Exploring the Impact of Unfocused Indirect and Direct Written Feedback on Iranian EFL Students' Implicit and Explicit Knowledge of Grammar

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

10.22132/tel.2022.148707

Abstract

Although a great deal of research has been conducted on various aspects of implicit and explicit knowledge, very few research have examined how written corrective feedback (WCF) works on implicit and explicit grammatical knowledge. Inspired by this gap, the aim of the present study was to investigate whether the direct and indirect unfocused kinds of WCF can lead to an increase in the learning gains in terms of implicit and explicit grammatical knowledge. To that end, 90 participants selected from a statistical pool of 380 EFL learners in seven private English language institutes were assigned into two treatment groups and one control group via random matching technique to receive the intended treatment. Using MANCOVA and one-way ANCOVA statistical techniques, data related to two treatment groups and one control group were collected. The results showed that both types of direct and indirect unfocused WCF could increase the students’ implicit and explicit grammatical knowledge. The results also suggested that although both written feedbacks improved the learners' performance almost equally, the direct type of WCF was slightly more effective. The study concludes with implications for teachers regarding their use of appropriate types of written error correction.

Keywords


Bitchener, J. (2012). A reflection on the language learning potential of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing.21, 348-363.
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York: Routledge.
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten-month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31, 193-214.
Bruton, A. (2009). Designing research into the effects of grammar correction in L2 writing: Not so straightforward. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 136-140.
Chomsky, N. (1976). Reflections on language. London: Temple Smith.
Corrigan, A., Dobson, B., Kellman, E., Spaan, M. & Tyma, S. (2010). Michigan Examination for the Certificate of Proficiency in English. Ann Arbor: Testing and Certification Division, the University of Michigan.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42-63). New York: Cambridge University Press.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-348). Oxford: Blackwell.
DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.). Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. Routledge.
Ellis, N. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305-352.
Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33, 209-224.
Ellis, R. (2006). Modeling learning difficulty and second language proficiency: The differential contributions of implicit and explicit knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 27, 431-463.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63, 97-107.
Ellis, R. (2010). A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 335-349.
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2013). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. London: Routledge.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the
acquisition of l2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland and F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Context and issues (pp. 81-104). Cambridge University Press.
Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes. A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1-10.
Frear, D., & Chiu, Y. H. (2015). The effect of focused and unfocused indirect written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ accuracy in new pieces of writing. System, 53, 24–34.
Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 129 – 140.
Jiang, L., & Xiao, H. (2014). The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback and Language Analytic Ability on Chinese Learners’ Explicit and Implicit Knowledge of English Articles. English Language Teaching, 7, 22–34.
Kamiya, N. (2015). The effectiveness of intensive and extensive recasts on L2 acquisition for implicit and explicit knowledge. Linguistics and Education, 29, 59-72.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
Latham-Koeing, C., Oxenden, C., & Boyle, M. (2012). American English file. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lee, I. (2019). Teacher frequently asked questions about focused written corrective feedback. TESOL Journal, 10(3), 1–15.
Lee, I. (2017). Working hard or working smart. Comprehensive versus focused written corrective feedback in L2 academic contexts. In J. Bitchener, N. Storch, & R. Wette (Eds.), Teaching writing for academic writing to multilingual students (pp. 168–180). New York: Routledge.
Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers' written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 69-85.
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp.15-41). Cambridge University Press.
Lyster, R. & Satio, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in second language acquisition 32,265-302.
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, 1–40.
Manchón, R. M. (2011). Writing to learn the language: Issues in theory and research. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Learningtowrite and writingtolearn in an additional language (pp. 61‐82). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Johns Benjamins Publishing Company.
Manchón, R. M. (Ed.). (2020). Writing and language learning: Advancing research agendas. John Benjamins
Manchón, R. M., & Cerezo, L. (2018). Writing as language learning. The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching. Wiley.
Mashhadi, A., & Khazaie, S. (2018). Familiar or unfamiliar context? Application of m-games in the blended module of L2 learning. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Online course management: concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 482-510). IGI Global.
McLaughlin, B. (1990). Conscious versus unconscious learning. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 617- 634.
Moradian, M., Hossein-Nasab, M. (2019). Revisiting the role of indirect written corrective feedback in the light of written languaging. Teaching English Language, 13(2), 79-94.
Mustafa, F., Kirana, M., & Bahri Ys, S. (2017). Errors in EFL writing by junior high students in Indonesia. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 4, 38-52.
Nezami, A., & Sadraie Najafi, M. (2012). Common error types of Iranian Learners of English. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 160-170.
Nourinezhad, S., & Hadipourfard, E., & Bavali, M. (2021). The Impact of audiovisual feedback on academic writing task procrastination. Teaching English Language, 15(2), 173-200.
Polio, C. (2012). The relevance of second language acquisition theory to written error correction debate. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 375-389.
Rumelhart, D., & McClelland, J. (Eds.). (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition: 1. Foundations+ Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11, 129-158.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 255-283.
Shintani, N. (2015). The effects of computer-mediated synchronous and asynchronous direct corrective feedback on writing: A case study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, (ahead-of-print), 1-22.
Shintani, N., & Ellis R. (2013). The comparative effect of direct written corrective feedback and metalinguistic explanation on learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge of the English indefinite article. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 286-306.
Stefanou, C., & Révész, A. (2015). Direct written corrective feedback, learner differences, and the acquisition of second language article use for generic and specific plural reference. The Modern Language Journal99(2), 263-282.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255-272.
Truscott, J., (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: a response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 337-343.
Wexler, K., & Mancini, R. (1987). Parameters and learnability in binding theory. In T. Roeper & E. Williams (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 41–76). Reidel.
Williams, J. (2012). The role(s) of writing and writing instruction in L2 development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 321-331.