Luận văn thạc sĩ Phương pháp giảng dạy tiếng Anh: EFL Teachers’ Written Corrective Feedback: Beliefs And Practices

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOIUNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIESFACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES NGUYEN NHAT HA EFL TEACHERS’ WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK: BELIEFS AND

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOIUNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYEN NHAT HA

EFL TEACHERS’ WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK: BELIEFS

AND PRACTICES

Quan điềm va thực tiên của giáo viên ngoại ngữ

M.A MINOR PROGRAM THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 8140231.01

Program: 1

Ha Noi — 2024

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOIUNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYEN NHAT HA

EFL TEACHERS’ WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK: BELIEFS

AND PRACTICES

Quan điềm va thực tiên của giáo viên ngoại ngữ

M.A MINOR PROGRAM THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 8140231.01

Program: 1

Supervisor: Dr Hoang Thi Xuan Hoa

Ha Noi — 2024

Hanoi, 2024

Nguyen Nhat Ha

Approved by

SUPERVISOR (Signature and full name)

Dr Hoang Thi Xuan Hoa

the start of this project.

Secondly, I also express my sincere thanks to the four teachers who took partin the study I would not have gotten the crucial and important information withouttheir participation

Thirdly, I extend my heartfelt thanks to each and every one of my closefriends and classmates for their enduring companionship It was essential to havetheir company and emotional support

Last, I am indebted to Ken and my family for their unconditional support,love, and care Additionally, I am extremely thankful to BTS and Seventeen whosemusic served as a continual source of motivation throughout this difficult process

ii

Written corrective feedback (WCF) is a commonly used method to supportthe writing processes of second language (L2) learners and enhance their writtenoutput Despite the existing body of research on WCF, there is limitedunderstanding of teachers’ beliefs regarding WCF and how these beliefs influencetheir teaching practices To address this gap, a study using a mixed-methods designwas conducted to examine the beliefs and practices of four high school teachers in aVietnamese public high school Through semi-structured interviews and analysis ofWCF from 40 student texts, it was discovered that the teachers used an unfocused

approach to offering feedback, with a greater emphasis on local issues likevocabulary The primary form of WCF employed by the teachers tended to be directstrategies Furthermore, the study revealed the nuanced relationship between beliefsand practices, showing both matches and mismatches While the teachers' beliefsaligned with their feedback scope, there were discrepancies between their beliefsand practices concerning feedback focus and strategies This research contributes toa deeper understanding of EFL teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding WCF withinthe local context and offers valuable insights that can be utilized to enhanceteachers’ feedback provision

1H

SLAULISVNUWCF

Second language acquisitionUniversity of Languages and International StudiesVietnam National University, Hanoi

Written corrective feedback

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION 2 ccssssscssssscscsccscecsccssscscssssesssssccsscssscsscssssssssssesscssncsssssscessessoesooes i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT c G5 G55 SH 000405000600809008 ii ABSTTIRA CT, d- << 5 s99 9999989400 0000980006 90050090 iii

LIST OF ABBREVIA TIONS c5 sọ HH 0 000000006098000090 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS csccsssssssssssssssscsscescsscsssssssssssssesscsscsssscescsscescesssssosssesees V LIST OF TABLES o5 << 5< << s0 0.00000000969650 Viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION o5 <5 5< SH HH 000008800 11.1 Statement of the problem and rationale for the S(UY << 55s «se sssssese 11.2 Aims and Objectives co co s55 555 9494694919989 9898099.960.080.04040060900960900900900 3

1.3 Scope Of the SfUY o ó5 5 9 Họ 00.00 1 000060996 3

1.4 Design of the SfUyy << <5 Họ Họ 0000900896 3

1.5 Significance Of the S{UỈY << s9 9 Họ 0 0000996 4

1.6 Organization Of the S{U(ỈY os- óc < 6s < 9 9 0 0.0000 000400009 000.0000046 009 6.8 41.7 Summary of the CHADẨCT dc << 9 9 9 99.8 0009 009.0000.0000400009 600 5CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE RE V LIỀN on 0000000000900 62.1 Writing in second language aCQUI1SIẨIOTI e- << < s5 < 5% 9594 964 9694968996 8895688 62.2 The definition and role of written corrective feedbaCK oseesseessesseessessseess 72.3 Forms of corrective feedback and their effectiveness sccscscssscssscsrscsssssoes 82.4 Requirements of effective fe€€daCĂ oss << s2 < 99 9.6 9.9699 6840088940896 896 102.4.1 Meaningful co << 5< < s 9 9 4.00 0.00 09004.000040000000 0096 112.4.2 Timely and COnStant o- << 5 6 5 9 99.99.999.609 4.0 00400094009898096 112.4.3 Manageable oeeos co s6 9098018 981930569.58900980009100930089889088008070800009908 112.5 Factors affecting the effectiveness of written corrective feedback s«« 112.5.1 Learner factors ó4 so 565 5655999 90050.909.000 0096095009090 09009060966 122.5.2 ETTOT E[D€ c co <4 9 4 4 0 0 00.00.0006 009 0040000400000 0800 122.6 Teachers’ belicfs o-< s5 s5 9 9909.909.000 0.00 0009500000090 09009 0096 8.0 122.6.1 Definition of teachers’ DÏIGÍS os- << < << s9 0009.000 0000000608689 0.6 13

2.6.2 The origin of teachers’ D@ÌICFS se ss< se s9 99.99.909.009 0000010008000 9ø 13

2.7 Previous studies on the topic and research Gaps ese<ssee<sssss s3 35565E996 895 14

2.8 Summary Of the CH4DẨ€T o- co << 5 6 9 9 9 99 99.99.9690 09004.060488906 0896 16CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOCY G5 G5 S00 0505004 66 183.1 Research €SIET coscossss s5 2 949999999899 9004.04.000000809090.08009400040609009060 183.2 Setting Of the S{UY -< 5s 5 s9 Họ 0.0 0000000000896 183.3 Sampling and DAT(ICIDATIẨS e- s- s <5 55 56% 9949490 9896969893.040.0404609004666 19

3.3.1 SarmpÏITiB o s5 5< s9 9 ” 0.0 000 0000 000000900 19

3.3.2 P4TLICIDAATIĂS 65 << G5 9 9 9 Họ 0 00.00010000 100060004000000400090 193.4 Data collection 1TISETUTTITIES e5 5 5 5< 5< 55994 9096496 9.509.50059008508946896 0.6 213.4.1 Interview co cọ cọ họ TT 000000000009 0096000 21

3.4.2 Students’ Writing ẨXẮS - s5 s9 9 Họ TH 000000009600 23

3.5 Data collection procedure c6- 66555 9939 190909898989893.050.0460460900466 24

3.5.1 Data from ITCTVIWS ‹ co 6 9 9 59 00 0 0t 0096 080.040.010 04 049004 000 24 3.5.2 Data from feedback on students’ WFTIẨITE ss- s5 s69 91 9959905 85586 5.8 24

3.6 Data analysis DFOC€CLITCS c5 << 5 6 9 9 9 99.9.9909 09.0 0.00040000460008 096 243.6.1 Data from ITẨCTVICWS s << sọ Họ Họ HT 0000096005080 243.6.2 Data from feedback on students’ WTIẨITE os- <5 5< 5 s59 91 9095009908965 263.7 Ethical COnSiderations ‹ s52 6< E5 E5 59 994 595 990.9090950 0090009009050 60 29

3.8 Summary Of the CHADCT - 5< 6 %9 9 94 99.996.909.000 000080001 00900 29

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION co SĂSSSSsSeseeksee 304.1 FITICITĐS d œ6 6 G5 9 9 9 4.9 00.00 000.004.0000 004 0600400000100090 304.1.1 Teachers’ written corrective feedback DTACIC€S -oss< 55s s53 5593559555695 304.1.2 Teachers’ beliefs regarding WCE o- co so << 9 9890989500080.94605040.0500960 364.2 DISCUSSION ‹ co 65 555 0 594.0990.000 09.0009.0096 00.0090.0009 009.:00960090996 39

4.2.1 Discussion on teachers’ actual written feedback practices -s5s«<sssssss 39 4.2.2 Teachers’ written corrective feedback: Beliefs and praCtIC€S ««-s«<s«« 41

4.3 Summary of the CHa[DẨCT 5< << 9 9.9 9.9.9.0 000 0000400009800096 43

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIƠN co G55 SH ng 0004605604006 44

VI

5.1 Summary Of ẨÏTIITIĐS s- << 5< s9 9 9.99 900 00.0000 009600 44

5.2 IITDÏICAfIOTNS de G5 5 5G 9< 9 9 9 9.99 0.0 0.0 000.000 000 00900 45

5.3 Limitations and suggestions for further T€S€ATCHh s< << 55s se 5£ e+96ee9 46

REEERENCES cọ Họ 0 00010 080.040.0 1000009009000 47 APPENDICES << sọ 0 000040 000098090896 I

APPENDIX A: SAMPLES OF STUDENTS’ COMMENTED TEXT IAPPENDIX B: INTERVIEW GUIDELINE cccsssssssssscsscsscsscsscesssssesssesees IIAPPENDIX C: INFORMATION SHEET AND CONSENT FORM FOR

PA RTTICIPAATNTTYS 5-5 5 << HH HH HC HH 00000000 0090 Il

VI

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 The profiles of four investigated Cases o5 s5 599055 89558956896 896 20Table 2 The coding scheme for feedback fOCUS ssccccssecssccscccssccsssessccsesccsosecees 26Table 3 Realizations of direct and indirect written feedback cscscsssssessesseeseeees 27Table 4 Descriptive statistics of teachers’ feedback Points .-.«s«<<s«ses sssess 30Table 5 Teachers’ number of local and global written feedback points «« 31Table 6 Examples of teachers’ WCF on local 1SSUCS - 5-5555 5s s59 55955555845 5e 32

Table 7 Examples of teachers’ WCF on global issues ssscccsssssssscssssscssssssecoseseees 33 Table 8 Teachers’ number of direct and indirect feedback Points scccssssseecseseee 35

Table 9 Examples of direct and indirect feedbaCK «eseessessessessssseeseeseeseeseeseesse 36

viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

The first chapter, which is the research overview, starts with an explorationof the research background This involves emphasizing the significance of writtencorrective feedback in teaching and learning writing and underlining the potentialimpact of teachers’ beliefs on their instructional practices Next, the chapter presentsa discussion of previous research that is closely related to how the study questionshave been formulated Following this, the chapter meticulously outlines researchdesign and scope, highlighting its meaningful contribution The concluding part ofthe chapter is the organization of the study

1.1 Statement of the problem and rationale for the study

In today's global context, English serves as a universal language connectingindividuals and organizations from diverse cultural backgrounds and societies(Dewi, 2015) It is extensively taught in numerous countries, including Vietnam.Among the four fundamental English skills, writing is deemed one of the mostimportant skills for students to master Ismail (2011) highlights that the ability toproficiently produce written texts not only facilitates language development but alsoenriches learners' knowledge and emotional experiences through the process ofbrainstorming and organizing ideas for writing Writing is often viewed as the most

challenging skill for students as it is a lengthy and demanding process thatnecessitates continuous practice (Myles, 2002) It involves a range of cognitive andmetacognitive tasks, including organizing, planning, organizing, drafting, andrevising (Negari, 2011)

Given these considerations, teaching writing has remained a focal point inthe field of second language acquisition (SLA) and has attracted significantattention from both L2 researchers and practitioners The existing body of literaturehas documented an array of techniques and strategies employed in writinginstruction One common pedagogical practice involves providing written correctivefeedback (WCF), which potentially enhances students’ writing abilities (Bitchener,

2008; Bitchener & Knoch, 2008; Ellis, Sheen, Murakami & Takashima, 2008;Nakaruma, 2016) WCE serves as a prevalent method that supports learners’ writingprocesses and products (Lee, 2013; Lee, Mak, & Burns, 2015; Zhang et al., 2021, as

cited in Cheng et al., 2021)

When it comes to investigating teachers' WCF practices, it is important toexamine their beliefs because of a possible alignment between beliefs and practices(Lee, 2009; Min, 2013; Montgomery & Baker, 2007; Phipps & Borg, 2009).Teacher beliefs are said to exert a substantial impact on L2 writers’ learningprocesses and results (Wenden, 1999; Borg, 2001) Moreover, as highlighted byBorg (2006), the significance of examining beliefs lies not only in their influence onbehaviors but also in enhancing teachers’ professional growth and methodologies

While numerous studies have explored the effectiveness of correctivefeedback (Li, 2010; Nassaji & Kartchava, 2017), the frequency of feedbackoccurrences (Sheen, 2004), the distribution of feedback types (Brown, 2016; Lyster& Ranta, 1997), and preferences of both teachers and learners for feedback(Akiyama, 2017; Lee, 2013; Li, 2017), there have been a few studies on whatteachers believe about WCF (Ferris, 2014, Mao & Crosthwaite, 2019, as cited inCheng et al., 2021) Relatively little is known about what teachers believe aboutWCE and the degree to which such beliefs influence their practice (Kim & Mostafa,

2021) Moreover, as teachers’ beliefs on unplanned aspects of teaching, such as theprovision of written corrective feedback, often differ from teaching practices morefrequently than planned components like task design and instructionalmethodologies (Basturkmen, 2012), there is a clear need for additional research onteachers’ beliefs regarding WCF (Junqueira & Payant, 2015)

Another reason for conducting this research stemmed directly from the

researcher’s personal experiences and concerns as an English teacher Notably, a

majority of high school students tend to exhibit a lack of enthusiasm for learningwriting and frequently encounter challenges in completing writing tasks.Additionally, a number of high school EFL teachers appear to either pay inadequate

attention to WCF or ineffectively employ it in practice

Motivated by the aforementioned factors, the present study, titled "EFL

teachers' written corrective feedback: Beliefs and practices," was carried out.

1.2 Aims and objectives

This investigation aimed to shed light on the beliefs and practicessurrounding written corrective feedback among EFL teachers with a specific focuson the context of a Vietnamese high school In other words, it sought to investigatecertain beliefs held by EFL teachers about WCF and see whether teachers’ beliefswere aligned with their actual correction practices The analysis of the data wouldbe followed by informed discussions and actionable recommendations which aimedat enhancing the effectiveness of WCF practices for more impactful languageinstruction

The objectives can be summarized in the following research questions:(1) What are EFL teachers’ beliefs about written corrective feedback?

(2) To what extent are EFL teachers’ beliefs aligned with their actual writtencorrective feedback practices?

1.3 Scope of the study

The study was conducted at a public high school in Vietnam during theacademic year 2023-2024 Four EFL teachers were selected as participants of thestudy The teachers were in charge of teaching grade 10 students

The study investigated the practices and beliefs about WCF held by the fourteachers Data, therefore, was collected via semi-structured interviews with eachteacher and students’ writing texts with teachers’ WCF

The school uses MOET-authorized (Ministry of education and training)textbooks emphasizing language components and skills, supplemented by foreignpublishers’ materials In writing classes, students analyze model texts, engage inlanguage exercises, and produce approximately 150-word texts on various topics.Teachers evaluate and provide feedback on students' initial drafts, which are thenrevised accordingly

1.4 Design of the study

The study used a mixed-methods design with two main instruments: structured interviews and student writing texts with teachers’ WCF Whileinformation from analyzing written feedback of students’ texts allowed theresearcher to better understand the teachers’ actual practices, information from the

semi-interviews helped to provide data regarding teachers' beliefs about WCF.1.5 Significance of the study

This study aims to make a substantial contribution to the field of writtencorrective feedback (WCF), both in the Vietnamese context and on a global scale.First and foremost, the study seeks to fill a clear gap in the literature by focusing onVietnamese-specific WCF practices The research's findings can help clarify thebeliefs and WCF practices of Vietnamese EFL teachers in high schools In addition,

this study employed qualitative methods in response to the advice made by Miao,Chang, and Ma (2023) that future research should vary methodology

From a practical standpoint, beyond their academic value, the results areexpected to be useful for EFL teachers and anybody having an interest in the beliefsthat affect teachers' WCF practices By having a better understanding of the factorsthat influence teachers’ feedback practices, teachers, curriculum designers, schooladministrators, and other stakeholders can improve teachers’ feedback techniquesthrough focused interventions and comprehensive professional developmentprograms Furthermore, this paper is a useful resource for future investigations ofWCF

1.6 Organization of the study

There are five main chapters in this paper.An overview of the study is provided in Chapter 1: Introduction, whichcovers the research topic, rationales, and objectives of the current study as well asits significance, scope, design, and organization

The second chapter, the literature review, defines crucial terms and pointsout significant research gaps

Chapter 3: Methodology presents the study's methodology, including howthe research site, participants, sampling techniques, research design, and datacollection tools are chosen The methods and procedures for gathering andanalyzing data are also covered in this chapter, along with the steps taken to

guarantee ethical concerns.

In order to address the research questions, the findings from two datacollection instruments are presented and discussed in Chapter 4: Findings andDiscussion

Chapter 5: Conclusion provides a summary of the results, discusses thestudy's limits, and makes suggestions for future research

Appendices and References follow these chapters.1.7 Summary of the chapter

The first chapter provides an overview of the research problem, including itsrationales, objectives, significance, scope, design, and structure Recognizing theintegral role of written corrective feedback in the teaching and learning of writing,as well as the impacts of teachers' beliefs on feedback practices, the study aimed toaddress two main research questions: (1) What are the beliefs of EFL teachersregarding written corrective feedback? and (2) To what extent are EFL teachers’beliefs aligned with their actual practices of written corrective feedback?Employing both qualitative and quantitative approaches with semi-structuredinterviews and analysis of feedback provided on students' texts as the primaryinstruments, the study investigated four teachers from a public high school inVietnam The findings from this research are expected to offer practicalcontributions aimed at enhancing teachers' understanding of written correctivefeedback as well as the potential connections between teachers’ beliefs andpractices

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

A theoretical foundation for the research is provided in the second chapter.To begin with, the important terms are conceptualized To highlight the promisinggap that the study attempted to address, the remaining sections present a review ofrelated literature from both local and global settings

2.1 Writing in second language acquisition

According to Thornbury (2006), writing is defined as a productive skill thatencompasses a number of sub-skills, ranging from the most basic skills such aswriting or typing in a legible way to the ability to organize and arrange informationin a logical manner In SLA, writing is regarded as an effective tool forcommunication (Dar & Khan, 2015; Haider, 2012) and as a common measure bywhich teachers evaluate students (Tan, 2011) Hyland (2003) argues that languagedevelopment depends on improving writing skills

However, writing is also the most demanding skill for L2 learners because itis a complex activity that requires certain knowledge of language, grammar,vocabulary, and thinking strategies of learners to be able to clearly express their

opinions and viewpoints in other languages (Yavuz-Erkan & Ïflazošlu-Saban,

Feedback in the product approach typically concentrates on grammatical accuracywhile overlooking broader aspects such as meaning construction in the writingprocess As a result, teachers' feedback tends to target specific components likewords, sentences, paragraphs rather than the holistic meaning and ideas conveyed inthe entire text (Sommers, 1982).

Conversely, the process approach encourages students to navigate writingthrough various stages, emphasizing the exploration and arrangement of ideas and

the development of organizational skills (Gibbons, 2002; Matsuda, 2003).According to Phung (2020), process writing entails five fundamental stages:prewriting, planning, drafting, revising, and editing, along with three additional

stages imposed by teachers: responding, evaluating, and post-writing Given itsfocus on the entire written text, feedback within the process approach centers onfunctions rather than forms and on language usage rather than language conventions

(Stewart, 1988)

The genre-based approach revolves around instructing learners on how toutilize language patterns to produce coherent, purposeful writing (Hyland, 2003) Itemphasizes the importance of understanding the social and cultural context oflanguage usage in writing (Hammond & Derewianka, 2001) This approachcategorizes writing into distinct text types, including narratives, information reports,instructions, explanations, and expository texts (Derewianka, 1990) In genre-basedinstruction, feedback gravitates towards supporting students' writing developmentsystematically, reinforcing genre awareness, community conventions, and providingsuggestions for improvement Unlike traditional grading, genre-based feedback notonly evaluates students' writing but also sheds light on areas for enhancement andoffers guidance for further development (Hyland, 2004)

2.2 The definition and role of written corrective feedback

Feedback plays an important part in the process of teaching and learningwriting skills Corrective feedback (CF) is a term used to refer to the informationprovided by teachers or readers directly and indirectly about language errors that

learners make when speaking or writing in L2 (Bitchener & Ferris, 2012) In otherwords, CF “takes the form of a response to a learner utterance containing a

linguistic error” (Ellis, 2009, p 3) which can be given in the written or oral form

For written corrective feedback (WCF), feedback can be provided byteachers, classmates within the classroom, or by native and non-native speakers in anatural setting In this study, the researcher focused on WCF of teachers because it

was relevant to the participants, scope, and purpose of the study

The question of whether teachers should introduce WCF to foreign languagelearners and how effective WCF is is a matter of considerable controversy in theSLA field Some researchers, notably Truscott (2007) believe that WCF does notpositively affect L2 writing On the other hand, a large number of studies havesupported WCF's significance The research of Bitchener and Knoch (2008),Hanaoka and Izumi (2012), Ellis, Sheen, Murakami and Takashima (2008), andShintani, Ellis and Suzuki (2014) are a few examples Specifically, thanks toteachers’ constructive comments and suggestions, students can reduce mistakesmade in the writing process (Han, 2002; Arrad, Vinkler, Aharonov, & Retzker,2014) Teacher WCF has been claimed to improve writing accuracy (Bitchener,2008) and reinforce students’ lexical and syntactic knowledge (DeKeyser, 2007) Inaddition, WCF helps to motivate students because it allows them to recognize theirown strengths and weaknesses, assess their progress, and maintain their efforts toachieve realistic goals (Rivière, 2000) In the long term, WCF also helps to fosterstudent autonomy During the feedback procedure, teachers lead students to figureout and correct their own mistakes Obviously, the application of WCF canpotentially promote student-centeredness because it motivates students to learn in a

serious and proactive way.2.3 Forms of corrective feedback and their effectiveness

The nature of WCF is considered pivotal to its ultimate success, with a broadspectrum of WCF typologies in the literature (Bitchener, 2008, 2012; Ferris, 1995,2004; Hyland & Hyland, 2006; Sheen, 2007, as cited in Mao & Crosthwaite, 2019)

Recent publications have analyzed written feedback in terms of feedback focus,feedback scope, and feedback strategy (Bitchener & Ferris, 2012; Ellis, 2009; Lee,2017; Sheen, 2011, as cited in Chang et al., 2021).

Feedback focus pertains to the specific areas on which teachers concentratewhen they provide WCF (Yu & Lee, 2014) WCF can be directed towards local orglobal issues Local issues involve aspects such as spelling, syntax, and punctuation,while global feedback addresses broader concerns like ideas, logic, content, andorganization (Montgomery & Baker, 2007) Existing research has taken a look athow effective local and global feedback are, with some findings indicating that theglobal feedback has more influence on enhancing high-order writing aspects thanlocal feedback (Ashwell, 2000; Zhang, 2018; Cheng & Zhang, 2021) Otherinvestigations have suggested that providing WCF on both local and global issuesthroughout the writing process is beneficial, as long as the feedback primarily

focuses on global aspects initially (Ashwell, 2000)

Regarding feedback scope, past studies have investigated whether or notteachers should give feedback on all errors or just some of them while ignoringothers Focused WCF or selective feedback involves providing written feedback onone or a few predetermined error types, while unfocused or comprehensivefeedback entails offering feedback on all or most structural elements (Ellis, 2010;Fazilatfar, Damavandi, Sani, & Heirati, 2015) For low-level L2 learners, focused

feedback may minimize cognitive overload by giving them more cognitiveresources to comprehend new knowledge quickly Focused feedback is beneficialfor enhancing writing accuracy in particular target structures, according to empiricalresearch (Bitchener & Knoch, 2008; Sheen, 2007; Suzuki, Nassaji, & Sato, 2019).However, in actual second language (L2) writing classrooms, where teachers aim toimprove students’ overall writing abilities, some researchers contend that teachersshould prioritize and utilize unfocused feedback (Zhang & Cheng, 2021) Whilenumerous studies have investigated focused feedback, research supporting thebenefits of comprehensive feedback remains limited Nevertheless, the availableresearch suggests that unfocused feedback can improve L2 students’ general writing

accuracy (Van Beuningen, de Jong, & Kuiken, 2012; Frear & Chiu, 2015; Karim &Nassaji, 2020, as cited in Chang et al., 2021).

Apart from the extent of written feedback provision, teachers also face thedecision of adopting which feedback strategies The existing literature has identifiedthree common types of WCF: direct, indirect, and metalinguistic (Ellis, 2009).However, this study primarily focused on two types of WCF: direct correctivefeedback (DCF) and indirect corrective feedback (ICF), as the concept ofmetalinguistic corrective feedback (MCF) remains unclear in previous research The

classification of feedback as MCF in one study (Robb et al., 1986) contrasts with itscategorization as ICF in others (Jamalinesari, Rahimi, Gowhary & Azizifar, 2015;Ferris & Roberts, 2001)

Direct corrective feedback (DCF) involves teachers explicitly indicating thecorrect form of errors by crossing out unnecessary words or phrases, insertingmissing words or morphemes, and providing the correct form above or in closeproximity to the erroneous form (Ellis, 2009; Ferris, 2006) DCF is suitable forlower-level students who may struggle to correct errors themselves and lackknowledge of the correct forms of errors

In contrast, indirect corrective feedback (ICF) is presented in the form ofunderlining, circling, and marking errors within the students' writing Here, the

teacher does not provide the correct forms of errors but rather assigns theresponsibility to the student for self-correction, based on the teacher's errorannotations (Bitchener & Knoch, 2008) Advocates of ICF argue that it enhancesstudents' engagement in guided learning and problem-solving activities as theyattempt to correct their own errors (Lalande, 1982) ICF is believed to beparticularly beneficial for long-term language acquisition and development,

especially among advanced students (Ferris & Roberts, 2001).2.4 Requirements of effective feedback

Feedback that is considered “effective” needs to show exactly what studentsneed based on their written products Therefore, feedback should include comments

10

on both students’ strong points and areas for improvement to help students realize

their strengths and weaknesses and increase their motivation for learning.Furthermore, feedback needs to adhere to the following criteria namely beingmeaningful, timely, constant, and manageable for both students and teachers

(Hartshorn et al., 2010).2.4.1 Meaningful

Feedback is meaningful when it is transparent to students This means thatstudents need to understand the comments made by teachers, especially whenteachers use ICF Therefore, it is suggested that students be taught how to recognize

and interpret the meaning of the error codes teachers use.2.4.2 Timely and constant

To increase the effectiveness of feedback, it needs to be provided at theappropriate time and continuously throughout the teaching process Feedback is

timely as students’ works are given comments during and immediately after the

writing process and returned to the students in later lessons Teachers shouldprovide feedback on students’ works before the next writing task is assigned.Feedback is continuous as students are regularly asked to create new writings andreceive feedback on nearly every lesson

2.4.3 Manageable

Another important characteristic that feedback should have is beingmanageable Feedback is considered manageable for teachers when they haveenough time to ensure the quality of their comments Feedback that is manageablefor students is when they have the time and ability to understand and applyfeedback from teachers Without ensuring this criterion, it will be difficult forteachers to provide continuous and meaningful feedback

2.5 Factors affecting the effectiveness of written corrective feedback

Selecting a suitable type of WCF is critical to increasing feedback’s

effectiveness There is no single type of feedback that can be implemented in allteaching contexts

11

Therefore, teachers should take the two following factors namely learnersfactors and error types into consideration when deciding the types of WCF.

2.5.1 Learner factors

It is a very important factor because the audience that the feedback is

targeted at is students Teachers need to take into account students’ L2 proficiency

levels when giving feedback For low-level students, using only ICF will not beeffective because students cannot realize exactly what errors they have made andhow to correct them due to their limited knowledge (Vyatkina, 2010) In this case, itis more appropriate to combine DCF with ICF because DCF is more immediate andfacilitates the student's self-correction process

Apart from the foreign language proficiency, teachers also need to payattention to the emotional and motivational factors of learners No type of feedbackwill be effective if the students themselves do not have a positive attitude towardsfeedback and are motivated to improve their writing skills (Guenette, 2007).Therefore, teachers need to clarify the value of this activity to students, explainingwhy students need to take the time to process and apply the feedback from teachers.When students have a high level of motivation, they are more interested and active

in participating in the feedback procedure.2.5.2 Error types

The choice of WCF type also depends greatly on the errors that students

make Therefore, teachers need to distinguish between “treatable” and “untreatable”errors (Ferris, 1999) Treatable errors are very recognizable and are dictated bylanguage rules that are consistent in most cases such as verb tenses, subject and verbagreement, and comparatives Students can rely on grammar rules to correct theseerrors With treatable errors, ICF should be adopted to provide students withopportunities to correct errors on their own On the contrary, there are some errorsthat are difficult for students to handle such as word choices and collocationsbecause there is no clear and fixed rule in all cases With these errors, DCF shouldbe applied to save time for both students and teachers and help students understand

the problem immediately.2.6 Teachers’ beliefs

12

2.6.1 Definition of teachers’ beliefs

Previous researchers have defined teachers’ beliefs in various ways Rokeach (1972) claims that beliefs are any statement starting with the phrase “I believe that.”

while Pajares (1992) sees this as a person's judgment of whether a statement is trueor false

Teacher beliefs are characterized as intricate, evolving, contextualized,systematic, personal, practical, and frequently unconscious constructs (Borg, 2006).Their role is to direct behaviors and provide motivation for actions (Kuzborska,2011; Fives & Buehl, 2012) Specifically, they might help teachers organize andunderstand data, define certain issues or tasks, and encourage prompt actions

In this study, Borg's (2001) definition of teacher beliefs was employed.According to Borg (2001), the term refers to any propositions that are consciously

or unconsciously held and evaluated as true by the teachers themselves Thisdefinition offers a comprehensive understanding of teacher beliefs as personallysubjective assertions used by teachers to evaluate information, as well as to guidetheir practices

2.6.2 The origin of teachers’ beliefs

Teachers’ beliefs can be drawn from a variety of potential sources (Skott, 2015) They are mostly shaped by teachers’ educational background, their prior

experiences as language learners, and their teaching practice (Lortie, 1975; Borg,

2005) It is said that teachers’ own schooling experiences and observations of their

past teachers play a significant role in forming their pedagogical beliefs (Richards& Lockhart, 1996; Hayes, 2009; Donaghue, 2003; Ellis, 2008) According to Lortie(1975), unlike other professions, teachers have unique opportunities to witnessteaching methods firsthand during their formative years

Additionally, teachers’personality (Mellati, Khademi & Shirzadeh, 2015; Rokeach, 1968) This means that

beliefs can be influenced by factors related to

teachers might favor specific teaching methods, classroom setups, or learningactivities that align with their individual traits

13

Lastly, research-based principles is one major contributor to teachers’ beliefs(Gilakjani & Sabouri, 2017) as teachers can rely on research findings in secondlanguage teaching to show preference for certain teaching methods.

2.7 Previous studies on the topic and research gaps

Recent research has exhibited an increasing interest in how teachers' beliefsregarding written corrective feedback influence their actual feedback practices Thisrelationship has been characterized as intricate, with neither a linear nor causalconnection (Fang, 1996) On the one hand, teachers’ beliefs serve as a guidance fortheir teaching practices, ensuring some degree of consistency between what theybelieve and what they do in the classroom On the other hand, this congruence is notalways absolute due to various factors concerning teachers, students, and contextualelements in their teaching environments (Basturkmen, 2012; Borg, 2006) Thealignment and misalignment between teachers’ beliefs and practices have been well-documented in the existing literature (Farrell & Ives, 2015; Sun & Zhang, 2023)

The differences between teachers’ practices and beliefs have been the subject

of some investigation For instance, Lee (2009) found ten noteworthy discrepanciesbetween the beliefs and actual practices of teachers Among the most notablediscrepancies are the use of error codes by teachers in spite of their perception thatstudents had limited comprehension of them and the use of the same markingstrategies despite the teachers' belief that they were ineffective Junqueira andPayant (2015) used a case study to find discrepancies between a pre-service L2teacher's beliefs and her actual actions They did this by using a variety of datasources, such as reflective journals, interviews, and comments on the essays writtenby the students The results showed that although the teacher thought that globalaspects should be addressed, she mostly gave direct WCF and concentrated on localissues In a similar vein, Mao and Crosthwaite (2019) carried out research todetermine how much Chinese teachers' WCF practices and beliefs matched Borg(2008)'s cognitive theory Three areas of belief-practice mismatch were found: thedistribution of local versus global errors, the availability of both explicit and

14

implicit WCF, and the types of implicit WCF The lack of training and contextualfactors were the causes of these discrepancies.

In another study, Montgomery and Baker (2007) compared teachers’ beliefsand practices concerning written corrective feedback They found significantdifferences between the teachers' actual feedback practices and what they reportedin questionnaires These practices were not only misaligned with their beliefs butalso diverged from the instructions given in their weekly meetings

In contrast, some studies have reported evidence of congruence betweenteachers’ beliefs and practices regarding WCF For instance, Lee's (2004) studyinvestigated teachers' beliefs and practices about error correction The resultsindicated that the teachers in her study preferred a comprehensive approach,aligning with their correction of almost all errors in the given task A majority ofthese teachers also expressed a preference for using direct feedback, whichcorresponded with their practices, as approximately 65% of the errors werecorrected in this manner

In the context of Vietnam, various studies have examined written correctivefeedback A study conducted by Tran (2022) sought to understand students’preferences for WCF Using a questionnaire, this research indicated that students at

a Vietnamese college held positive perceptions and displayed preferences for WCFin writing

Another investigation by Dam (2018) explored university teachers and

second-year students’ evaluation of effectiveness of indirect written corrective

feedback across five distinct aspects of writing, namely grammar, language use,mechanics, content, and organization The findings indicated that both teachers andstudents agreed that the feedback provided aligned with students’ comprehensionbut occasionally surpassed their self-correction capabilities They were in consensusregarding the efficacy of indirect WCF in addressing grammatical errors, but foundit less effective in improving content There was a neutral stance from both parties

15

concerning the effectiveness of this feedback approach for addressing lexical andmechanical errors Notably, the aspect where perceptions differed the most betweenteachers and students was organization Furthermore, teachers and students sharedsimilar reasoning for their perspectives These findings suggested the need foradjustments in teachers' feedback delivery methods and students' feedbackassimilation practices to enhance the efficiency of indirect WCF.

Furthermore, several researchers, including Pham and Iwashita (2018),investigated the relationship between indirect corrective feedback, the enhancementof students’ grammatical accuracy, and the development of learner autonomy Theresults illustrated that the introduction of indirect corrective feedback not only led toimprovements in university students’ grammatical accuracy in writing but alsopromoted their ability to make independent decisions and take responsibility fortheir learning

Undoubtedly, existing literature has offered profound insights into teachers’beliefs and practices toward WCF However, most of them have been conducted

outside Vietnam Little attention has been paid to investigate teachers’ beliefs andpractices in the Vietnamese context Past studies in the context of Vietnam mainlydeal with the impact of WCF (Tran, 2016; Dam, 2018; Pham & Iwashita, 2018) Asa result, this study was carried out to fulfill the research gap and make contributionsto the investigated field

2.8 Summary of the chapter

The second chapter provides the theoretical foundation of the study,beginning with an exploration of the definition of writing and three instructionalapproaches to teaching writing It then clarifies the term written corrective feedbackand its significance, encompassing feedback focus (addressing global and local

issues), feedback scope (comprising focused and unfocused WCF), and feedback

strategy (encompassing direct and indirect WCF) as outlined by various scholars(Sheen, 2011; Bitchener & Ferris, 2012; Lee, 2017, as cited in Chang et al., 2021)

16

Following this, the literature review demonstrates the definition of teachers'beliefs and their sources A synthesis and critical evaluation of existing literature onteachers’ beliefs and practices of written corrective feedback sheds light on both thealignment and misalignment between language teachers' beliefs and practices,thereby highlighting significant research gaps This study aims to fill these gaps,particularly in the Vietnamese context, where there is insufficient research on this

topic

17

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

The third chapter revolves around the research methodology It begins byoffering an insight into the research site, illuminating the study's contextualbackground Furthermore, it outlines the mixed-methods design and purposefulsampling strategy, directly connecting with participant selection and the two datacollection instruments, analysis of feedback on students’ writing texts and semi-structured interviews This chapter also elaborates on the techniques and proceduresemployed for data collection and analysis Finally, the chapter wraps up with theethical considerations of the study

3.1 Research design

To seek answers to the research questions, this study utilized a methods approach, which allowed the researcher to employ both qualitative andquantitative methodologies within a single study (Tashakkori & Creswell, 2007).Previous studies have confirmed that various types of data are sufficient toaccurately capture and describe beliefs (Pajares, 1992), which, in this case, referredto the beliefs and practices of EFL teachers regarding WCF Incorporating bothquantitative and qualitative approaches was anticipated to provide better insightsinto the research problems compared to relying on a single approach

mixed-3.2 Setting of the study

The research was carried out at a public high school situated in a rural area ofVietnam To preserve the confidentiality of the research site, it was identified as

"School A" within the study

In most Vietnamese high schools, School A included, English has been amandatory subject since 2010 The objective is for students to attain a proficiencylevel of at least B1 according to the Common European Framework of Reference(CEFR) by the end of the 12th grade The EFL instruction adheres to a nationalcurriculum established by the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) ofVietnam School A employs a MOET-authorized textbook that emphasizes three

18

language components (pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar) and four languageskills (listening, reading, writing, speaking) The school also employed additionalsupplementary coursebooks from reputable foreign publishers to offer studentsfurther practice.

In school A, a writing class, lasting 45 minutes, typically commences with amodel text, followed by activities that direct students through the writing process,including model analysis, language exercises, and guided writing Ultimately,students are tasked with composing texts of approximately 150 words, centered onfamiliar topics and derived from models or prompts designed for personal or basiccommunicative purposes The required text genres span from personal and formalletters to narratives, as well as the description of charts, graphs, tables, andexpository writing Following the completion of their writing assignments, students’initial drafts are evaluated and critiqued by teachers Subsequently, students revise

their writing based on the feedback provided by their teachers.3.3 Sampling and participants

3.3.1 Sampling

Given the pivotal importance of an effective strategy in ensuring thecredibility of qualitative research (Gable, 1994), this study opted for purposivesampling Purposive sampling is a more favorable method in qualitative researchwhen contrasted with non-probability sampling, primarily to reduce the risk ofselecting non-representative cases (Ishak, Bakar & Yazid, 2014) According toDörnyel (2007), it facilitates the selection of participants who can offer "in-depthand diverse insights" into the phenomenon under investigation (p 126) This, inturn, contributes to the detailed description of the examined experiences and

detailed understanding of the research problems (Creswell, 2014).3.3.2 Participants

Purposive selection was applied to ensure diversity among participants.Given that the participants are ESL teachers, the criteria for selection includedfactors influencing their teaching practices, such as years of experience, relevant

19

qualifications, and teaching styles.

To fulfill the research objectives, the researcher invited four EFL writingteachers as participants out of 11 EFL teachers at School A, all of whom willingly

signed the Consent Form The profile of each participant can be outlined as follows

Table 1

The profiles of four investigated participants

Profile Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant Participant 4

3

Pseudonym Au Tam Son Manh

Teaching 2 years 5 years 4 years 8 years

experience

Gender Female Female Male Female Qualifications Bachelor Master Bachelor Master

— Local — Local — Local — Local

university university university university

Classroom Pre- Pre- Intermediate profile intermediate intermediate level, Intermediate

Upper-level, around Upper-level, around around Bl Upper-level, aroundA2 A2 B2

To ensure the privacy of teachers, specific pseudonyms were assigned to allparticipants The selection of the four participants was based on significantdifferences that could affect their beliefs and practices The four teachers, one maleand three females, differed in terms of teaching experience and educationalbackground Teaching experience varied from 8 years to two years, ensuring diverseperspectives and practices towards WCF Specifically, Manh, the most experienced

20

teacher, had 8 years of teaching experience Tam and Son were two other Englishteachers at the school, with five and four years of teaching experience, respectively.The remaining teacher, Au, was a novice with only two years of teaching Despitetheir shared professional training and education in pedagogy from the sameuniversity, only Manh and Tam held a Master's degree Furthermore, the four caseswere responsible for distinct classrooms ranging from elementary to upper-intermediate levels, necessitating varied approaches to cater to each group oflearners.

3.4 Data collection instruments

There were two main sources of data: written feedback of students’ texts andsemi-structured interviews

3.4.1 Interview 3.4.1.1 Rationale for the use of interview

This study employed interviews as a main method for data collection.Interviews are defined as verbal exchanges in which the interviewer asks an

interviewee to provide answers for a specific issue (Gillham, 2000)

The employment of interviews into this study can be attributed to three mainreasons Firstly, interviews, being an important tool in qualitative research, have thecapacity to generate a wealth of information, facilitating an in-depth exploration ofthe subjects (Creswell, 2014) Interviews are particularly valuable in gathering datathat is not readily observable According to Lambert and Loiselle (2007), they

enable researchers to elicit information pertaining to participants’ experiences andbeliefs regarding a specific research issue or area of interest In the context of thisstudy, the objective was to gain a profound understanding of teachers’ beliefsconcerning written corrective feedback

Secondly, interviews serve as a crucial tool for not only capturing verbal butalso non-verbal cues, including facial expressions, gestures, and tone of voice Ashighlighted by Opdenakker (2006), non-verbal components are extremely helpfulwhen the interviewer aims to examine the participant's beliefs about a particular

21

phenomenon.3.4.1.2 Interview design

Interviews can be carried out either individually or in a group setting (Qu &Dumay, 2011) For this research, one-on-one interviews were chosen, as theyoffered more convenient scheduling with participants Additionally, individualinterviews were preferred to group interviews to ensure that participants couldexpress their thoughts and opinions independently, without external influences(Mack, Woodsong, MacQueen, Guest & Namey, 2005)

Babbie (2007) distinguishes three main types of interviews: structured, structured, and unstructured interviews To align with the research objectives, thesemi-structured interview format was employed According to Given (2008), thisapproach involves the researcher asking informants a series of predetermined, open-ended questions The semi-structured interview's adaptability not only helps toexplore participants’ beliefs and insights but also allows for the spontaneousexamination of interesting topics that arise during the discussion (Ryan, Coughlan& Cronin, 2009) Additionally, this method is suitable for dealing with a relativelysmall number of interviewees (Drever, 1995)

semi-3.4.1.3 Interview guideline development and description

Prior to the interviews, inspired by previous studies (Cheng & Zhang, 2022;Cheng, Zhang & Yan, 2021), a written guideline was carefully prepared (SeeAppendix B) The guideline adopted the semi-structured approach with a number of

open-ended questions It is structured into two sections, each aiming to gainvaluable insights regarding teachers' backgrounds and their beliefs about WCF

In the first section, teachers are invited to provide their academicbackgrounds, including the degrees they hold and their majors They are furtherprompted to reflect on their personal journey in learning English writing,

specifically their experiences with WCF from their own teachers Additionally,teachers are encouraged to share their professional experiences in teaching English,with a particular focus on their approaches to teaching writing skills This section

22

also encourages teachers to compare and contrast their teaching methodologies withthose employed by their own teachers Furthermore, teachers are asked to describeany formal training they have undergone about the teaching of English writing andfeedback provision.

In the second section, attention shifts towards teachers' specific beliefsregarding WCF Teachers are prompted to share their beliefs on the importance offeedback, the rationale behind their views Furthermore, teachers are encouraged to

elaborate on the choice between providing focused or unfocused feedback, directversus or indirect feedback, feedback on global or local issues The section

concludes with teachers offering any additional comments, recommendations, orconcerns they may have

It is noted that during the interviews, only some questions which were takenfrom the guideline were pre-determined and new questions would be developedfrom discussion

3.4.2 Students’ writing texts

Students' commented texts provide concrete evidence regarding variousaspects of teachers’ written corrective feedback practices, including the scope,strategy, and focus of their feedback (Lee, 2009; Mao & Crosthwaite, 2019) Thisdata can subsequently be juxtaposed with their instructional beliefs Therefore, theresearcher collected a total of 40 commented texts (ten for each teacher) Each textwas approximately 150 words in length and was produced in response to writingtasks featured in the teachers’ current instructional materials at the time of theresearch (see Appendix A for samples) The texts covered a wide range of topics, allof which were related to common themes found in the course book or additionalmaterials, such as education, food and health, and technology These texts werewritten by grade-10 students from School A A majority of students demonstratedEnglish proficiency at levels ranging from AI to BI However, there were also

some excellent students whose proficiency level could go up to B2 (CEFR)

23

3.5 Data collection procedure

After obtaining the participants’ agreement to participate in the study, thedata collection procedure proceeded as follows

3.5.1 Data from interviews

The researcher sought permission and scheduled appointments with theparticipants at suitable locations and times Each participant took part in anindividual interview for approximately 30 minutes Both Vietnamese and English

languages were used during the interviews to enhance clarity and efficiency

During the interviews, the researcher followed a predetermined list ofquestions, but also remained flexible, adjusting the order based on the interviewees'responses In addition to questions directly related to the research problems, furtherinquiries were posed to ensure comprehension and to extract additional informationthrough active listening Creating a comfortable environment was a priority during

the interviews, fostering trust and rapport between the interviewer and participants

All interviews were audio-recorded to facilitate subsequent analysis.3.5.2 Data from feedback on students’ writing

Before returning the writings to students, all of the teachers had beeninformed that they needed to send in a copy of their students' work Subsequently,the researcher went through each teacher's papers, identifying those with a lot of

comments, and then chose ten at random This would give the research sufficientdata The study used a combination of purposive and random sampling techniques,in accordance with its goals Papers with few comments, from students who couldwrite reasonably well, were not included so as to provide enough data for analysis

3.6 Data analysis procedures

3.6.1 Data from interviews

To analyze the data obtained from interviews, the researcher initiallytranscribed the recordings and translated the transcripts into English Thematicanalysis was then employed Thematic analysis is a method that involves"identifying and analyzing patterns of meaning in a dataset (i.e., texts)" (Braun &

24

Clarke, 2006, cited in Neuendorf, 2019, p 213) There are two main reasons for thechoice of thematic analysis Firstly, it offers a more accessible form of analysis,particularly beneficial for those new to qualitative research, simplifying the data

analysis process Secondly, thematic analysis is suitable for investigating andcomparing diverse perspectives among participants and uncovering unexpectedinsights, making it a valuable tool for gaining a comprehensive understanding ofEFL teachers’ beliefs in addressing the research objectives

Thematic analysis can be conducted following either inductive (in whichthemes, codes and categories emerge from the data) or deductive (in which themes,codes and categories are analyzed in alignment with theory or existing knowledge)(Braun & Clarke, 2006)

To enhance the depth of analysis, deductive manner was employed in thisstudy A deductive approach served as the initial framework, allowing for theanalysis of data based on pre-existing themes in the literature However, otherunexpected themes arising from the data should be considered to better grasp thephenomenon under study

The analysis of the data followed a six-stage model proposed by Braun andClarke (2006) and included the following steps:

Step 1: Preparing the data: The researcher transcribed the data and translatedthe interviewees’ responses into English, ensuring the accuracy of the translations

Step 2: Familiarizing with the data: After transcribing and translating thedata, the researcher thoroughly read and re-read the transcripts to identify potentialthemes and patterns within the qualitative data This process also involved notinginitial ideas and relevant items pertaining to the research question, forming the

foundation for subsequent analysis

Step 3: Generating initial codes: In this stage, the researcher identified andrelevant data within each transcript with descriptive codes The codes captured themeaning of specific data groups, following the criteria outlined by Braun and Clarke

(2016) to avoid overlooking valuable information

Step 4: Searching for themes and reviewing themes: The researcher analyzed

25

the coded data to identify similarities among them which lead to some potentialthemes These themes were then refined and categorized, with some themes beingcombined, separated, or removed based on their relevance to addressing theresearch questions.

Step 5: Defining and naming themes: In this stage, themes were furtherrefined and defined with appropriate names

Step 6: Producing the report: The researcher prepared a comprehensivereport, presenting an analytic narrative and supporting evidence for the identified

themes, and connecting the analysis to the existing literature.3.6.2 Data from feedback on students’ writing

In accordance with Hyland (2003), every incidence of feedback in the text,including in-text remarks, marginal notes, and endnote remarks, was recognized asa feedback point Any written interaction by teachers was defined as a feedbackpoint (Hyland, 2003), and meaningful units were used for analysis (Cheng andZhang, 2021; Yu & Lee, 2014) The themes that guided the categorization of these

feedback points included focus, strategy, and scope

First, the usage of direct correction, indirect indicators (such as highlighting,underlining, or circling errors), and indirect remarks from teachers were examinedfor each of the specified feedback points based on recommendations from earlierresearch (Sheen, 2011; as cited in Cheng, Zhang, & Yan, 2021; Buchtener & Ferris,

2012) The feedback coding system was proposed by Cheng, Zhang, and Yan in2021

Table 2The coding scheme for feedback focusFocus Subcategory ExampleLanguage Grammar and * Writing letters have

vocabulary some benefits for us

Content Clarity, adequacy » The meaning of this

and relevance sentence is unclear

¢ Add another reasonhere

* This reason youmentioned is notrelevant to

the topic

Organization The overall * There is no topic

structure, cohesion, sentence in thiscoherence and paragraph

paragraphing » Add ‘because’ hereNote From “Exploring teacher written feedback in EFL writing classrooms:

Beliefs and practices in interaction,” by X Cheng, J Zhang and Q Yan,2021, Language Teaching Research, 0(0) p

12 (https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211057665) Copyright 2021 by Sage

Each feedback point was then further categorized utilizing the distinctionbetween local (Grammar and Vocabulary) and global (Content and Organization)aspects developed by Montgomery and Baker (2007), Storch and Tapper (2000),and Alkhatib (2015)

Inspired by previous studies (Montgomery & Baker, 2007, Storch & Tapper,2000 & Alkhatib, 2015) Cheng, Zhang and Yan (2021) proposed the codingscheme for feedback strategies

Table 3Realizations of direct and indirect written feedback

Strategies Realizations Examples

Local feedback:Direct feedback 1 presenting the correct * In today’s society, people

answers directly prefer use cell phones 2 crossing out the redundant (using)

27