2019 - Maria-Elena Solares-Altamirano -
Özet:For nearly twenty-five years, researchers have tried to refute Truscott’s claim for the inefficiency of written corrective feedback (WCF) for grammar improvement. Despite numerous attempts, the role WCF plays in grammar learning is still unresolved. Problems with early studies trying to negate Truscott’s claim included methodological and ethical flaws that recent studies have overcome. Researchers are, however, still unable to totally refute Truscott’s claim. This research outlines possible reasons for this. These reasons are presented with the support of a quasi-experimental study on the effects of noticing-supported error correction conditions (ECCs) on learners’ writing accuracy. The research tackles comprehensive WCF in an open, uncontrolled and learner-centred writing task. Learner-initiated noticing opportunities were encouraged in each ECC during the feedback stage with the aim to investigate whether learner-initiated noticing opportunities added to ECCs influence writing accuracy. Regardless of numerous studies on WCF, little research has paid attention to noticing while receiving feedback. The study is framed within the ‘noticing’ debate, the ‘language learning potential of writing’ and the ‘writing-to-learn’ and ‘feedback-for-acquisition’ dimensions. Results are discussed under the main findings: the lack of statistically significant results for grammatical features that might lend support to Truscott’s claim for the inefficacy of WCF for grammatical features, and; the statistically significant results found for the CONTROL- and the SELF- ECCs. The former might support Truscott’s claim that learners’ time and effort would be more productively spent on writing practice. The latter, might suggest that accuracy improvement might not depend on the WCF technique but on noticing opportunities.
Anahtar Kelime:Writtcorrective feedback, error correction, comprehensive/unfocused error correction, learner- initiated noticing