SECOND LANGUAGE WRITING RESEARCH AND WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN SLA

By D. Ferris. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2010

415 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/23de98c26c9191e893679e9cec102406562952d2

How researchers see this paper

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

In Language and Linguistics

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Research into practice: Written corrective feedback (2012, neutral): “Thus, a middle ground is proposed, where teachers select several error categories, instead of one, for feedback (Ferris 2010; Storch 2010).”
Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing: Theoretical Perspectives, Empirical Insights, and Future Directions (2010, background): “This finding is valuable from a learning-to-write perspective because it shows that CF has the ability to help learners develop more effective revision and self-editing skills (Ferris, 2010).”
The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing (2018, background): “However, although focusing feedback on a few or single errors may be effective, the ecological validity of such studies is questionable (Ferris, 2010), as L2 writing teachers do not usually correct only one type of error at a time.”
The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta‐Analysis (2015, background): “However, written corrective feedback is still a divisive issue among researchers (Ferris, 2010, 2012).”
Future Directions in Feedback on Second Language Writing: Overview and Research Agenda (2010, background): “This issue seems unlikely to be resolved in the near future, but it continues to be a valuable debate and it serves to remind us, as Ferris (2010) points out, that despite its links with research in the areas of rhetoric and composition studies in the first language, second language writing is a…”
Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014) (2016, background): “Recent years have seen a surge of interest in feedback in writing in general and written corrective feedback in particular, and as a result a number of significant reviews have been published (Ferris 2003, 2010, 2012; Hyland & Hyland 2006; Bitchener & Ferris 2012).”
Motivation and feedback: How implicit theories of intelligence predict L2 writers’ motivation and feedback orientation (2017, background): “This is simply because L2 writing instructors observe on a daily basis that “ some students bene ﬁ t more from corrective feedback than others ” (Ferris, 2010, p. 196).”
“I just want to do it right, but it's so hard”: A novice teacher's written feedback beliefs and practices (2015, result): “To date, although extensive, research2 on the benefits of written corrective feedback (WCF) and teacher response in improving learners’ L2 development and accuracy is still controversial, and findings remain inconclusive (see Ferris, 1999, 2004, 2010; Truscott, 1996, 1999).”
Teacher written corrective feedback: Less is more (2019, background): “Taking into account the students’ stage of learning and specific needs, teachers can consider adopting a ‘middle’ position (Ferris, 2010) that combines FWCF and CWCF, which will be examined in the ‘What teachers can do’ subsection in the following section.”
Feedback-seeking behavior in second language writing: motivational mechanisms (2019, background): “Written corrective feedback (WCF) has been a topic of empirical and theoretical interest in the field of second language (L2) writing over the last 2 decades (e.g., Chandler, 2003; Ferris, 1999, 2010; Krashen, 1984; Truscott, 1996).”