IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/arp/tjssrr/2018p208-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Teachers’ Corrective Feedback Strategies in Assessing Essay Writing

Author

Listed:
  • Noor Hashima Abd Aziz*

    (School of Languages, Civilisation & Philosophy, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia)

  • Arsaythamby Veloo

    (School of Education & Modern Languages, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia)

Abstract

Feedback has been an important topic of discussion in language learning. Although research on written corrective feedback is available, there is little research on the specific strategies employed by teachers in order to provide feedback on their students’ essay writing. This paper reports part of a larger research. One of the objectives of this study was to explore corrective feedback strategies employed by the English as a second language (ESL) teachers and English language expert raters when assessing their students’ written essays. This study used qualitative case study which involved 12 participants. Data were collected through interviewing nine English language teachers and three English language expert raters to obtain their pedagogic practices in providing written corrective feedback. The strategies identified are based on Ellis’s typology of strategies for providing written corrective feedback. The findings showed that the preferred written corrective feedback strategy used by the teachers and raters was Metalinguistic Corrective Feedback with Direct Corrective Feedback and Focused Corrective Feedback used by only a few of them. This study has pedagogical implications in that it explains the ESL teachers/expert raters’ pedagogical attitude and practices towards error correction and their preferred written corrective feedback strategies in dealing with error correction.

Suggested Citation

  • Noor Hashima Abd Aziz* & Arsaythamby Veloo, 2018. "Teachers’ Corrective Feedback Strategies in Assessing Essay Writing," The Journal of Social Sciences Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, pages 208-212:6.
  • Handle: RePEc:arp:tjssrr:2018:p:208-212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.arpgweb.com/pdf-files/spi6.22.208.212.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.arpgweb.com/journal/7/special_issue/12-2018/6/4
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arp:tjssrr:2018:p:208-212. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Managing Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arpgweb.com/?ic=journal&journal=7&info=aims .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.