The impact of metalinguistic corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners acquisition of the hypothetical conditional

Gharanjik, Nourollah

Abstract

Several recent works have shown the efficacy of written corrective feedback (WCF) as a method in improving ESL/EFL learners’ grammatical accuracy. Using a quasiexperimental design, this study aims at investigating the effect of metalinguistic explanation (ME) corrective feedback as a form focused instruction on Iranian high school students’ use of the hypothetical conditional in their writing. Fifty high school students were given the Oxford placement test. Based on the results, 34 of them were chosen to be homogenous in terms of language proficiency. The students were then randomly assigned to two groups, one experimental and one control group. The experimental group received the treatment (ME) after each guided writing practice but the control group did not. The results of independent samples t-test showed that students in the experimental group significantly outperformed students in the other group in the accurate use of the grammatical feature. The findings have some implications for EFL teachers, teacher educators, and learners.

References

Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102-18.

Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. London: Routledge.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409-31

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, U. Pergamon.

Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second?language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379(1), 259-278.

Montazeri, M., & Salimi, E. A. (2019). Assessing motivation to speak (MTS) and willingness to communicate through metalinguistic corrective feedback. Learning and Motivation, 68, 101594.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101594.

Nickel, T. (2002). Online learning activities: beginning an international collaboration. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 3(1).

Polio, S. (2012). The relevance of second language acquisition theory to the written error correction debate. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 375-389.

Roohani, A., Jafarpour, A., & Teimoori,H. (2015). Differential Effects of Written corrective Feedback on Iranian High School Students’ Grammatical Accuracy. TELL, 9(1), 29-59.

Roshan, S. (2017). Written corrective feedback, individual differences and the second language acquisition of the English passive voice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Auckland University of Technology. Auckland, New Zealand.

Rummel, S., & Bitchener, J. (2015). The effectiveness of written corrective feedback and the impact LAO learners' beliefs have on uptake. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 38(1):64-82.

Schmidt, R. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. Consciousness in second language learning: Aila Review, 11, 11-26.

Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). New York: 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(2), 255–283.

Shintani, N., Ellis, R., & Suzuki, W. (2014). Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language learning, 64(1), 103-131.

Tayebipor, F. (2019). The Impact of Written vs. Oral Corrective Feedback on Omani part-time vs. Full time College Students’ Accurate Use and Retention of the Passive voice. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(1), 150-160 doi:10.17507/jltr.1001.17.

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255-272.

Truscott, J. (2010). Some thoughts on Anthony Bruton’s critique of the correction debate. System, 38(2), 329-335.

Van Beuningen, C., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in Dutch multilingual classrooms. Language Learning, 62(1), 1-41.