SECOND LANGUAGE WRITING RESEARCH AND WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN SLA

For more than a decade now, a great deal of research has been done on the topic of written corrective feedback (CF) in SLA and second language (L2) writing. Nonetheless, what those research efforts really have shown as well as the possible implications for practice remain in dispute. Although L2 wri...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inStudies in second language acquisition Vol. 32; no. 2; pp. 181 - 201
Main Author Ferris, Dana R.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, USA Cambridge University Press 01.06.2010
Subjects
Applied Linguistics
College English
Communicative Competence (Languages)
Educational theory
English (Second Language)
Error Correction
Feedback
Foreign language learning
Grammar
Language Acquisition
Linguistics
Native Speakers
Process Approach (Writing)
Researchers
Second Language Instruction
Second language learning
Second language writing
Teaching Guides
Teaching methods
Topics
Writing Instruction
Writing Processes
Writing Teachers
New York
United States > US
California
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:For more than a decade now, a great deal of research has been done on the topic of written corrective feedback (CF) in SLA and second language (L2) writing. Nonetheless, what those research efforts really have shown as well as the possible implications for practice remain in dispute. Although L2 writing and SLA researchers often examine similar phenomena in similar ways, they do not necessarily ask the same questions. SLA-focused researchers investigate whether written CF facilitates the acquisition of particular linguistic features. In contrast, L2 writing researchers generally emphasize the question of whether written CF helps student writers improve the overall effectiveness of their texts. Understanding these differences in starting points is important because it provides a possible explanation for the conflicting methodologies and conclusions of various reviews on this topic (e.g., Ferris, 2003, 2004; Truscott, 1996, 2007). This article briefly traces the history of these two parallel lines of research on written CF and notes both contrasts and convergences. It then moves to a focused discussion of the possible implications and applications of this body of work for the L2 language and writing classroom and for future research efforts.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/6GQ-79SBBJ81-9
ArticleID:99049
PII:S0272263109990490
istex:4B1BE07F5D5BAE98CEEBEDDEC929F124D83554C1
Earlier versions of this article were presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics conference (March, 2008, Washington, DC) and at the annual symposium of the Applied Linguistics Association of New Zealand (November, 2008, Auckland). I am grateful especially to John Bitchener of Auckland University of Technology, Jeffrey Brown of California State University, Sacramento, Kory Lawson Ching of San Francisco State University, and Carl Whithaus of University of California, Davis, for their helpful feedback on earlier drafts of this article. I am also grateful for the helpful comments made on an earlier version by two anonymous SSLA reviewers. All errors and omissions remain my own.
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0272-2631
1470-1545
DOI:10.1017/S0272263109990490