Three Study Boxes: Written Corrective Feedback

In my point of view feedback is an essential tool for learners’ progress. If the student is not assessing their work then they are not learning and given feedback are vital to ensure best practice is maintained and the learners are achieving to their full potential.

Feedback is a vital part of the assessment process as it gives the assessor an idea of if the learner has met the criteria set and if they haven’t, what action is needed to achieve the criteria.

With metalinguistic feedback, the teacher does not provide the correct form but “comments, information, or questions related to the well-formedness of the student’s utterance” as Lyster and Ranta (1997: 47) states. Metalinguistic feedback is a corrective feedback form of implicit correction which implies ways of negotiation of form without explicitly providing the correct form. It generally provides either some grammatical metalanguage that refers to the nature of the error or a word definition in the case of lexical errors. It can also be body language which involves non-verbal cues such as facial expressions or hand movements to indicate errors about word order or tense. (Lyster and Ranta, 1997). For example:

Let’s examine some of the similar views and approaches to giving written feedback in the English second language classroom. The following sources; “Deciding What and When to Correct”, “Reading, Writing, and Learning in ESL: A resource book for teaching K-12 English learners”, and “Subject Matters” video, all share similar viewpoints on marking errors that are compatible with the learners proficiency level. Errors should not be marked if students have not been given explicit instruction on the particular grammar form. For example, instructors should not expect a beginner English learner to correctly use past and present verb tense in sentences if they

Materials and teaching strategies are based on the linguistic structures, literary genres, and cultural references normally acquired by monolingual speakers of English. ESL and EFL are categories that apply to non-native learners. Generally, in ESL students, only English is utilized in the classroom. Teachers are usually native or near-native speakers of English and are rarely proficient in any of the languages of their students. Typically, the vocabulary and linguistic routines of daily life are taught with the goal of accelerating the cultural adjustment to the new setting.

Receiving, giving, and responding to feedback makes students confident learners who know how to move their learning forward. This is a responsibility for the teacher to do for each student, and should also be encouraged for students to do with one another. Personal and peer reflection and assessment is a great skill to introduce early in primary years hopefully to be carried out in future years.

This article will analyse two approaches: teachers’ questions and teachers’ treatment of oral errors. Firstly, there will be a relavent literature review and then follows the analysis of the assessment video two in the light of error treatment and teachers’ questions. In the end, improvements will be

Feedback can be positive or negative, which impacts on the students’ behaviour. Assessment, feedback and the reports work as “operants” to affect the students’ learning.

There are two types of corrective feedback which usually found in university writing courses: written corrective feedback and oral corrective feedback. However, the lecturers normally use only written corrective feedback in their classes. This teaching strategy still has a gap that some students don’t understand why the mistakes are not correct. Moreover, this gap of using only one method of using corrective feedbacks cannot make students improve their writing ability.

English plays a significant role in the whole world from the last few decades. For all the students whose mother tongue is not English, which as a second language (ESL) is much difficult to study than those students who study English as the first language. Therefore, the ESL classroom becomes more and more significant. A successful ESL lesson includes several aspects: the teacher’s questions, the interaction between teacher and students and the task-based learning, etc.

The participants of this this study were composed of twenty-eight ESL elementary aged students in grades 2-5. There were almost twice as many males as female students, at a 9:5 ratio. These students came from

Ammar and Spada (2006) investigated the effects of recasts and prompts on L2 learners’ written and oral ability across different proficiency levels. The study fits in with the previous research, as in previously the focus of research was just based on CF being a solution for low levels of grammatical efficiency, which have been explained as the proof against the accuracy of understandable input and exceptionally meaning-based direction. The researchers have thus proposed FFI in CF, which is based both on reactive and proactive form of feedback and which has been proposed by the researchers as the most important way of attracting the learners towards language form in case of communicative classroom environment. The main motivation, just as in previous article, is to explore the form-focused instruction as alternative way of instruction so as to make CF more proactive as well as reactive.

Error Correction in Second Language Writing: Teachers’ Beliefs, Practices, and Students’ Preferences Victor Albert Francis S. Corpuz Supervisors: Lynette May Annette Patterson Queensland University of Technology Faculty of Education Master of Education (Research) September 2011 Abstract Error correction is perhaps the most widely used method for responding to student writing. W hile various studies have investigated the effectiveness of providing error correction, there has been relatively little research incorporating teachers’ beliefs, practices, and students’ preferences in written error correction . The current study adopted features of an ethnographic research design in order to explore the beliefs and

The use of the mother tongue in the ESL/EFL contexts has been and still is a hotly debated issue. In fact, those who have dared to use the students’ L1 in their teaching practice have been more often than not looked down on, and unreasonably labeled as traditional outdated teachers due to the fact that they do not embrace the state of the art approach: Communicative Language Teaching.

The world is becoming more globally diverse with inventions like the internet enabling communication all across the global in mere seconds. With new interpreting apps even being in a foreign country no longer has a language barrier for tourist encouraging more travel. Schools across the United States are reflecting this trend as teachers are more likely to encounter students who know more than one language or who are learning English as a second language. Having students who are English second language learners (ESL) in the classroom changes the learning environment as different teaching techniques are used. In some subjects like math these teaching techniques can change in a minute ways from how the teacher would normally teach making it inconspicuous. Yet in subjects such as writing the whole process in teaching drastically alters as teacher have to new knowledge barriers to overcome with ESL students. These changes in way teachers teach writing caused by ESL students can benefit all students especially in elementary school in comprehending writing skills.