VOlUME 06 ISSUE 01 JANUARY 2023
Siwaporn Singhkum
Udon Thani Rajabhat University
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i1-05Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
In the era of technological globalization, educators are encouraged to incorporate online synchronous communication (e.g., chatting) and statistical approaches (e.g., error-identification automatic annotator) into the writing curriculum (Hosseini, 2012; Li, Link, & Hegelheimer, 2014). Electronic feedback is playing an increasingly vital part in modern writing instruction. It improves learners' revision and reduces teachers' workloads associated with error correction and delivering insightful comments. However, the deficiencies of e-feedback have been noted by both learner and instructor roles (Li, Link, & Hegelheimer, 2014). This paper is to review relevant studies on how electronic corrective feedback facilitates writing instruction in the classroom.
REFERENCES
1) Abuseileek, A. F., & Abualsha, A. (2014). Using peer computer-mediated corrective feedback to support EFL learners' writing. Language Learning & Technology, 18(1), 76-95.
2) Alipanahi, F., & Mahmoodi, R. (2015). Corrective feedback via e-mail on the correct use of past tense among Iranian EFL learners. South African Journal of Education, 35(4), 1-19.
3) Allah, L. F. (2008). Electronic feedback: Is it beneficial for second language writers?. Teaching English with Technology, 8(3), 1-10.
4) Almasi, E., & Tabrizi, A. (2016). The effects of direct vs. indirect corrective feedback on iranian EFL learners' writing accuracy. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3 (1), 74-85.
5) Al-Olimat, A. A., & Abuseileek, A. F. (2015). Using computer-mediated corrective feedback modes in developing students' writing performance. Teaching English with Technology, 15(3), 3-30.
6) Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Corrective Feedback and the Correct Use of Preposition: Is It Really Effective?. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 13(4), 95-111.
7) Beuningen, C. V., (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1-27.
8) Chiu, C., & Savignon, S. J. (2006). Writing to mean computer-mediated feedback in online tutoring of multidraft compositions. CALICO Journal, 24(1), 97-114.
9) Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of peer e-feedback on Turkish EFL students’ writing performance. J. Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61-84.
10) Dikli, S. (2010). The Nature of Automated Essay Scoring Feedback. CALICO Journal, 28(1), 99-134.
11) Ebyary, K. E., & Windeatt, S. (2010). The impact of computer-based feedback on students’ written work. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 121-142.
12) Ene, E. (2014). Learner uptake of teacher electronic feedback in ESL composition. System, 46, 80-95.
13) Grami, G. M. A. (2012). Online collective writing for ESL learners using blogs and feedback checklist. English Language Teaching, 5(10), 43-48.
14) Guardado, M., & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback. Computer and Composition, 24(2007), 443-461.
15) Heift, T. (2010). Prompting in CALL: A longitudinal study of learner uptake. The Modern Language Journal, 94(2), 198-216.
16) Hosseini, S. B. (2012). Asynchronous computer-mediated corrective feedback and the correct use of prepositions: Is it really effective?. Turkish online journal of distance education, 13(4), 95-111.
17) Huang, H. C. (2016). Students and teacher’s perception on incorporating the blog task and peer feedback into EFL writing classes through blogs. English Language Teaching, 9(11), 38-47.
18) Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). Introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284.
19) Lavolette, E., Polio, C., & Kahng, J. (2015). The accuracy of computer-assisted feedback and students responses to it. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2), 50-68.
20) Li, J., Link, S., & Hegelheimer, V. (2014). Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation feedback in ESL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27(2015), 1-18.
21) Liu, X., Liu, S., Lee, S.-h., & Magjuka, R. J. (2010). Cultural Differences in Online Learning: International Student Perceptions. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 177–188.
22) Saadi, Z. K., & Saadat, M. (2015). EFL learners’ writing accuracy: Effects of direct and metalinguistic electronic feedback. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(10), 2053-2063.
23) Saeed, M. A., & Ghazali, K. (2016). Modeling peer revision among EFL learners in an online learning community. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 13(2), 275-292.
24) Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.
25) Seiffedin, A. H., & El-Sakka, S. M. F. (2017). The impact of direct-indirect corrective e-feedback on EFL Students writing accuracy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(3), 166-175.
26) 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.
27) Tafazoli, D., Nosratzadeh, H., & Hosseini, N. (2014). Computer-mediated corrective feedback in ESP courses: Reducing grammatical errors via email. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136(2014), 355-359.
28) Vurdien, R. (2012). Enhancing writing skills through blogs in an EFL class. The Call Triangle: Student, Teacher and Institution, 1-4.
29) Ware, P. (2011). Computer-generated feedback on student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 45(4), 769-774.
30) Yeh, S., & Lo, J. (2009). Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback. Computer & Education, 52(2009), 882-892.
31) Yusof, J., Manan, N. A. A., & Alias, A.A. (2012). Guided peer feedback on academic writing tasks using Facebook notes: An exploratory study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67(2012), 216-228.