Written corrective feedback on the use of conjunctions among Malaysian ESL learners

Lee, Evon Y.C.

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	P Language and Literature
Main Author :	Lee, Evon Y.C.
Title :	Written corrective feedback on the use of conjunctions among Malaysian ESL learners

Place of Production :	Tanjong Malim
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

This mixed-methods study explored the influence of metalinguistic corrective feedback on thirty Malaysian ESL learners’ appropriate and inappropriate use of conjunctions in their writing practice. Data were derived from three sources: students’ essays, questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. The categories of conjunctions explored in this study were additive conjunctions, causal conjunctions, temporal conjunctions, and adversative conjunctions. The percentages of appropriate and inappropriate use of conjunctions were tabulated based on three writing assignments (expository essay, cause and effect essay, and problem-solution essay). The results showed a positive influence of metalinguistic corrective feedback on the ESL learners’ use of conjunctions. The findings from the survey questionnaire revealed positive perceptions in three main aspects: the helpfulness and preferences of coded metalinguistic corrective feedback and their feelings receiving the feedback. Additionally, the efficacy of metalinguistic corrective feedback was explored in the questionnaire and interviews with the feedback perceived as a mediator tool, a trigger for noticing, a correction aid for conjunctions use in writing and as a tool to promote independent learning.

References

Anderson, T. (2010). The effects of tiered corrective feedback on second language academic writing. Master of Arts thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Retrieved from https://circle.ubc.ca

Basturkmen, H. & von Randow, J. (2014). Guiding the reader (or not) to re-create coherence: Observation on postgraduate student writing in an academic argumentative writing task. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 16, 14-22. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2014.07.005

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 207-217. Retrieved from doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.002

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of focused approach to written corrective feedback, ELT journal, 63, 204-211. Retrieved from doi: 10.1093/elt/ccn043

Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education. 31 (2), 219-233. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/ 03075070600572132

Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267-296. Retrieved from doi: 10.1016/s1060-3743(03) 00038-9

Chen, J., Lin, J. H., & Lin, J. (2016). Corrective feedback in SLA: Theoretical relevance and empirical research. English Language Teaching, 9 (11), 85-94. Retrieved from doi: 10.5539/elt.v9n11p85

Ebadi, E. (2014). The effect of focused meta-linguistic Written Corrective Feedback on Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners’ Essay Writing Ability. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5 (4), 878-883. Retrieved from doi:10.4304/jltr.5.4.878-883

Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

Eyengho, T., & Fawole, O. (2013). Effectiveness of indirect and direct metalinguistic error correction techniques on the essays of senior secondary school students in South Western Nigeria. Educational Research and Reviews, 8 (17), 1613-1620. Retrieved from doi: 10.5897/ERR2013.1514

Ferdouse, F. (2013). Learning from mistakes: Using correction code to improve students’ writing skillin English composition class. Stamford Journal of English, 7 (2012), 62-86. Retrieved fro doi: 10.3329/sje.v7i0.14463

Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short-term and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing (p. 81-104). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-184. Retrieved from doi: 10.1060/S1060-3743(01)00039-X

Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 181-201. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0272263109990490

Gholaminia, I., Gholaminia, A., & Marzban, A. (2014). An investigation of meta-linguistic corrective feedback in writing performance. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 116 (2014), 316-320. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.214

Goldstein, L. (2006). Feedback and revision in second language writing: Helping learners become independent writers. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.) Feedback in second language writing:

Contexts and issues (p. 185-205). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman: London.

Herrera, S. L. (2011). Exploring the role of corrective feedback in second language writing. Master of Education thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Retrieved from https://dx.doi.org/10.14288/1.0078063

Hung, D. M. & Thu, V. T. A. (2014), Vietnamese Learners’ Attention and Use of Cohesive Devices in English Essay Writing at Dong Thap University. Asian Journal of Education Research, 2 (2), 1-14. Retrieved from www.multidisciplinaryjournals.com

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39, 77-95. Retrieved from doi: 10.107/S061444806003399

Hyland, K. (2013). Student perceptions of hidden messages in teacher written feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 39 (2013), 180-187. Retrieved from doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.06.003

Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing, and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 405-530. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami051

Muftah Hamed. (2014). Conjunctions in argumentative writing of Libyan tertiary students. English Language Teaching, 7 (3), 108-120. Retrieved from doi: 10.5539/elt.v7n3p108

Nuruladilah Mohamed (2016). Use of conjunctions in argumentative essay by ESL undergraduates. Academia Journal UiTMT, 5 (1), 1-13. Retrieved from http:// journale-academiauitmt.edu.my/

Park, E. S., Song, S. H., & Shing, Y. K. (2015). To what extent do learners benefit from indirect written corrective feedback? A study targeting learners for different proficiency and heritage language status. Language Teaching Research, 20 (6), 678-699. Retrieved from doi.org/10.1177/136216881560 9617

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied linguistics, 11,129-158. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2. 129.

Schmidt, R. (2001). “Attention.” In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (p.3-32). Cambridge University Press.

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 255-283. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1454-7249.2007.tb00059.x

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46 (2), 327-369. Retrieved from http://lecture.ecc.utokyo. ac.jp/~cwpgally/references/2009S_TEW_Truscott _original_article.pdf

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page