A reflection on 'the language learning potential' of written CF

Journal of Second Language Writing

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 348-363

  Bitchener, John ^a  

^a AUCKLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

L2 development; L2 learning acquisition; Potential of written CF; Written CF research; Written CF theoretical perspectives

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871766066     PISSN: 10603743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.006     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Aljaafreh A., Lantolf J.P. Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal 1994, 78:465-483.
2. Anderson J. The architecture of cognition 1983, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
3. Anderson J. Cognitive psychology and its implications 1985, Freeman, New York, NY. 2nd ed.
4. Ashwell T. Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method?. Journal of Second Language Writing 2000, 9:227-258.
5. Bitchener J. Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 2008, 17:102-118.
6. Bitchener J., Ferris D.R. Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing 2012, Routledge, New York.
7. Bitchener J., Knoch U. The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research 2008, 12:409-431.
8. Bitchener J., Knoch U. The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics 2010, 31:193-214.
9. Bitchener J., Knoch U. Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 2010, 19:207-217.
10. Bitchener J., Young S., Cameron D. The effective of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 2005, 14:191-205.
11. Chandler J. The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 2003, 12:267-296.
12. Coughlan P., Duff P.A. Same task, different activities: Analysis of an SLA task from an activity theory perspective. Vygotskian approaches to second language research 1994, 173-194. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ. J.P. Lantolf, G. Appel (Eds.).
13. DeKeyser R.M. Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1997, 19:195-222.
14. Ellis N.C. Implicit and explicit SLA and their interface. Implicit and explicit language learning 2011, 35-47. Georgetown University press, Washington, DC. C. Sanz, R. Leow (Eds.).
15. Ellis R. SLA research and language teaching 1997, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
16. Ellis R. The study of second language acquisition 2008, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
17. Ellis R., Sheen Y., Murakami M., Takashima H. The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System 2008, 36:353-371.
18. Fathman A., Whalley E. Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom 1990, 178-190. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. B. Kroll (Ed.).
19. Ferris D.R. The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly 1997, 31:315-339.
20. Ferris D.R. The case of grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing 1999, 8(1):1-11.
21. Ferris D.R. Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues 2006, 81-104. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. K. Hyland, F. Hyland (Eds.).
22. Ferris D.R., Roberts B.J. Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be. Journal of Second Language Writing 2001, 10:161-184.
23. Frantzen D. The effects of grammar supplementation on written accuracy in an intermediate Spanish content course. The Modern Language Journal 1995, 79(3):329-344.
24. Given L., Schallert D. Meeting in the margins: Effects of the teacher-student relationship on revision processes of EFL college students taking a composition course. Journal of Second Language Writing 2008, 17:165-182.
25. Guenette D. Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 2007, 16(1):40-53.
26. Hedgcock J., Lefkowitz N. Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 1994, 3:141-163.
27. Hendricksen J.M. Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research and practice. Modern Language Journal 1978, 62:387-398.
28. Hendricksen J.M. The treatment of error in written work. Modern Language Journal 1980, 64:216-221.
29. Hyland F. The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing 1998, 7:255-286.
30. Hyland F. ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research 2000, 4:33-54.
31. Hyland F. Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System 2003, 31:217-230.
32. Kepner C.G. An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. Modern Language Journal 1991, 75:305-313.
33. Kormos J. The role of individual differences in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 2012, 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.003.
34. Krashen S.D. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications 1985, Longman, London.
35. Lalande J.F.I.I. Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal 1982, 66:140-149.
36. Lantolf J.P., Thorne S. Sociocultural theory. Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction 2007, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. B. Van Patten, J. Williams (Eds.).
37. Long M.H. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. Handbook of second language acquisition 1996, Academic Press, San Diego, CA. W. Ritchie, T. Bhatia (Eds.).
38. Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language 2011, John Benjamins Publishing Company. R. Manchon (Ed.).
39. L2 writing development: Multiple perspectives 2012, Walter de Gruyter, Inc, Boston. R. Manchon (Ed.).
40. McLaughlin B. Theories of second language learning 1987, Edward Arnold, London.
41. McLaughlin B. Restructuring. Applied Linguistics 1990, 11:113-128.
42. Nassaji H., Swain M. A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness 2000, 9(1):34-51. 10.1080/09658410008667135.
43. Pienemann M. Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics 1989, 10:52-79.
44. Polio C. The relevance of second language acquisition theory to written error correction debate. Journal of Second Language Writing 2012, 21:375-389.
45. Polio C., Fleck C., Leder N. 'If only I had more time': ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing 1998, 7:43-68.
46. Reid J. " Eye" learners and " ear" learners: Identifying the language needs of international students and U.S. resident writers. Grammar in the composition classroom: Essays on teaching ESL for college-bound students 1998, 3-17. Heinle & Heinle, Boston. P. Byrd, J.M. Reid (Eds.).
47. Robb T., Ross S., Shortreed I. Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly 1986, 20:83-93.
48. Roberts, B. (1999). Can error logs raise more than consciousness? The effects of error logs and grammar feedback on ESL students' final drafts. Unpublished master's thesis, California State University, Sacramento.
49. Robinson P. Attention, memory and the " noticing" hypothesis. Language Learning 1995, 45:283-331.
50. Robinson P. Attention and memory during SLA. Handbook of second language acquisition 2003, Blackwell, Malden, Mass. C. Doughty, M. Long (Eds.).
51. Schmidt R. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 1990, 11:129-158.
52. Schmidt R. Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review 1994, 11:11-26.
53. Schmidt R. Attention. Cognition and second language instruction 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. P. Robinson (Ed.).
54. Semke H. The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals 1984, 17:195-202.
55. Sharwood Smith M. Consciousness raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics 1981, 2:159-169.
56. Sharwood Smith M. Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical base. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1993, 15:165-179.
57. Sheen Y. The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 2007, 41:255-283.
58. Sheen Y. Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning 2011, Springer, New York.
59. Sheen Y., Wright D., Moldawa A. Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System 2009, 37(4):556-569.
60. Sheppard K. Two feedback types: Do they make a difference?. RELC Journal 1992, 23:103-110.
61. Storch N., Wigglesworth G. Learners' processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing: Case studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2010, 32(2):303-334.
62. Swain M. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. Input in second language acquisition 1985, 235-253. Newbury House, Rowley, MA. S.M. Gass, C.G. Madden (Eds.).
63. Swain M. Three functions of output in second language learning. Principles and practice in the study of language: Studies in honour of H. G Widdowson 1995, Oxford University Press, Oxford. G. Cook, B. Seidlhofer (Eds.).
64. Swain M. Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced language proficiency. Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky 2006, 95-108. Continuum, New York. H. Byrnes (Ed.).
65. Swain M., Brooks L., Tocalli-Beller A. Peer-peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 2002, 22:171-185.
66. Swain M., Lapkin S. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal 1998, 82:320-337.
67. Swain M., Lapkin S. Talking it through: Two French immersion learners' response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research 2002, 37:285-304.
68. Truscott J. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 1996, 46:327-369.
69. Truscott J. The case for " the case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes": A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing 1999, 8:111-122.
70. Truscott J. Evidence and conjecture: A response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing 2004, 13:337-343.
71. Truscott J. The effect of error correction on learners' ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing 2007, 16:255-272.
72. Truscott J., Hsu A.Y.-P. Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing 2008, 17:292-305.
73. Van Beuningan C., de Jong N.H., Kuiken F. The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners' written accuracy. ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics 2008, 156:279-296.
74. Van Beuningan C., de Jong N.H., Kuiken F. Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in Dutch multilingual classroom. Language Learning 2012, 62:1-41.
75. Van Patten B. Input-processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition 1996, Ablex, Norwood, NJ.
76. Van Patten B. Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary 2004, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
77. Xu C. Overgeneralization from a narrow focus: A response to Ellis et al. (2008) and Bitchener (2008). Journal of Second Language Writing 2009, 18(4):270-275.