EFL Learners’ Writing Accuracy: Effects of Direct and Metalinguistic Electronic Feedback

The present study investigated the effects of direct and metalinguistic electronic feedback (E-feedback) on Iranian EFL learners' writing accuracy and attitudes toward computer assisted language learning (CALL). Twenty nine students in two intact English writing classes comprised the participan...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Theory and practice in language studies 2015-10, Vol.5 (10), p.2053
Main Authors: Saadi, Zahra Kheradmand, Saadat, Mahboobeh
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Computer Assisted Instruction
Computer assisted language learning
Data collection
Educational aspects
English as a second language
English as a second language instruction
Feedback
Feedback (Psychology)
Internet access
Language
Language Acquisition
Language attitudes
Language Skills
Learning
Metalinguistics
Punctuation
Researchers
Second language writing
Skills
Software
Student attitudes
Studies
Study and teaching
Writing
Writing instruction
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The present study investigated the effects of direct and metalinguistic electronic feedback (E-feedback) on Iranian EFL learners' writing accuracy and attitudes toward computer assisted language learning (CALL). Twenty nine students in two intact English writing classes comprised the participants of the study. A mixed-method design was used for data collection and analysis. In addition to the instruction provided similarly in both classes, based on random assignment, the students in one group received direct electronic corrective feedback (DECF) using Ginger software. In the other class, the students received metalinguistic electronic corrective feedback (MECF) in the form of error codes provided through Markin4 software. Results revealed that the use of E-feedback developed the learners' writing accuracy and attitudes toward CALL. However, there were no significant differences between the final overall writing accuracy scores of the DECF and MECF groups and their gain scores. Regarding writing accuracy components (i.e., structure, vocabulary, and punctuation), although the MECF group obtained higher scores in three components, a statistically significant difference between the two groups was found only in terms of vocabulary gain scores. Finally, in the interviews, the students in both groups referred to some barriers in the implementation of CALL in their context as well as some of its merits. Index Terms--writing accuracy, corrective feedback, direct and metalinguistic feedback, electronic feedback, CALL
ISSN:1799-2591
2053-0692
DOI:10.17507/tpls.0510.11