Feedback in Second Language Writing: Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction

By D. Ferris. 2006

632 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1e45038311f7d31529aabb312a9b4b14ef12e1d9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. Icy Lee
2. D. Ferris
3. C. V. Beuningen
4. Hossein Nassaji
5. J. Bitchener
6. Ken Hyland
7. R. Ellis
8. R. Ruegg

In Language and Linguistics

1. Hossein Nassaji
2. C. V. Beuningen
3. K. Karim
4. Icy Lee
5. R. Ellis
6. D. Ferris
7. E. Kang
8. J. Bitchener

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. C. V. Beuningen
2. Hossein Nassaji
3. Icy Lee
4. J. Bitchener
5. D. Ferris
6. R. Ruegg
7. Shulin Yu
8. N. Storch

Citations in the corpus

• “I just want to do it right, but it's so hard”: A novice teacher's written feedback beliefs and practices (2015, background): “Several studies have focused on teachers’ WCF practices in various pedagogical contexts (e.g., Ferris, 2006; Guénette & Lyster, 2013; Jodaie & Farrokhi, 2012; Lee, 2010; Montgomery & Baker, 2007).”
• The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students (2008, background): “Other studies (Chandler, 2000; Ferris, 1995, 1997, 2006; Ferris & Helt, 2000; Ferris et al., 2000; Lalande, 1982) that have not included a control group (see Table 2 below) are unable to claim that it was WCF alone that facilitated improvements in accuracy.”
• Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing (2018, background): “Equally however, research reminds us that it does not always fulfill this potential (e.g. Ferris, 2006; Truscott & Hsu, 2008) and surveys reveal significant student dissatisfaction (Carless, 2006).”
• Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development (2009, background): “There is evidence to suggest that prodding the learner to self-correct is effective in promoting acquisition (e.g., Lyster, 2004; Ferris, 2006).”
• The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing (2018, background): “As mentioned earlier, Ferris (2004, 2006) has argued that indirect feedback is superior to direct feedback as indirect feedback makes students engage in problem-solving learning and more profound forms of language processing.”
• Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students (2018, background): “…with corrective feedback (CF) has been interpreted in previous research as learner perceptions (Ferris, 1995; Lee, 2004), revision behaviours (Ferris, 2006; F. Hyland, 2003), processing and uptake (Storch & Wigglesworth, 2010), and addressing feedback using strategies and self-monitoring…”
• Research into practice: Written corrective feedback (2012, neutral): “…about the usefulness of written corrective feedback (WCF) in helping L2 students improve their writing, initiated by Truscott (1996) and rebutted by Ferris (1999, 2004, 2006), and then followed up more recently by Bitchener (2008) and other researchers (e.g. Chandler 2004, 2009; Ellis et al.…”
• The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta‐Analysis (2015, background): “Direct feedback involves providing the correct counterparts of incorrect forms, while indirect feedback offers typographic cues such as underlining and circling the incorrect forms but has learners figure out their correct counterparts for themselves (Ferris, 2006).”
• Evidence in Support of Written Corrective Feedback. (2008, background): “Compared with earlier studies on the value of written corrective feedback for improving the accuracy of ESL student writing (see Ferris, 2002, 2003, 2006), where sometimes as many as 15 or more linguistic forms and structures were investigated, this study has heeded the example of effective SLA…”
• Student perceptions of hidden messages in teacher written feedback (2013, background): “In sum, while much of the research on feedback given to second language writers has focused on error correction (e.g. Ferris, 2006; Bitchener, 2008), feedback carries a heavier informational load than this, not all of which is directly pedagogic or even intentionally communicated.”
• Feedback-seeking behavior in second language writing: motivational mechanisms (2019, background): “Studies have generally shown that WCF is more effective when it is explicit (e.g., Ferris, 2006), direct (e.g., Bitchener & Knoch, 2010; Manchón, 2011), and focused on certain linguistic features (e.g., Bitchener & Knoch, 2009; Sheen, 2007).”
• Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy (2019, background): “Considering the large standard deviations often reported in written corrective feedback studies (e.g. Ferris, 2006), further research which includes a measure of LAA and other measures of individual differences is needed to investigate the effects of different types of written feedback.”