The Effect of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback on EFL Writing Accuracy A Review of Thirty Research Articles (2001-2014)

سال انتشار: 1393
نوع سند: مقاله کنفرانسی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 713

فایل این مقاله در 7 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

ELLTE01_107

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 28 شهریور 1394

چکیده مقاله:

Error correction is perhaps the most widely used technique for responding to students’ writing. SinceTruscott published his 1996 article, the case against grammar , a discussion about whether and how to give L2feedback on their writing mistakes has been of great importance (Bitchener, Young, & Cameron, 2005). Also,the question of whether teachers should provide feedback on different parts in the writing assignments ofESL/EFL learners, and if so how, has been a matter of considerable attention in the field of SLA.For most of the 20th century error correction of L2 students’ text was assumed to be an important andbeneficial practice (Alroe, 2011). Plenty of studies have tried to investigate the efficacy of providing errorcorrection and different types of written corrective feedback (WCF). This study aims at presenting acomprehensive, detailed review of thirty research articles on the effect of two important types of correctivefeedback (CF) mainly direct and indirect corrective feedback on EFL/ESL writing accuracy.

نویسندگان

Fatemeh Fazilatfar

Department of English, Yazd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Yazd, Iran

Sima Sayadian

(PHD) Department of English, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Yazd, Iran

مراجع و منابع این مقاله:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :
  • Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, ...
  • Erel, S., & Bulut, D. (2007). Error treatment in LZ ...
  • Eslami, E. (2014). The Effects of Direct and Indirect Corrective ...
  • Farrokhi, F., & Sattrpour, S. (2011). The Effects of Focused ...
  • Guenette, D. (2013). The pedagogy of error correction: Surviving the ...
  • Hashemnezhad _ H., _ Mohammadnej ad, S. (2012). A case ...
  • Hyland, F. (2010). Future Directions in Feedback on Second Language ...
  • Jodaie, M., & Farrokhi, F. (2012). An Exploration of Private ...
  • Lindavist, A. (2012). The Use of Written Corrective Feedback. A ...
  • Liu, Y. (2008). The effects of error feedback in second ...
  • Lu, Y. (2010). The value of direct and indirect written ...
  • MAAREK, S. (2009). The Effectivenes of Correction Symbols as Feedback ...
  • Mirzaii, M., & Aliabadi, R. B. (2013). Direct and indirect ...
  • Mubarak, M. (2013). Corrective feedback in LZ writing: a study ...
  • Park, E. (2006). Review Article on" The Effectivenes of Teacher's ...
  • Santos, M., Serrano, S. L, & Ruiz, R. M. M. ...
  • Sayyad, F. S., _ S ayyadmahaleh, M. M. (2013). THE ...
  • Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects ...
  • Sivaji, K. (2011). A study of the impact of direct ...
  • Storch, N. (2010). Critical Feedback on Written Corrective Feedback Research. ...
  • Van Beuningen, C. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع