Teachers written corrective feedback on students writing performance to improve 10th grade students writing skill

INTRODUCTION

Rationales

Learning to read, write, listen, and speak are the four cornerstones of acquiring a command of the English language It takes work for students to get a handle on all four skills Writing is one of the most challenging yet most important practical skills for ESL students to develop According to Richard and Renandya (2002:303), authors create and describe ideas in their thoughts before transforming them into writing that readers can understand Based on what they've said, many overseas students also learning English have unique writing challenges

One of the difficulties students experience while writing is a need for knowledge on choosing the appropriate term They have trouble putting their thoughts on paper It may come as a surprise, but grammar and syntax are also areas where some students struggle Mistakes in subject-verb agreement, pronouns, prepositions, tenses, and articles are still widespread since many people need a firm grasp of grammar and syntax The question then becomes how to remedy the students’ situation

Further study is being done to find the most efficient way to teach writing According to Miftah (2015:17), a Writing Process Approach (WPA) can help L2 students write better essays, especially descriptive ones He goes on to explain that the WPA has five phases The first one is prewriting, designed to help students gather thoughts and opinions on the covered subject Second, drafting aims to lay out the learners' beliefs Third, it is intended for revision by students, with an emphasis on

2 structure and substance Fourth, it teaches students how to edit and proofread for spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and grammatical accuracy and correctness The last activity is the publication, which allows students to share their completed writing

So, it's essential to work on helping students improve their writing abilities There have been several efforts undertaken to enhance students' writing abilities Both educators and students have sought out methods for achieving this One teaching strategy is followed by another as they research and put it into practice Saban (2011) put classroom action research into practice Students' writing competence was improved via using written corrective feedback, and the outcome was positive He also stressed the need for teachers to edit students' written work by identifying grammar mistakes, providing feedback, and assigning grades Written corrective feedback is the most common method used in L2 or foreign language WCF courses Teachers employ corrective feedback in writing to help students with grammar and composition

Teaching using written corrective feedback may take several forms There are six tactics that instructors may use in the school; therefore, the strategies are helpful, according to Ellis (2009:98–99) One is called Direct written corrective feedback which consists of the instructor highlighting the error and providing the proper format

In the second kind of textual feedback, which is indirect, the teacher's method informs that a mistake occurred but does not give a fix Students must use highlighting, marking, circling, crossing, and cursors to show where they left off in their reading The third approach uses the mistake code to guide the composition of meta- linguistically corrected textual feedback The instructor writes symbols in the margin (ww for a misspelled word, art for an article mistake, and v for a verb error, for example) The instructor marks the material for mistakes and provides a grammatical explanation for each error marked The fourth strategy, The Focus of the Feedback, addresses whether the teacher addresses all of the student's errors or focuses on a subset Electronic written corrective feedback is the fifth sort of feedback, and it involves pointing out a problem and providing a link to an adjustment file with examples of proper use Method number six, known as reformulation, consists in having a native speaker completely revise the student's writing to make it seem more natural and logical

Given the abundance of options shown by the research on written corrective feedback, it may be challenging for L2 educators to choose the most appropriate one for their classrooms Because according to the metalinguistic feedback, students and teachers need to have a solid understanding of metalinguistic Since using a computer is required for electronic feedback, not all students will be able to buy one, and not all schools will be able to supply computers for every student Additionally, the analyst for a reformulation must be a native

Direct and indirect written corrective feedback work since those who have provided corrected feedback have specific implementation students When a teacher delivers written immediate corrections to a student, they must identify particular faults and give detailed examples of how to repair them This spontaneous literary reaction may take various forms (Ellis, 2008, p 99) They remove superfluous words and phrases, add fresh ones, and put the proper term above or next to the incorrect one Giving students written feedback, however, could impede their ability to learn independently and may not enhance their memory of the material

On the other hand, teachers who provide indirect corrective feedback in writing highlight mistakes but need to guide how to fix them You may indicate errors by underlining, circling, or crossing them out According to Lalande (1982:141), receiving corrections in writing helps students focus their studies and find solutions to their problems It challenges those learning English as a second language to consider how their words will be used in speech It also aids in the memorization of new facts Indirect, written corrections may be pretty successful, as shown by Ferris (2011:94) Students of a second language benefit from getting sentences in writing because it forces them to slow down and think about what they've done wrong The technique helps with long-term retention if the L2 students learn anything new The most effective method of assisting writers in learning English as a second language is to provide them with corrective feedback in writing According to Ferris (2010:190), indirect corrective feedback via text is preferred by students learning a second language (L2) According to Van Beuningen (2010), direct written corrective feedback occurs when teachers call attention to errors by supplying the proper linguistic form and when students respond by fixing the mistake Written corrective feedback is indirect when teachers provide students with ideas rather than the goal form

The investigation at Pho Yen high school uncovered particular concerns with students' writing skills within the educational framework, which might be addressed to improve students' writing in the classroom Many students never had to learn proper grammar or spelling These poor students start to believe that grammar and spelling are all that "English" and "writing" are They view writing as a surefire recipe for failure Sometimes people think they will never be able to write well because they only associate it with using proper grammar and spelling They need to be made aware of how crucial writing ability is to learning When taking writing tests, they frequently receive a low mark, which impacts their learning outcome In truth, students often make several simple spelling, grammar, punctuation, and organization errors in written work In addition, there are other issues with teaching writing in high schools nowadays, including a shortage of qualified instructors and insufficient study time, which prevents students from developing their skills Students also need to gain writing principles knowledge

This study aimed to examine the impact of instructors' corrective feedback on students' writing performance to enhance the writing abilities of 10th graders This study was done because the researcher wanted to increase writing abilities among 10th graders by studying the effects of teachers' written corrective feedback on student writing performance.

Aims of the study and objectives

The study aimed to improve students' writing proficiency and the efficacy of written corrective feedback Therefore, the researcher examined students' views about utilizing written corrective feedback and how it affected their writing proficiency This approach will enable students to write more effectively.

Research questions

The present study responds to the following research questions with the objectives as mentioned above:

(i) How does teachers’ written corrective feedback improve students' writing competence?

(ii) What are students’ attitudes toward the use of teachers’ written corrective feedback?

Scope of the study

Given the breadth of the study's focus, the researcher may have struggled to cover all bases Therefore, the researcher limited the scope of the investigation based on available resources (time and expertise) Using contextual and problem-solving information, the researcher investigated the effect of written corrective feedback on 10th-grade students' writing skills during the second terrm of the 2022-2023 school year The researcher only chose class 10C1 with forty students, all 15 years old, as the study participants due to the research's time constraints.

Significance of the study

It was anticipated that this research's findings would have some theoretical and practical benefits Theoretically, this study could contribute positively and as a reference to a general understanding of enhancing students' writing competence The researcher hoped to deliver several benefits in terms of practical advantages

To the researcher First, the study might serve as training for the researcher in problem-solving This skill may be beneficial because of many reasons To begin, it encourages better management of one's time More day-to-day tasks are assigned to a person in a senior capacity In my new employment, in addition to being responsible for my own responsibilities, I may also be accountable for supervising and managing the work of others Because of my problem-solving skills and my knack for coming up with original concepts, I am in a position to perhaps devise efficient techniques for making work go more smoothly It's possible that I'll put my problem-solving skills to work by putting in place various automated tools and solutions

Second, it assists me in developing work strategies and setting work priorities I may be able to choose the best course of action or organize my work more efficiently if I use problem-solving techniques You are also able to strategize solutions, which enables you to assist others in recognizing and making use of the qualities and potential they bring to initiatives Problem-solving skills are extremely beneficial to have in a team that is working through a particularly busy period, such as a retail team just before the Christmas shopping season

Third, it inspires me to do well even when I'm under a lot of pressure One of the most significant advantages of learning to solve problems is that it improves your chances of being successful even while working in high-stress environments People

6 who are good at finding solutions to problems often have dispositions that allow them to flourish even in stressful situations, such as when a deadline is drawing near or when they are confronted with a difficult task at work If you use analytical thinking to these scenarios, you may be able to discern whether an issue calls for a simple but temporary solution or a more involved but more permanent one In times of stress, it not only helps you advise and calm your colleagues, but it also helps you

Lastly, but certainly not least, it enables me to take calculated chances Problem solvers are more willing to take calculated risks because they are aware that, regardless of the outcomes, there is likely to be another approach that will allow them to achieve their objectives They go into their employment with an increased sense of self- assurance as a result In addition, they make use of their problem-solving ability to anticipate difficulties and come up with viable suggestions for solutions before the problems ever arise

To teachers of English at Pho Yen high school The study could be a source of knowledge for the English teachers at Pho Yen high school on enhancing the students' writing abilities Knowing more and sharing more helps one to build on existing information and to be able to enhance knowledge; therefore, having a rich supply of data and knowledge about any topic is crucial for learning, comprehending, forecasting, producing, and inventing in a specific sector

To 10th-grade students at Pho Yen high school The study would increase the enthusiasm and motivation of Pho Yen High School 10th graders to learn and write English Motivation is the effort to acquire a language due to a desire to do so and a feeling of pleasure gained from doing so It is an essential component to the achievement of successful language acquisition Students will be more excited about the teaching and learning process due to motivation, which will motivate them to study English effectively

To other researchers Last but not least, the study could serve as the basis for future research and provide general information to other researchers about how to enhance students' writing abilities.

Organization of the study

The study is structured in 5 chapters as follows:

The purpose, goals, importance, and scope of the thesis are discussed in this section.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The definition of Writing Competence

Ghaith (2002) states, "Writing is a complex process that allows writers to explore thoughts and ideas and make them visible and concrete." Before you can put your thoughts into words, you need to know what they are When you write, you can find out who you are writing for and what they may be interested in The purpose of writing is not communication but rather the development and preparation of a message When you put your thoughts down on paper, you may reach conclusions you would not have reached otherwise When you put your ideas down on paper, you may reach conclusions you would not have reached otherwise Writing is a linguistic expression that allows you to break out of your present mind

One other definition of writing is a series of contrasts As Nunan (2003:88) points out, writing involves both the mind and body Writing physically puts one's ideas or words to paper or another surface When you register, you engage in a mental process that involves coming up with ideas, thinking about how to present them, and organizing those thoughts into coherent words and paragraphs It is an attempt at both communication and awe Writers have two clients: the public, who needs information conveyed in specific ways, and the author, who wants to share their thoughts and feelings It may be thought of as both a process and a result The author's responsible for planning, drafting, revising, and rereading their work The audience's impression of a product is what matters most The author's accountable for planning, drafting, editing, and rereading their work The audience's image of a product is what matters most

All three categories highlight the writer's physical and cognitive involvement in writing

Creating a piece of writing is never a one-and-done deal (Hogue, 2007, p 15) Kane (2000) explains that writing is more than just putting words on paper; the process consists of three stages: planning, doing, and doing again (and again and again, as often as time allows and patience allows)

Harmer (2001, p 4-5) identifies four main stages in the writing process These include brainstorming, a rough draft, revisions, and the final output a) Planning

Skilled writers prepare their writing ahead of time They attempt to formulate their thoughts before they begin to write or type The writers must consider three key factors when planning The first author needs to think about the following: (i) The writer's motivation impacts not just the writing style they choose but also the choice of words they use and the information they choose to include (ii) The intended audience, which will affect the writing's structure (how it's laid out, how the paragraphs are created, etc.) and tone (whether it's formal or casual) (iii) The organization of the material presented in the text (including facts, ideas, and arguments)

Pre-writing might serve as a source of inspiration for the first draft Instead of being forced to gaze at a blank page, it helps individuals generate tentative thoughts and gather information for writing The following are some learning options for students of this age:

Group brainstorming: The group members share their thoughts on the subject

Here, spontaneity is key There is no correct or incorrect response First, they might cross known land before venturing into more untamed or abstract territory

Clustering: The instructor provides a prompt, and the students devise words to describe it Word clusters are shown by circling them and linking them with lines Students who have something to say but struggle to put it into words benefit significantly from clustering because of the visual elements of the approach, which facilitates the flow of ideas

Rapid Free writing: One or two minutes are allotted for the students to jot down as many words and phrases as they like about a subject The writer's mind works

10 quickly due to time constraints Rapid free writing is utilized when group brainstorming is not an option or when the nature of a given problem necessitates a particular technique

WH question: Students come up with who, why, what, where, when, and how inquiries on a subject The first string of WH-questions replies can be followed by more of the same questions, and so on This may go on forever b) Drafting

A draft is a name for a piece of writing's initial iteration Drafting is a crucial part of the writing process because it enables the researcher to write down ideas and arrange them in order of importance During the drafting phase, the author focuses on maintaining a natural flow of writing rather than editing for grammar or organization The first draft will need to be filtered and tightened, but it should have more concentration than the free-writing phase

Feedback: Pratiwi (2013) cites Keh, who defines feedback as any suggestions from a reader that the writer may utilize to make changes After completing a first draft, students should seek feedback It carefully examines their writing to determine if there are any remaining differences Learning relies heavily on receiving and processing feedback Research shows that it aids students in self-assessing, making constructive behavioral changes, and putting knowledge into practice When students discover that their writing still has specific gaps, feedback evaluates their performance

As a result, the students require feedback to enhance their writing abilities It was anticipated that they might alter their behavior by becoming critical, conscious of their errors, and continuing to write Students are given the chance to recognize their strengths and faults by providing feedback

Responding: The teacher's (or peers') reaction to students' writing is crucial to the writing process's success It is given by the instructor after the students have written their first draft but before they begin revising c) Editing (reflecting and revising)

The instructor will soon review the final drafts of students' works Therefore they are now working to improve them Editing as part of process writing is crucial because students may recognize the connection between such activity and their writing, given that correction is not done for its goal but rather as a step in making

11 communication as unambiguous as feasible - accuracy of citations, other supporting materials, and grammar and language use

Writers often pore over their drafts after they are finished to assess their success or failure Other readers' comments and ideas (or those of an editor) are frequently helpful when reflecting and rewriting The author will be assisted in making the necessary revisions by another reader's response to a piece of work d) Final revision

The students then create their final version after revising their initial draft and making the necessary revisions Because of how editing is done now, this can appear very different from the initial idea and the first draft But now that they have finished their paper, the student may send it to the intended readers

The instructor will soon review the final drafts of students' works Therefore they are now working to improve them Editing as part of process writing is crucial because students may recognize the connection between such activity and their writing, given that correction is not done for its goal but rather as a step in making communication as unambiguous as feasible Students edit each other's work for grammatical, spelling, punctuation, vocabulary, sentence structure, and citation errors

Teaching writing

Here are some suggestions for getting students writing that Nunan (2003:92-94) has put together: First, be aware of the context in which your students are writing; second, give them enough time to write; third, provide them feedback that is both constructive and instructive; and fourth, make it clear how their writing will be graded Meanwhile, Nation (2009:93-94) offers four principles for teaching writing that may be used to evaluate classroom activities, a writing course, or the writing component of a language course to guarantee that students are exposed to a balanced range of instructional strategies The four pillars of effective language learning are as follows:

1) Meaning-focused Input (students should incorporate prior knowledge and experiences into their writing)

As part of this guiding concept, learners are encouraged to incorporate their experiences and prior knowledge into their writing, as Nation (2009) stated A report is more likely effective and meaningful for students if they have done sufficient preparation for the content of their writing The selection of the subject, or the work done in the past, might constitute the preparation

2) Meaning-focused Output (students should produce large quantities of writing of many types)

Nation 2009 advises students to write often and in many styles Students must also practice writing's unique characteristics

Nation (2009) proposes that students should be aware of the components of the writing process and possess deliberate coping mechanisms for dealing with components Furthermore, students should focus on clarity and fluency while generating written script in cases when the native language employs a different script Due to this, both students and instructors should pay close attention to spelling in order to promote and enhance students' development of writing abilities

The article "Nation 2009" suggests that students should work on increasing their writing speed in order to be able to compose straightforward content at a pace that is acceptable In this scenario, the students will likely participate in an activity that involves repetition while working with simple and well-known items Brown (2000), pages 346-348, outlines a number of other ideas for building writing approach, which are included below for more explanation of this subject

2.2.2 Teacher’s roles during the writing lesson

As noted by Harmer (2007: 108), many critics use the term "facilitator" to describe a teacher who encourages student independence via group and pair projects and acts more as a resource than a knowledge transmitter The following are characteristics of instructing that promote positive learning, as identified by Harmer: (i) Create a learning environment where students can build their knowledge using the relevant materials and chances The teacher is in tune with her students, knows how to pace lectures, and gives meaningful assignments that engage students in their learning; (ii) Make sure that all students feel comfortable in the classroom The educator is responsible for making the classroom secure, conducive to learning, and accessible to students with diverse abilities Teachers skilled in activity coordination create a classroom climate conducive to learning for all students The school's policies and practices play a significant part in creating a positive atmosphere for education The instructor consistently assesses and uses good classroom management strategies She maximizes teaching time by employing routines and processes The instructor knows how to handle interruptions so that there is no negative influence on the student's instructional time, and the students understand what is expected of them; (iii) Encourage student collaboration inside the classroom The instructor encourages and models democratic principles and practices, which are crucial in the actual world; (iv)

Fostering students' natural curiosity and will to study; (v) Assist students in developing their ability to think critically, independently, and creatively by giving them situations that foster these traits; (vi) Provide students with enough time to complete tasks and clear expectations Students take responsibility for their education in a setting that encourages high standards and treats its members with dignity and fairness; (vii) Boost your students' sense of worth The teacher promotes collective effort above individual competition via group tasks and a shared sense of purpose; (viii) Communicate with students Language is used by the teacher to encourage students to express themselves, develop their identities, and learn; (ix) Teaching about other cultures and appreciating individuality are two important educational goals Pay close attention and react appropriately.

Assessing writing

According to Nurhalifah, writing evaluation studies will continue to compare and contrast the benefits and drawbacks of direct and indirect measures since validity and reliability are at issue in pay geometry Since candidates must exhibit the behavior allegedly being measured, immediate evaluation seems more reliable As a result, it enables examiners to select from a broader range of abilities found in the "writing ability" domain However, there may be more potential sources of incorrect score variation in direct evaluation than indirect assessment Unimportant variables like handwriting, the assignment, and the researcher may influence the essay score of a candidate While the indirect evaluation has a narrower focus, it allows for more manipulation of item sampling error and the talents being evaluated Additionally, results on several standardized objective examinations can be calculated and compared with high accuracy, whereas scores on various standardized essay assessments cannot Furthermore, direct evaluation outcomes are often far less reliable than indirect assessment results The more writing assignments each student receives and the more readings there are in each assignment, the more reliable the essay ratings become, to the point where there are declining gains and rising costs

Multiple-choice test scores and essay test scores can have strong correlations when highly reliable evaluations are acquired, particularly if associated errors are corrected in the direct measure The natural step's lower dependability sometimes limits direct-indirect correlation However, research supports common sense by

18 demonstrating that the two assessment approaches focus on slightly different capabilities Indirect assessment often emphasizes word and sentence-level characteristics like mechanics, diction, usage, syntax, and modification In contrast, direct examination often emphasizes higher-order or discourse-level features like a thesis statement, clarity, organization, development, and rhetorical strategy

A perfect writing test would include both a multiple-choice and an essay component Including an essay component in a writing ability section acknowledges the importance of essay writing in the curriculum and dramatically improves the predictive validity of the indirect measure, or its capacity to predict the quality of future writing performance Twenty or thirty minutes of writing on a randomly assigned subject, with each paper receiving two independent holistic readings from raters trained to focus on higher-order abilities, would be a great addition to the GRE This is what one other essay-using software has found to be the case Less costly options exist, such as using writing samples that have not been examined or have only been locally rated; moreover, these methods need more psychometric validity.

Feedback

The terms "teacher" and "feedback" make into the phrase "teacher feedback." A teacher may also be thought of as a facilitator of learning They're responsible for steering students toward higher levels of mastery To put it another way, educators are obligated to respond to student concerns by offering corrective feedback Cited by Carvalho (2014) et al., feedback is information that a teacher offers about any elements of a student's knowledge Keh (1990) highlighted several ways to provide this information, including feedbacks, questions, and suggestions Finally, teacher feedback refers to a teachers' feedback on a student's performance It might be interpreted as advice as a statement, a question, or a proposal to help students perform better

Teacher-provided verbal and written feedback have traditionally been the norm in many classrooms (Marylin, 2002, p 15) In most cases, the instructor is the one who provides comments on student progress The teacher does help students who are having trouble with their writing The teacher assists them by providing tips on writing effectively and proofreading their work for errors and inaccuracies

Pratiwi (2013) claims that the teacher can provide feedback by asking a question to seek clarity or make an expanding suggestion Additionally, the teacher may comment on students' compositions that show understanding, point out a sentence's technical issues, or encourage students when producing quality writing These things can be done to make sure that the students' written work is consistent with the point they intend to make After receiving feedback, students could promptly modify their work based on the instructor's comments Usually, the instructor makes specific corrections to each student's paper before conferring with them The term for this is "feedback" from a conference

Research on the effects of teachers' comments on their students' written work in a second or foreign language has focused on the role that corrective feedback plays in improving the accuracy of their students' writing The mistakes below are grammatical ones ESL/EFL students made in their written compositions A feedback called corrective feedback is intended to address any errors that students may have caused Error correction is aided by corrective feedback that directs students to the proper response When a teacher responds to a student's material that contains errors, they may do so in various ways (Ellis, Loewen, and Erlam 2006)

Therefore, teacher feedback refers to comments made by the teacher to help students write better and produce quality work The readers will receive information and amusement if student writing is done well

Gibbs and Simpson (2004) list ten prerequisites, seven related to feedback, for an evaluation to facilitate student learning

1) For feedback to be genuinely formative, it must be provided frequently and in sufficient detail

2) Rather than focusing on the students' personalities, feedback should be directed toward their work

3) Students need to be able to apply the feedback they get quickly enough to make learning gains

4) The feedback must be pertinent to the goals the evaluation aims to achieve

5) Student grasp of what they are expected to perform should be the focus of feedback

6) The learner must receive feedback

7) The student needs to act on the feedback

Discourse errors, sentence coherence errors, grammatical errors, word choice faults, sentence pattern flaws, punctuation, capitalization, and spelling problems are the six types of writing mistakes Whenever a teacher provides students with suggestions for growth, this is known as feedback To properly and reliably label the different mistake kinds, the operational definitions for these six categories are described below: a) Discourse organization refers to how a book makes sense to readers regarding how the material is structured and the relevance and clarity of its concepts and ideas b) Sentence coherence refers to how sentences relate to one another grammatically, lexically, and logically c) Grammatical mistakes include verb tense, pronoun errors, incorrect noun endings, incorrect articles, incorrect prepositions, incorrect word order, and incorrect subject-verb agreement d) Unidiomatic language, redundant language, repetitions, erroneous language, and overly generic language e) Sentence structure: run-ons, fragments, and improper sentence construction (misplaced sentence/clause boundaries)

Comma splices, capitalizing titles, capitalizing beginning letters, using the wrong word form, and dividing words are all instances of punctuation, capitalization, and spelling errors

Lewis (2002, p 3-4) claims that giving feedback in language classes serves a variety of reasons

Feedback gives teachers and students information The teacher can learn about students' individual and class wide progress through feedback, which also indirectly evaluates the teacher's instruction At the same time, feedback is a continuous assessment for learners more targeted than grades or marks In contrast to marks or steps, which often compare students, comments offer information about personal progress by identifying strengths and weaknesses The words may also provide language guidance by outlining a rule or example

Students receive learning-related recommendations from feedback The teacher can give students more information about their language use than simply explaining Another option is to comment

Feedback gives students exposure to the language The instructor provides examples of how language is employed in one-on-one interactions They use vocabulary slightly more advanced than the rent language while writing comments This provides a natural setting for the learner to learn new words and grammatical standards

Motivation can take the form of feedback More motivating than grades or marks can be input Considering what the teacher says might motivate students to learn and speak the language as best, they can Learn more about your students as a teacher so that you can provide encouragement that considers your students' unique situations

Student autonomy can be fostered through feedback Feedback can assist students in learning to identify their errors Students are encouraged to be autonomous learners by teaching themselves to recognize their mistakes

The purpose of giving students comments on their work is to help them improve It may describe presentations made in class orally or in writing a) Oral feedback

Oral feedback, or oral conference, is a formative assessment in which a teacher and student have a one-on-one conversation about a student's writing The biggest challenge is finding sufficient time for the teacher to give feedback b) Written Feedback

Students' drafts of written assignments receive written feedback, which includes feedback, edits, and grades The markings may appear on words or shorthand symbols like circles, underlings, and other indications High school and middle school students may use this format Written feedback on students' efforts are most valuable when they are either specific to each student or general in nature and when they point out specific areas in which the students may improve They respond to negative comments by offering corrective feedback and praising the work's positive aspects While older students may benefit from written input, younger students may benefit more from oral feedback since it can help them correct their misunderstandings more quickly Since

22 the research population includes junior high school students, the researcher concentrates on written feedbacks, as indicated in the delimitation of the problem There are different kinds of comments in teacher feedback, per Chen & Lyon, as cited in Binglan & Jia (2010):

1) Give compliments; I mean, make supportive remarks on managing Ex: Excellent writing! Significantly improved or very beautifully organized

2) Feedback is a negative, authoritative opinion or evaluation For instance, phrases that contradict one another can be perplexing

3) Imperative comments direct the student researcher to take action or make a change, and they typically begin with an imperative verb form For instance, stay consistent in your tone and manner and be specific

4) Advice refers to comments that are frequently conditional and suggestive For instance, lengthen the main lines or add a few more details

5) A closed question can only be answered with the words "yes" or "no" or with a single word Have you been fair in your assessment? And does this term have a figurative or literal meaning?

Written feedback

Burnett and Mandel (2010, p 8) state that the most common kind of instructor response to students' writings is written feedback or handwritten remarks designed to assist students in improving their writing Teachers may help students learn from their mistakes and grow as writers by providing feedback on their drafts Hayland (2006) argues that a teacher's only motivation in giving written feedback to students is

29 educational The feedback's sole function is to relay the teacher's remarks and ideas for improvement to the students Teacher-written feedback is also essential since it gives students a reader reaction to their writing, helps them improve as researchers, and may be used to defend a student's grade b) Kinds of Written Feedback

Various forms of written feedback, including comments, corrections, and grades, are provided to students in response to drafts of their written work, as described by Cohen (as cited in Hartatie, 2016) Words or fast symbols like circles, underlines, and other signals may have marks The teacher should make explicit remarks on the mistakes made by the students, offering advice on how to improve as well as compliments on the good parts of their work

Your instructor could mark your paper with a series of symbols or acronyms to indicate where you might improve it

With this kind of feedback, you can see precisely where you went wrong and how to fix your sentence, phrase, or word

Negatives include not realizing you're making the same errors again and the possibility that there is more than one correct method to say what you mean Furthermore, the instructor could accidentally warp your message by adjusting it to fit their needs

Using a correction code may help you recognize your weaknesses and the areas of the exam where they show through As a result, you can better understand why these mistakes should be avoided

Once again, this form of feedback's potential drawbacks stems from the necessity of a high metacognitive awareness of your strengths and limitations and prior criterion training

Receiving such feedback makes you feel as though your teacher is conversing with you directly This individualized approach to teaching may make lessons seem less like a chore and more like an opportunity to grow as a person and a learner

The downside is that you may still want an explanation of precisely what was incorrect, how it may be changed, and how it pertains to the test requirements you are studying, despite these remarks seeking to elicit the solution This is in part because there needs to be more meta-language

The possibility of passing the test and the specific factors you should study until the big day becomes crystal evident after receiving such feedback The problem with getting an overall grade like this is that you need to get feedback on the individual mistakes made in the text you submitted, which is a huge missed learning opportunity

In addition, Miftah (2015) distinguishes between three distinct forms of written feedback: suggestions, observations, and replies Grammar, idea development, spelling, paragraph coherence, etc., are the principal foci of written feedback forms The researcher also examines the English teacher's pattern of written feedback based on the sorts of written feedback outlined earlier The researcher looks over the student's writing to determine the methods c) Models of Written Feedback

Previous Studies

Numerous studies on corrective writing have been studied at length over the last few decades

According to Shirotha's (2016) study, providing students with written corrective feedback is an effective strategy for raising the quality of their writing A large number of previous investigations have shown this The instructor has complete discretion over the kind of written reprimand used A wide range of approaches may be used while providing corrective feedback in writing in the classroom Three types of textual feedback exist: indirect, meta-linguistic, and direct The research discusses the effect on students' writing accuracy of receiving indirect written corrective feedback The essay aims to identify the most effective form of classroom written corrective feedback Thirty-five ESL students with low competency are the subjects of the study Students' writing accuracy is evaluated with a pretest and posttest on writing A T-test is used to analyze the data collected The outcome meets my expectations Thirty-five students have shown a statistically significant increase in writing accuracy The final score on the exam has been higher than the first one It has also shown that providing students with corrective feedback in writing encourages them to take responsibility for their education

Sina's (2014) study attempted to evaluate two types of grammatical correction feedback and see which one was more effective in enhancing the writing skills of EFL students Thirty-five upper-level students were split into three groups for the study Throughout the fourteen sessions, teachers in each class taught students how to write on various topics using different text structures Class A students brought in their homework to their instructor, who reviewed and returned the work to them after making any necessary corrections Students in section B were assigned an electronic task, which they were to complete and submit via email to their instructor, who would then provide feedback in the form of corrections Class C was a control group in which students were not given corrective feedback on their written tasks Students in Group

C also had the option of handing in their assignments in person or electronically Both approaches were practical since the experimental group's average score was much higher than the control group's The results showed that the students in group B (Electronic Feedback) performed far better than those in class C (Traditional

Feedback), indicating that the electronic feedback form was more effective and lucrative.

Maryam and Kian (2016) looked at how L2 writers might improve their article use in English via written corrective feedback Accuracy in using the definite article

"the" and the indefinite articles "a" and "an" in English were assessed throughout eight weeks in the present research, which was designed as a quantitative, experimental survey Sixty students (20 in each group) participated in the study to determine which style of teacher-written corrective feedback is most effective in improving writing accuracy Direct WCF was administered to the first experimental group, whereas indirect WCF was issued to the second group Grammatical errors were not addressed in the WCF for the control group The research results demonstrated that direct WCF had a more significant effect on academic achievement

Manijeh (2014) researched "The Role of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedback in Improving Writing Skill among Iranian EFL Students." Since Truscott

(1996) said that written corrective feedback (WCF) is ineffective, detrimental, and should be abandoned, there has been a constant need for a longitudinal study on the efficacy of WCF for ESL and EFL writers While there is some debate as to whether or not error feedback helps L2 student writers improve accuracy and overall quality of writing (Ferris, 1999; Truscott, 1996; Truscott, 1996), the majority of studies on error correction in L2 writing classes have shown evidence that students who receive error feedback from teachers improve in accuracy over time Researchers in this research sought to determine the effects of both direct and indirect forms of corrective writing feedback on EFL students' final drafts Students from the "Iranians" school in Ardabil, numbering sixty at the pre-intermediate level, participated Twenty students were split into three groups: those who would get direct feedback, those who would receive indirect input, and those who would receive no feedback There was little to no difference in the distribution of errors committed by the three groups in the first session (pretest, appendix 1) Throughout five classes, students took TOEFL examinations that included questions on both indefinite and specific nouns Each session included twenty-two exams and forty blanks The exams were based on three books: TOEFL Grammar Flash, Rahnama TOEFL, and Longman Preparation Course for the TOEFL Test The therapy for the experimental group consisted of providing

33 feedback and teaching participants how to fix their errors This was completed in the span of five meetings (once a week) The groups that received direct and indirect feedback were treated in terms of giving feedback on their mistakes, whereas the group that received no feedback received none When editing articles for the direct- feedback group, they immediately gave the authors input on where they may improve

On the other hand, the indirect feedback group's papers were marked up to point out the errors Moreover, they needed help to see the revised papers while correcting the no-feedback group's mistakes A single-factor analysis of variance was used to compare the outcomes among the three groups The significance threshold for group differences was set at This report shows you what we learned from analyzing the data Since the testing length was the same and the kind of testing was the same (a fill-in- the-blank test), only the first session of the pretest (session 1) and the second session of the posttest were analyzed We found relative deviations in our fifth session

Yahya and Suhartono (2016) performed a study to see whether tenth graders' descriptive writing improved after receiving written corrective feedback Putting words to paper may take time since doing so involves forming coherent ideas or arguments - possible textual evidence of student knowledge Misuse or misapplication of a concept may be considered a sign of learning, but it does not mean it should be tolerated indefinitely Teacher strategy development begins with an understanding of where students are making errors One question that guides this study is this: What kinds of written corrective feedback do tenth-grade teachers employ for students' descriptive writing assignments? (2) How do students react to the teacher's written corrections while writing tenth-grade descriptive texts? This research's data was gathered using a descriptive case study methodology This analysis focuses on the English teachers and students of SMK PGRI 1 KEDIRI's tenth grade Two days is all it takes to complete the study The author draws on various resources, such as field notes, surveys, interviews, and student writing The findings show that (1) teachers use direct, indirect, and metalinguistic corrective feedback; (2) students respond positively to 48% of direct corrective feedback and negatively to 38%; (3) students respond positively to 2% of indirect corrective feedback, and (4) students respond positively to 2% of metalinguistic corrective feedback In light of the findings, we may conclude that (1) the instructor used direct corrective feedback to address most students' errors

34 in their written descriptive texts, and (2) the students preferred this correction technique to others The author argued that teachers need to understand the theories of written corrective feedback if they want their students to learn from and use all types of written corrective feedback, not only direct corrective input

Maryam and Kian (2015) studied intermediate EFL students to determine the effect of written corrective feedback on writing ability This research aimed to investigate whether or not providing intermediate Iranian students with written corrective feedback (WCF) will assist them in improving the accuracy of their writing Using pre- and post-tests administered over eight weeks, the present research analyzed the effectiveness of the definite article "the" and the indefinite articles "a" and "an" within the English article system Sixty students (20 in the control group, 20 in the experimental group, and 20 in the experimental group) took part in a study to determine which kind of written corrective feedback from instructors influenced writing accuracy the most In the study (1), no writers in the control group received written corrective feedback (WCF) for grammatical errors, but writers in studies (2) and (3) received such feedback

In the study of Duong Thi Thu Huyen named “Feedback as formative assessment on EFL students’ writing”, although numerous changes have been incorporated into teaching English in Vietnam, the writing evaluation still strongly emphasizes written products Teachers primarily see themselves as testers in the assessment process The objective of the assessment is predominantly administrative and reporting (summative) Due to the lack of possibilities for students to develop their ideas and thoughts during such assessments, they eventually lose interest in writing They are unable to apply independent writing strategies (Ho, 2006) Instead, teachers must be taught how to give feedback as a formative assessment to enhance student learning, and students must be supported with appropriate corrective feedback This study examines two EFL primary teachers' attempts to use formative assessment in their writing classes using the Hattie and Timperley (2007) paradigm The study's methodology includes pre- and post-meeting class observations and semi-structured interviews with four inexperienced English teachers The results show minor improvements in students' learning progress, but significant changes in teaching

35 writing would require a fundamental shift away from the product writing process and toward process one

There were several methodological and methodological instrument differences across the prior investigations, although they did demonstrate some consistent outcomes Previous research has shed light on the significance of including written corrective feedback in education, generally and specifically for learning English writing The literature reviewed herein also laid the groundwork for the ideas and insights into how corrective feedback in writing might affect several facets of second language learning The researcher also gained benefits in building research equipment and expanding theoretical understanding for the present investigation While the current study followed the same scientific methodology and used similar instruments, it focused on a different population It employed a different set of tactics and materials than the investigations above Many studies also focused on elementary or middle school children rather than high schoolers as ELF participants Since previous research has shown that students' English writing improves after receiving corrected feedback in writing, this study was done to assess the efficacy of this strategy.

METHODOLOGY

Research questions (Restated)

As stated in Chapter I, this research aims to determine whether or not 10th graders at Pho Yen High School improve their writing skills after receiving written corrective feedback Additionally, the researcher would like to look at how the students feel about utilizing written corrective feedback to help them become more proficient writers Therefore, this study provides answers to the following focused research questions:

(i) How does teachers’ written corrective feedback improve students' writing competence?

(ii) What are students’ attitudes toward the use of teachers’ written corrective feedback?

Design of the study

This action research study aimed to analyze the effects of written corrective feedback on the English writing skills of 10th graders at Pho Yen High School during the second semester of the 2022-2023 school year

According to Nunan (1992:3), action research is a technique that consists of three parts or components: (1) a question, issue, or hypothesis; (2) data; and (3) analysis and interpretation Action research is the study that is undertaken by and for educators, as stated by Wallace (2000) Modifications to procedures are either found, developed, or kept track of on a local level According to Mertler (2009), action research is "research conducted by teachers for themselves." To better their education, teachers evaluate their classrooms, lessons, methods of assessment, and student relationships

There are a few reasons why action research is done First, it aids in issue identification, problem resolution, and enhancement of her teaching activities Teachers benefit from insight into their classroom dynamics, students' mental processes, and motivations for behaving in specific ways It helps determine where a teacher can make the most progress in classroom instruction, what areas to focus on for improvement, and how and what adjustments to implement The researcher learns from her classroom experiences and observations that her students struggle with writing skills Therefore, a successful approach must be implemented to improve students' writing competence

Because the action research process is dynamic and fluid, different researchers have offered several models As a result, the steps in action research may alter based on researchers' many points of view (Creswell, 2012)

This action study is carried out correctly and rationally due to its remarkable advantages, which were explained previously A broad overview of an action research design and action research methodology were further detailed in the following subsections

Invented by Kurt Lewin in 1944, "action research" is "a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action" that employs "a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action."

The term "action research" was coined by Elliott (1991) and refers to "the study of a social situation to improve the quality of action within it." This brief description draws attention to the need to enhance the standard of instruction and learning and the

38 working environments for educators and students Action research is "a cycle of posing questions, gathering data, reflecting, and deciding on a course of action," as Ferrance (2000) defines it

Action research is "a systematic process of inquiry consisting of three elements or components: (1) a question, problem, or hypothesis, (2) data, and (3) analysis and interpretation" (Nunan, 1992, p 3) According to Wallace (2000), "action research" is conducted by and for classroom educators Modifications to routines are discovered, developed, and tracked on a micro level "action research is characterized as research that is done by teachers for themselves," as Mertler (2009) puts it Teachers constantly reflect on their pedagogical practices, lesson plans, student assessments, and interactions with students in order to improve the quality and effectiveness of their teaching

Action research may follow several different frameworks Burns (2010: 8) suggests a traditional action research paradigm Figure 1 provided an illustration of the model Planning, carrying out the plan, observing the results, and reflecting on the process comprise an action research cycle (Burns, 2010)

Burns' action research cycles would be used in this study even if some other action research models are excessively rigid and rigid Burns' model is helpful since it succinctly conveys the key significant concepts about the crucial stages of an action research investigation Writing classroom problems had also been known for quite some time, which meant that the first part of the complex design could be skipped The study benefited from using an action research fundamentals paradigm Finally, it suited the research's time constraints

Figure 1 An action research cycle (Burns, 2010)

These four action research components each have a crucial function in our investigation From her professional experience, the researcher pinpointed a specific issue: the students' inadequate performance in writing class Next, a strategy was developed to examine how written corrective feedback may improve learners' writing abilities The third step of the action research procedure involved gathering the researchers' quantitative and qualitative data Thanks to the reflection phase, the researcher determined what worked and what should be altered for the next cycle

In action research, the researcher observes and interacts with real-world situations Some steps are taken in action research According to Burn (2010: 8), four stages are involved in conducting such an investigation They are preparation, execution, monitoring, and reflection These methods were used in this study's investigation

In this stage, the researcher used corrective writing feedback to identify problems in secondary school English language arts classrooms The researcher utilized questionnaires to learn how often instructors used written corrective feedback, how they used it, and what they thought about it

A total of 30 participants got written corrective feedback from teachers Two examiners then assessed 60 compositions to improve scoring reliability and eliminate any potential rater bias One of the examiners is a Pho Yen high school English teacher with 23 years of experience The researcher is a current undergraduate at Thai Nguyen University of Education and serves as an additional examiner for the course

Additionally, they received guidelines on the scoring process to maintain consistency In the study's experimental phase, students each received five writing prompts over ten weeks of training and got written corrective feedback

The students learned English writing periods with applying written corrective feedback through eight phases (Lee, 2008):

Phase 1: The teacher gave the students a topic-specific assignment and usually had them discuss ideas

Phase 2: The instructor gave the students assignments that drew their attention to terminology and linguistic patterns pertinent to the subject

Phase 3: Students created individual drafts

Phase 4: The instructor repeated the procedure, this time having the class read out some of the "beautiful sentences" they had composed

Phase 5: The class was assigned to correct a variety of errors that the instructor chose at random

Phase 6: The instructor took over during the proofreading activity by providing the correct answers without allowing students to discuss or reflect on their errors

Phase 7: The instructor gave the students their work back

Phase 8: The teacher instructed the students to amend the erroneous sentences

Subjects of the study

The researcher only chose class 10C1 with forty students, all 15 years old, as the study participants due to the research's time constraints They have spent the better part of seven years learning English as part of their school curriculum From beginners to intermediates may be found among the students By the time the study was conducted, all participants had finished all four years of a high school English program They have just started the second term in their 10th grade The 10th graders

42 have just recently begun to study English writing in a high school setting, so they require an engaging and practical technique to advance their writing skills The researcher picked 10C1 students as the study participants because they had greater prior exposure to English and were already more skilled writers than students in lower levels The researcher's task of implementing the stated feedback would be simplified.

Data collection instrument

The research used a hybrid of two data-gathering methods:

Description: The "The illustrated final exam for the first semester of the academic year 2022-2023 (Writing section)" from the Ministry of Education and Training was updated for the written examination In the test, students were required to write a paragraph about a given topic The researcher utilized this exam to determine the appropriate grade level for the students The study asked a different teacher of English at Pho Yen High School to evaluate and grade the students' writing skills to provide accurate findings The Ministry of Education and Training gave the standards for rating students' writing assignments

In Table 2 below, the scores were changed to a 10-point scale

Table 2 Converted marks for assessing writing competence

The converted marks used to evaluate writing competence were separated into six levels, as shown in Table 2: Excellent (from 9.0 to 10) is followed by Very Good (8.0 to 8.9), Good (6.5 to 7.9), Average (5.0 to 6.4), Below Average (3.5 to 4.9), and Low (1.0 to 3.4)

The study asked a different teacher of English at Pho Yen High School to evaluate the students' writing skills to get accurate results Before the test, this teacher received training on utilizing the Writing Assessment Subscales (Appendix 2)

This writing exam examined the students' writing abilities as both a pre-test and a post-test A week before the intervention began, the students in the class completed a writing exam as a pre-test The identical writing exam as the post-test was administered ten weeks later

Justification for the test: The same test was utilized for both to avoid equating various pre-test and post-test formats Even if they recalled how they had written the first time, the tenth-week gap between doses would be long enough to control any short-term memory impact after the pre-test Additionally, any effects brought on by exam experience would be comparable for each student

Description: Gusti, Abdul, and Emma (2021) changed the questionnaire used in this research (see Appendix 4) A questionnaire was used to collect their responses to investigate the students' opinions about their teachers' written corrective feedback

The questionnaire includes close-ended and open-ended questions Questions about attitudes about using written corrective feedback in English-writing classrooms have many options for student to choose After the intervention, the questionnaire was distributed

Justification: The questionnaire is one of the educational researchers' most essential and popular tools It probably has many participants, and analyzing the data generated is not too difficult (Brown, 1995) Additionally, Gillham (2000) lists several benefits of questionnaires, including their low time and financial costs, the simplicity of closed-ended question analysis, the lack of quick feedback requirements, and respondents' anonymity

The researcher chooses the questionnaire of Gusti, Abdul and Emma because the current study has the same goal with theirs Their questionnaire is simple and easy for students at Pho Yen high school to understand and respond to.

Teaching materials

The researcher utilized the teaching material "Tieng Anh 10 (Global Success)" from the Ministry of Education and Training for the action study There was a weekly

44 period designated for English writing on the schedule There were two 45-minute periods From units 6 through 10, the researcher chose five writing times

These writing exercises also allowed the teacher to demonstrate how to provide students with written corrective feedback to help them become more proficient writers Table 3 provides the timeline for implementing written corrective feedback

Table 3 Schedule of applying writing topic

Number of Unit Name of Unit Writing lessons

Unit 6 Gender Equality Writing about jobs for men and women

Viet Nam and International Organisations

Writing about Viet Nam’s participation in international organisations

Unit 8 New ways to learn Writing about the benefits of blended learning

Unit 9 Protecting the environment Writing about a wildlife organization

Unit 10 Ecotourism Writing a website advertisement for an ecotour

Data collection procedure

The researcher sent grade 10 students who agreed to participate in the study copies of a writing exam Based on the pre-test findings, the researcher assessed the participants' writing abilities before offering written remedial remarks

Students were prompted to sign on by the researcher The researcher gathered the findings after completing the test to determine whether applying written corrective feedback improved test outcomes and compared them to the results The researcher also analyzed the pre-test and post-test results to assess the difference between applying the technique before and after

The researcher created the questionnaires and sent them to a Facebook page for the research participants in grade 10 They were requested to complete the questionnaire honestly and completely by the researcher

Data analysis

The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyze the obtained test results

Additionally, based on the survey results, the students' attitudes regarding the teacher's written remedial remarks were examined throughout the lesson Data was collected by counting and calculating to create the statistics The researcher then analyzed the material and displayed it in tables and figures for easy comprehension.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

Results

4.1.1 Results of the writing test

Pre- and post-tests were used, as previously stated, to assess the influence of written corrective feedback on students' writing skills before and after the intervention The test results data were calculated, examined, and summarized as follows

The pre-and post-test results were compared to see whether the student's writing skills improved after the intervention The results of the pre-test and post-test were carefully addressed a) Results of the pre-test

The tables and figures below show the pre-test findings as they were presented and displayed The pre-test mean scores for writing are displayed in Table 4

Table 4 Descriptive statistics of the pre-test

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation

Table 5 displays the band scores from the pre-test, which were classified as Excellent (9.0 - 10.0 point), Very Good (8.0 - 8.9 point), Good (6.5 - 7.9 point), Average (5.0 - 6.4 point), Below Average (3.5 - 4.9 point), and Low (1.0 - 3.4 point)

Table 5 Frequency of the pre-test scores

Before using written corrective feedback in writing classes, students' writing grades are shown in Figure 2

Figure 2 Results of the pre-test scores

The figure shows that, with 55% of the total, students with average scores made up the most significant percentage of the group Additionally, nobody received a score in any other band, and 45% of students received Below Average grades The students' writing skills were generally below average, according to the data from the pretest results b) Results of the post-test

The post-test mean scores for writing performance are displayed in Table 6

Table 6 Descriptive statistics of the post-test

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation Post-test

Table 7 displays the post-test band scores, which are classified into six categories: Excellent (9.0 - 10), Very Good (8.0 - 8.9 ), Good (6.5 - 7.9 ), Average (5.0

Table 7 Frequency of the post-test scores

Figure 3 depicts the student's post-test writing competency after the teacher's involvement in written corrective feedback

Figure 3 Results of the post-test scores

In general, 15% of the students had writing scores between 6.5 and 7.9 (excellent), whereas 20% received below-average writing scores

The post-test results show that the students outperformed themselves in the post-test, with higher mean scores It illustrates that the students' grades would indicate an improvement in their writing ability In other words, the use of written corrective feedback boosted the students' ability to acquire writing skills c) Comparison of the pre-test and post-test

The comparison of the students' pre-test and post-test results is shown in Figure 4

Figure 4 Comparison of the pre-test and post-test scores

As seen in the chart above, the students' English writing proficiency was low before the intervention Most of them received Below Average ratings, with 45%; however, following the intervention, this percentage significantly dropped to 20% Additionally, the data gathered demonstrated that more students scored at Good and Post- test levels were on average Compared to the pre-test results, the post-test data revealed a substantial change in students' writing ability at Good levels Compared to students who did well on the pre-test, 15% did well on the post-test

The comparison of the mean writing performance scores between the pre-test and post-tests is shown in Table 8

Table 8 Descriptive statistics of the pre-test and post-test scores

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation Pre-test

The pre-test scores varied from 4.0 to 5.8, with a mean of 4.880, as shown in Table 8 It indicates that the student's writing proficiency must be improved before applying written corrective feedback The post-test scores, which included written Corrective Feedback activities, varied from 4.0 to 7.2, with a mean of 5.565, in contrast This demonstrated that the mean results of the two examinations varied significantly The students' writing abilities have greatly improved This significant improvement could be related to the study's use of written corrective feedback

Average Good Very Good Excellent

4.1.2 Data from the student questionnaire

To answer the second study question, a quantitative analysis of the questionnaire responses from the students was done At Pho Yen High School, 40 members of class 10C1 received questionnaire papers All of them were completed and returned

The questionnaire was given to forty 10th graders at Pho Yen High School to complete to learn more about their opinions on written corrective feedback in writing lessons a) Students’ preference towards types of written corrective feedback

The first question on the form inquired about students' preferred method of providing corrective feedback in writing Direct feedback, indirect feedback, metalinguistic feedback, focused feedback, electronic feedback, and reformulation are the six types of textual corrective feedback Not all students are aware of the various forms of written corrective feedback offered by the researcher to assist students in better comprehending the alternatives presented in the questionnaire and making an informed decision about the kind of written corrective feedback they would want to receive from their teachers In Table 9, you will find the answers to Question 1

Table 9 Students’ preferences toward type of written corrective feedback

Type of written corrective feedback Frequency Percentage

Table 9 displays the distribution of student preferences for different forms of written corrective feedback in frequency and percentage Students prefer receiving immediate corrective feedback in writing 85 percent of the time The kind of written corrective feedback that students detest the least is reformulation (cited by 5% of respondents)

Table 10 Reasons for preferring the types of written corrective feedback

Type of written corrective feedback Reason

- The students will have an easier time understanding their mistakes

- The students will better understand both the error and the remedy

- The students will be able to learn from what their professor has fixed

- Because students are responsible for making follow-up adjustments, it encourages them to develop greater autonomy

- It assists students in recognizing when they have made a mistake and in determining the appropriate response

- The students can quickly pinpoint the source of the problem

- The indication is clear and straightforward

- The students understand the gravity of each kind of fault and agree that they should all be fixed

Unfocused Feedback Reasons were not mentioned

- It offers a comprehensible clarification of what exactly their mistakes are

- It is beneficial for students when the instructor needs help to check their papers since the website delivers trustworthy corrections, mainly grammatical errors

Reformulation Reasons were not mentioned

According to the data, direct corrective feedback is the most favored since it will make both the mistake and the remedy evident to the recipient The instructor's reprimand might also serve as a teaching opportunity for the class's students Consequently, it is much simpler for the students to comprehend where they went wrong b) Students’ preferences towards types of error that must be given written corrective feedback

The second survey question asked students to choose the sort of mistake they would want to receive written corrective feedback from their instructor Organizational, grammatical, content/idea, punctuational, spelling, and vocabulary errors are the six most common types of writing mistakes Table 11 displays the responses to the second question on the questionnaire

Table 11 Students’ preferences toward type of errors should be corrected

Type of error Frequency Percentage

Table 11 displays the number and percentage of times students said they wanted teachers to fix various mistakes According to most responses, 72.5% of students wanted teachers to correct their grammar mistakes While 75% of students felt the instructor should correct spelling mistakes, only 25% thought so

Table 12 Reasons for preferring the types of error that must be corrected

- The student often needs to correct the mistake because the order of words in English and Vietnamese is structured differently

- The student needs help organizing their ideas

- The fault cannot be seen by utilizing the program, and the problem cannot be corrected

- Students often struggle with grammar, particularly with correct tenses, and usually rank it as the most challenging aspect of the English language

- Most of the time, students do not notice when they've made grammatical mistakes in their work

- The students believe they always need help coming up with fresh ideas after writing one paragraph

- The students want to know whether or not their writing is relevant to the context and subject provided to them

- The students need help arranging the information and the ideas they write in their writing

- The students often commit a wide variety of punctuation problems

- Punctuation may change the meaning of certain words

- The quality of their spelling leaves much to be desired

- When writing the term, the students most likely chose the incorrect characters or letters

- Students' limited vocabulary makes keeping up with the required amount of written work

- The students are interested in learning about proper word selection while writing

- Because of their limited vocabulary, the students often use different terms in their writing

Grammatical errors are the sort of mistakes that should be rectified with the highest priority As a result of the students' perception that they still have room for improvement in their grammar abilities, particularly concerning the application of tenses, most students need to receive grammatical corrections in the form of written feedback In addition, some students indicated that grammar is the most challenging topic in the English curriculum Because the vast majority of students believe they often commit grammatical faults, the problem in question must be rectified

54 c) Students’ preferences towards how written corrective feedback should be given

The third survey question inquired whether students had received written corrective feedback from their instructors The origin of this item is straightforward Table 13 displays the results of the third question on the questionnaire

Table 13 Students’ preference toward how written corrective feedback should be given

Way of written corrective feedback Frequency Percentage

Mark all major errors but a not minor one 10 25 %

Mark most of the major errors, but not necessarily all of them 11 27.5 %

Mark only a few of the major errors 2 5 %

Mark only the errors that interfere with communicating your ideas 8 20 %

Mark no errors and respond only to the ideas and content 0 0 %

Discussion

Students in a 10th-grade English class at Pho Yen High School had positive attitudes about using written corrective feedback, and the findings showed that students' writing skills improved as a consequence Results from the pre-test, post- test, and questionnaires were presented before; this part focused on examining the key findings related to the two study topics

4.2.1 Research question 1: How does teachers’ written corrective feedback improve students' writing competence?

Examining students' test scores reveals that, in response to the first research question, teachers' ability to enhance their students' writing after receiving corrections in writing increased Data collected from the pretests and the posttests revealed that the point distributions before and after the intervention were very different This demonstrates that when participants were taught English writing by receiving written corrected feedback, they saw a considerable increase in their writing skills

The written corrective feedback Approach greatly impacted the student's writing proficiency for several reasons Using written corrective feedback, students can establish excellent performance (goals, norms, and expectations) The second benefit is that it helps students improve at self-evaluating (reflection) and assessing their education Third, it promotes positive and uplifting dialogue about learning and identity between educators and their students Fourth, using this method, there are opportunities to narrow the performance gap between actual and intended performance Last but not least, students receive information via written corrective feedback that they may utilize to help shape training

Corresponding with the findings of Shirotha's (2016) research, which found significant differences in test scores before and after a written Corrective Feedback intervention, this finding supports the efficacy of this method The results of this study offered corroboration for the conclusions of Sina's (2014) and Maryam and Kian's (2016) studies, which claimed that the written Corrective Feedback Approach might help students' writing skills improve

As expected, the positive findings supported Manijeh's (2014) claim that EFL students benefited from both types of corrective writing feedback Yahya &

Suhartono (2016) said that written corrective feedback was thought to be a valuable strategy for enhancing tenth-grade students' descriptive text writing abilities

In conclusion, the students improved their writing abilities in a less intimidating context—written corrective feedback—which was linked to their statistically significant improvement in writing proficiency Some researchers have shown that providing students with corrective feedback in writing might help them become better writers

4.2.2 Research question 2: What are students’ attitudes toward the use of teachers’ written corrective feedback?

According to this research, students have a wide range of preferences when receiving written forms of corrective feedback In terms of written corrections, students most often get direct feedback, and the most common problems they must fix are grammatical ones Additionally, most students preferred that the teacher note every mistake and provide written feedback for corrections after class in a private setting Additionally, after obtaining written corrective feedback, most students feel inspired

The following discussion covered the potential causes of these observations First, students were intrigued to uncover their faults and the remedy after receiving written corrective feedback Second, after receiving written corrective feedback, students were able to create their best work Third, the instructor did more than edit the students' writing by offering written feedback; she also gave guidance and aid

The questionnaire results, however, showed that not all students were satisfied with the written corrective feedback Some students may have disliked receiving written corrective feedback intended to improve their writing due to shyness, learning preferences, and low motivation This study found that students were more likely to have a positive outlook on learning English as a second language after receiving written corrective feedback, which may positively impact their motivation to learn Written corrective feedback's capacity to foster a supportive and non-threatening learning environment, where students find learning enjoyable and are consequently intrinsically motivated to achieve goals, maybe the primary explanation for the positive relationship between written corrective feedback and intrinsic motivation

In conclusion, the study's findings showed favorable results regarding the student's writing abilities and attitudes about using written corrective feedback as a

61 teaching technique in Pho Yen high school's English writing classes A detailed examination of the study's data revealed that Pho Yen high school students should be given written corrective feedback while learning how to write in English Using written corrective feedback has been shown to help students at Pho Yen High School improve their writing abilities Therefore the school may use this strategy.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Conclusion

In order to better understand how to integrate written corrective feedback to improve students' writing competence, evaluate its effects on students' writing competence, and explore students' attitudes toward written corrective feedback, the authors of the study titled " Teachers' written corrective feedback on students' writing performance to improve 10th grade students' writing skill " conducted interviews with teachers and students to gain insight into their perspectives on written corrective feedback

At Pho Yen High School in Thai Nguyen Province, forty grade 10 students were chosen The following two research questions were addressed using a writing test and a questionnaire

(i) How does teachers’ written corrective feedback improve students' writing competence?

(ii) What are students’ attitudes toward the use of teachers’ written corrective feedback?

The results demonstrate that the interventions had an impact on changes The following were the changes' underlying causes:

First, it was evident that students' proficiency in English writing increased due to obtaining written corrective feedback Written corrective feedback was shown to improve 10th graders' English writing skills, as evidenced by a significant improvement between the pre-test and post-test scores of the participants

Second, it was evident from the questionnaire that most students had a favorable attitude toward implementing written corrective feedback, indicating that they were convinced of its benefits

Based on the findings, the researcher advised teachers on properly implementing written corrective feedback in English writing courses

5.2 Implications and Recommendations for further research a) For teachers of English

Taking Into Account Learner Factors Numerous academics have recommended pedagogical practices that may be used in classrooms teaching a second language (L2) to mitigate the unfavorable effects of certain types of corrective feedback on students learning that language One of these adverse effects is the heightened anxiety students experience while being corrected When offering corrective feedback, it is essential for teachers of English as a foreign language (EFL) to take into account a diverse range of learner factors This allows teachers to gain a deeper comprehension of the factors that led to the errors made by their students and to offer feedback that is both effective and pertinent, thereby assisting their students in the development of their language skills When offering corrective feedback to their students, language instructors should consider several factors, including their students' views, sensitivities, personalities, expectations, preferences, and emotional requirements The teachers should not force their assumptions on the students and should address any conflicts that arise between the students' beliefs and the practices of the teaching methods It is also recommended that teachers build a connection between students' expectations and teachers' beliefs by having dialogues and interactions with students to negotiate the aims and expectations of feedback This is because many studies have suggested that teacher feedback has a great potential for miscommunication and misunderstanding

Developing Techniques for One's Own Self-Correction According to the research on SLA and writing in a second language, it is the responsibility of instructors to assist L2 learners in recognizing faults, developing abilities for self-revision, and making the most excellent use possible of error feedback for subsequent language activities Specifically, different sorts of errors need distinct approaches from instructors These approaches include complicated phrase constructions, word choice, and other unusual uses of language forms It is vital for instructors of English as a foreign language (EFL) to carefully recognize and react to various forms of mistakes by giving students with in-depth explanations of grammatical concepts and teaching

64 students the appropriate method to respond to errors In other words, teachers need to provide students with specific training for self-correction procedures in the classroom For instance, a teacher may assign group projects in which students work together to recognize and rectify problems often made in their classmates' writing Students' grammatical knowledge may be solidified and made plainer via peer correction, which ultimately benefits both students This might also be an effective method for assisting students in explaining their mistakes to themselves and finding the appropriate solutions

Including Grammar Education Effective and efficient grammar training must be included in correcting since specific grammar lessons are essential in language classes Grammar training substantially influences language acquisition, especially for Asian students, because of their language competency and prior learning experiences in nations where English education and learning heavily emphasize explicit grammar instruction Data from Schulz (2001) revealed that students from all cultural backgrounds had the same belief that the interplay between grammar teaching and feedback facilitates language acquisition As long as learners are exposed to a foreign language environment where they get rich and understandable information, we do not dispute that learners might effortlessly acquire and learn the language EFL learners' final mastering of a foreign language might be aided and fostered by formal Form Focused Instruction (FFI) b) For students

First, it is recommended that students collaborate on their writing projects It might be accomplished via supplementary materials and the inclusion of the instructor in the revision process Second, students should read and carefully consider the teacher's remarks before modifying their written response technique In order to avoid repeating mistake, people must learn from their own errors Third, students need to actively compose and edit their papers They ought to apply the teacher's written feedback

Due to the restrictions mentioned above, specific directions for further investigation were proposed First, it is necessary to conduct longer-term investigations to complete two action research cycles and produce more trustworthy findings Second, a more comprehensive range of participants is required, such as students in higher grades Third, future research should include other methods, such as interviews, in addition to surveys and essays Last but not least, there has to be further study into effective methods of providing students with written corrections to raise their writing standards

The study had several limitations, although giving a very in-depth explanation of how written corrective feedback helped students in the 10th grade become more proficient writers

First, some students should have taken writing lessons seriously during the experiment, which prevented them from visibly improving their writing abilities Teachers must be conscious of their challenges to effectively engage students and implement successful teaching practices

Second, just ten weeks were allotted for the study to be completed The study would be more dependable if the research were conducted over an extended period and the additional time significantly contributed to the students' increased success with their writing abilities

Thirdly, the Pho Yen Upper Secondary School results were exclusive to one class (10C1) The study results might be applied to a broader population if action research were used in more courses

1 Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

2 Bijami, M., Kashef, S H., & Nejad, M S.(2013) Peer Feedback in Learning English Writing: Advantages and Disadvantages Journal of Studies In Education

3 Binglan, Z & Jia, C (2010) The Impact of Teacher Feedback on The Long-Term

Improvement in The Accuracy of EFL Student Writing China: University of

Science and Technology of China

4 Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U (2008) The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409 - 431 https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168808089924

5 Brown, J D (1995) The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development Boston: Heinle & Heinle

6 Brown, H D (2001) Teaching by Principles: An interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy New York: Pearson Education Company

7 Burn (2010) Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A Guide for

Practitioners Routledge, New York, NY

8 Burnett, P C & Mandel, V (2010) Praise and Feedback in the Primary

Classroom: Teachers‟ and Students‟ Perspectives Australian Journal of

9 Carvalho, C., Martins, D., Santana, L E., & Feliciano, L (2014) Teacher feedback: Educational guidance in different school contexts Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 159, 219–223 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.360

10 Creswell, J W 2008 Educational research planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research Boston: Pearson

11 Ellis, R (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition Oxford: Oxford University Press

12 Ellis, R (2009) A typology of written corrective feedback ELT Journal, 63(2), 97-107

13 Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R (2006) Implicit and Explicit Corrective Feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar Studies in Second Language

14 Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H (2008) The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context System, 36, 353-371

15 Elliott, J (1991) Action Research for Educational Change Philadelphia: Open

16 Evans, N W., Hartshorn, K J., & Tuioti, E A (2010) Written corrective feedback: Practitioner’s perspectives International Journal of English Studies,

10(2), 47–77 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ936910

17 Ferrance, E (2000) Action research RI: Brown University Action Research

18 Ferris, D (2006) Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short and long-term effects of written error correction In K Hyland & F Hyland

(Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing Contexts and Issues (pp 81–104)

Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007

19 Ferris, D R (2011) Treatment of error in second language student writing (2nd ed.) Ann Arbor: Michigan

20 Ferris, D., & Roberts, B (2001) Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184 https://doi.org/10.1016/s1060-3743(01)00039-x

21 Ghaith, G 2011 http:/nadasisland.com/ghaith-writing.html Accessed on May

22 Gibbs, G & Simpson, C (2004) Conditions Under wich Assessment Supports Students’ Learning Learning and teaching in higher education 1: 3-31

23 Gillham, B (2000) The research interview Real world research., London:

24 Gusti, S R R, Abdul, M and Emma, R F (2021) Students’ Preferences Towards

Lecturer’s Written Corrective Feedback in Writing Class Atlantis Press

25 Harmer, J (2001) The Practice of English Language Teaching London:

26 Harmer, J (2007) How to teach English Harlow, UK: Pearson education

27 Hartatie, E (2016) The Effectiveness of Teacher Feedback Technique Toward Students’ Ability in Writing Recount Text at SMA-N 1 Katingan Tengah

Unpublished Thesis Palangka Raya: IAIN Palangka Raya

28 Hayland, K (2006) Teaching and Researching London: Longman

29 Huyen, D T T (2020) Feedbacks as formative assessment on ELF students’ writing Journal of Education Management, 2020, Vol 12, No 7, pp 132-139

30 Kane, T S (2000) The Oxford Essential Guide to Writing Oxford: Oxford

31 Keh, C L (1990) Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation ELT Journal, 44(4), 294–304 https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/44.4.294

32 Lalande, J F (1982) Reducing composition errors: an experiment The Modern

33 Lee, I (2008) Student Reactions to Teacher Feedback in Two Hong Kong Secondary Classrooms Journal of Second Language Writing, 17: 144-16

34 Lewin,.K (1994) Action Research and Minrity Prolems Journal of Social Issue

35 Lewis M (2002) Giving Feedback in Language Classes The University of

Auckland: SEAMO Regional Language Centre

36 Manijeh, H (2014) The role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback in improving Iranian EFL students' writing skill Social and Behavioral Sciences, 668 – 674

37 Marrs, S (2016) Development of the students’ perceptions of writing feedback scale (Unpublished Doctoral’s Dissertation) Virginia Commonwealth University

Retrieved from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/4404/

38 Maryam, S S and Kian, P (2015) The effect of written corrective feedback on writing accuracy of intermediate learners Theory and Practice in Language

39 Maryam, S S and Kian, P (2016) The effect of written corrective feedback on the accuracy of English article usage in L2 writing Journal of Applied Linguistics and

40 Marylin, L (2002) Giving Feedback in Language Classes Auckland: The

41 Mertler, C (2009) Action Research Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage Publications, Inc

42 Miftah, M Z (2015) Peer Response in an Indonesian EFL Writing Class: A Case

43 Miftah, M Z (2015) Enhancing writing skills through writing process approach Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 5(1), 9-24

44 Nation, I S P (2009) Teaching ESL/EFL Reading and Writing New York:

45 Nunan, D (1991) Language teaching methodology London: Prentice-Hall

46 Nunan, D (1992) Research methods in language learning Cambridge, UK:

47 Nunan, D (2003) Practical English Language Teaching New York: The

48 Nurhalifah (2017) “Written Corrective Feedback Applied by English Teacher at

The Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 6 Palangkaraya” Thesis IAIN Palangkaraya

49 Oshima, A & Hogue, A (2007) Introduction to Academic Writing (3rd Ed.)

50 Pratiwi, W D (2013) Students’ Perception Towards Teacher‟s Written Feedback among 11th Grade Students at SMAN 1 Wedi Klaten

51 Richard, J C & Renandya, W A (2002) Methodology in Language Teaching United Kingdom The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge

52 Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I (1986) Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality TESOL Quarterly, 20 (1), 83 https://doi.org/10.2307/3586390

53 Rowe, A., Wood, L (2008) Student perceptions and preferences for feedback

Asian Social Science, 4(3), 78-88 DOI: 10.5539/ass.v4n3p78

54 Saragih, N, A., Madya, S.,Siregar, R.A., Saragih, W (2021) Written corrective feedback: students’ perception and preferences International Online Journal of

55 Schulz, R (2001) Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA- Colombia The Modern Language Journal, 85, 244-58

57 Sermsook, K., Liamnimitr, J., & Pochakorn, R (2017) The impact of teacher corrective feedback on EFL student writers’ grammatical improvement English

Language Teaching, 10(10), 43–49 https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n10p43

58 Sheen, Y (2007) The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255–

59 Shirotha, F B (2016) The Effect of Indirect Written Corrective Feedback on Students’ Writing Accuracy Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 6(2), 101-118

60 Sina, S F (2014) The Effect of Two Types of Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Writing Skill Advances in Language and Literary Studies, Vol 6 No 1

61 Suhartono, N and Yahya, M U (2016) The use of written corrective feedback to improve the tenth grade students’ writing skill of descriptive text Journal of

62 Smith, Alfred.N (1971) The importance of attitude in foreign language learning Modern language journal, vol 55(2), 83-88 https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.201124.012

63 Truscott, J (1996) The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes

Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 1770.1996.tb01238.x

64 Van Beuningen, C (2010) Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions International Journal of

65 Wallace, M J (2000) Action research for language teachers Cambridge Univ Pr

66 Wen, Y (2013) Teacher Written Feedback on L2 Students Writings Jounal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(2): 427

67 Wenden, A (1991) Learners Strategies for Learner Autonomy London:

APPENDIX 1: WRITING TEST FOR STUDENTS

Write a paragraph (120 – 150 words) about the ways of living a green lifestyle

Complete the paragraph Use what you have learnt and the ideas below to help you Living green:

- Planting more trees and plants

- Organising regular clean-up activities

- Collecting litter, setting up more recycling bins

- Turning off electrical devices when not in use

- Using energy from the sun, wind, and water

There are many ways you can make your life greener

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Living a green lifestyle is not difficult, but these small changes will make a big difference

Writing for B1 Preliminary for Schools is graded on its quality in language, organization, content, and communicative ability The following are the specific band descriptions:

5 - All content is relevant to the task

- Target reader is fully informed

- Uses the conventions of the communicative task to hold the target reader’s attention and communicate straightforward ideas

- Text is generally well organized and coherent, using a variety of linking words and cohesive devices

- Uses a range of everyday vocabulary appropriately, with occasional inappropriate use of less common lexis

- Uses a range of simple and some complex grammatical forms with a good degree of control

- Errors do not impede communication

4 Performance shares features of Bands 3 and 5

3 - Minor irrelevances and/or omissions may be present

- Target reader is on the whole informed

- Uses the conventions of the communicative task in generally appropriate ways to communicate straightforward ideas

- Text is connected and coherent, using basic linking words and a limited number of cohesive devices

- Uses everyday vocabulary generally appropriately, while occasionally overusing certain lexis

- Uses simple grammatical forms with a good degree of control

- While errors are noticeable, meaning can still be determined

2 Performance shares features of Bands 1 and 3

1 - Irrelevances and misinterpretation of task may be present

- Target reader is minimally informed

- Produces text that communicates simple ideas in simple ways

- Text is connected using basic, high- frequency linking words

- Uses basic vocabulary reasonably appropriately

- Uses simple grammatical forms with some degree of control

- Errors may impede meaning at times

- Target reader is not informed

APPENDIX 3: BLANK TEACHER ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE

B1 Preliminary for Schools Writing paper – teacher assessment

Content Has the candidate answered the task? Have they done what they were asked to do? (Or have they missed anything from the question which they should have included? Have they written something irrelevant?)

Is the writing appropriate for the task? Has the candidate used a style which is appropriate for the specific communicative context? (Or have they written in a way that is not suitable – for example, using a very formal style in an email to a friend or ending an article with ‘Love’?)

Organisation Is the writing put together well? Is it logical and ordered?

(Or is it difficult for the reader to follow? Does it use elements of organisation which are not appropriate for the genre, like beginning an email with a title or starting every sentence in an article on a new line instead of using paragraphs?)

Language Is there a good range of vocabulary and grammar? Are these used accurately? (Or are there mistakes? Do these cause any confusion for the reader?)

Dear students, we are conducting a research on “Teachers’ written corrective feedback on students’ writing performance to improve 10 th grade students’ writing skill” This questionnaire is designed to investigate students’ attitude toward written corrective feedback The researcher really appreciates your cooperation and participation

INSTRUCTION: Please answer the following questions by putting a cross (x) in the appropriate box

1 What type of written corrective feedback do you like?

Direct Corrective Feedback (correcting errors by providing the right form)

Indirect Corrective Feedback (underlining errors, placing cursors to indicate errors, or providing a cross beside the line in the writing that has the error)

Meta-linguistic Corrective Feedback (using error codes to show errors and giving a grammatical description dependent on the number of errors at the end of the passage)

Focused Feedback (correcting the specific errors and omits the other errors)

Unfocused Feedback ( giving correction to all the errors, such as article errors, grammatical errors, spelling errors, etc)

Electronic Feedback ( using technology to correct errors )

Reformulation (rewriting the text, retaining all thoughts while deleting grammatical errors, lexical inadequacies, and ambiguities)

2 What type of errors should be corrected?

3 How written corrective feedback should be given?

Mark all major errors but a not minor one

Mark most of the major errors, but not necessarily all of them

Mark only a few of the major errors

Mark only the errors that interfere with communicating your ideas

Mark no errors and respond only to the ideas and content

4 When written corrective feedback should be given?

Individually on my writing during the class

During the class, if everyone in the class also makes the same error as me

5 How do you feel after receiving written corrective feedback?

Thank you again for your collaboration!