the study are 1) there was no group effect of the two types of feedback in the development of their explicit knowledge of the target feature in the test, whereas a time effect was found that their knowledge of the target feature developed significantly after the treatment; and 2) no group differences were found between the two types of feedback in the use of the target feature in the revised writing and among the three writings, though the DCF group outperformed the ME group in the accurate use of the target feature in writing. Theoretical and pedagogical relevance of the findings is addressed.

This study investigated the effects of negotiation in the process of providing written corrective feedback (WCF) by comparing three different patterns: non-negotiation, minimal negotiation, and extended negotiation. The data were collected from three intermediate academic English classes at a university in Korea. Each class was exposed to different degrees of negotiation while they received WCF for two target forms, the past verb forms and the English articles, in their written production (text re-construction tasks). Their accuracy improvement was measured by text-reconstruction writing tasks and error correction tests. The study found that the use of negotiation affected accuracy improvement of the target forms; however, its effectiveness varied depending on the target forms and measurements. For the past tense, negotiation, regardless of its amount, resulted in more accuracy improvement than non-negotiation in both text re-construction tasks and error correction tests. However, for the English articles, negotiation operated differently: extended negotiation significantly brought about more accuracy development in both measurements, but the difference between minimal negotiation and non-negotiation was only observed in the error correction test, not in the text re-construction task.

This paper examined effects of three types of written corrective feedback (CF) on L2 learners’ grammatical accuracy in writing, focusing on the use of verb tense and articles. Within Ellis’ (2008) typology of CF, the present study focused on direct, indirect, and metalinguistic CF. The feedback was provided at each stage of writing, and the participants were to write three new pieces of writing. Changes in the accuracy of the grammatical targets were measured. Results indicated that despite the limitations of the small number of the participants, positive changes in the grammatical accuracy were found with metalinguistic CF for verb tense and with indirect CF for articles in new pieces of writing. In addition, unlike previous studies, a negative role of direct written feedback was observed in the present study.

The study investigates the relative effects of two types of indirect written corrective feedback (CF) on the acquisition of English articles. Thirty-five high intermediate Korean EFL college students who were enrolled in three composition classes participated in this study. After the instruction on the English article usage, three classes (Class A, Class B, and Class C) received different types of feedback on their blog writings over the course of a semester. Both Class A and Class B received indirect feedback in the form of underlining errors. In the following class, Class A received correct forms with metalinguistic information for the errors revised incorrectly, but Class B did not have such opportunities. The Class C received no feedback. The results showed that only Class A, which received indirect feedback plus correct forms with metalinguistic information, made a statistically significant gain from the 3 sessions of feedback treatment. Pedagogical implications were provided on the basis of the findings.

This study examines whether revision mediates the effects of its preceding written corrective feedback (CF) in developing second language (L2) knowledge. For this purpose, effects of direct CF and three sub-types of metalinguistic CF with and without revision were compared in the quasi-experiment with 197 EFL university students. They formed 9 groups (i.e., 4 revision groups, 4 non-revision groups, and 1 control group) and completed 4 dictogloss writings. Written CF and revision were implemented after the first two writings. English articles were the target structure for the written CF. The first, third and fourth writings were measured for the accuracy of article use as the pre-test, the immediate post-test and the delayed post-test, respectively. The results reveal that revision did not affect the efficacy of direct CF while it enhanced that of metalinguistic CF to varying degrees with its subtypes. These findings indicate that, if revision is conducted following written CF with particular metalinguistic information, it may facilitate learning new L2 knowledge beyond manifesting existing L2 knowledge.

This study compares native English teachers (NETs) and non-native English teachers (NNETs) in their perceptions of errors as well as their actual feedback. Studies comparing NETs and NNETs have focused on actual feedback practice (Green & Hecht, 1985; T. Kobayashi, 1992), with very few studies relating this feedback to their actual perceptions of error correction (Hyland & Anan, 2006; Kim, 2007). In order to better understand this phenomenon, 26 NETs and 24 NNETs completed a questionnaire and provided feedback on a sample academic essay. The results reveal that while both groups showed differing degrees of perceptions, they did not significantly differ from each other in actual feedback, except that NETs preferred coded feedback than NNETs by explaining errors. This study implies that NNETs are as reliable as NETs in correcting errors, but that they differ in how they give feedback.

Despite a growing interest in the role of written corrective feedback (CF) in L2development, not enough research has examined how learners actually process and understand linguistic information delivered in CF. Acknowledging the importance and necessity of process-oriented research into written CF, the present study investigated the extent to which Korean learners of English understood written CF they received from the teacher in writing classes. In addition, the study looked into whether the presence and quality of understanding of CF was related to learners’immediate uptake and retention of CF. Two intact writing classes and one native English teacher participated in the present research. The study found that a third of CF targeting grammar errors and a half of CF targeting vocabulary errors were correctly understood. The quality of the learners’ understanding of CF was closely related to their immediate uptake in terms of grammar but not in vocabulary; and the quality of their understanding was strongly related to retention in grammar and vocabulary.

Thi s study investi gates whether the effect of written corrective feedback (CF) on learners' acquisition of English art icle usage is mediated by the type of information CF provides. To tap into this issue, four types of informat ion on error were identifi ed: its existence, location, correct form and nature. Written CF was categorized into three types according to the sorts of information it contained: indirect CF that supplies informat ion on existence and location, direct CF that provides information on ex istence, location and correct form, and metalinguistic CF that includes metalinguistic explanation on error nature and all the other infornlation types. Three CF groups were accord ingly formed along with a control group in a quasi-experiment, where the groups engaged in three narrative-writing tasks. Error correction and narrati ve writing tests were administered to measure the acquisition of explicit and implicit knowledge of English articles respectively. The results revealed that written CF was beneficial to acquisition of both L2 exp licit and im plicit knowledge and that such positive effects emerged only in the metalinguistic CF group. The findings added counterevidence to Truscott's (1996) argument against written CF utility and suggested that metalinguistic explanation on error may playa pivotal role in written CF-triggered L2 acqui sition.