Written corrective feedback from sociocultural theoretical perspectives: A research agenda

Language Teaching

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2018, Pages 262-277

  Storch, Neomy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85044054306     PISSN: 02614448     EISSN: 14753049     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0261444818000034     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Al Shahrani, A. & N. Storch (2014). Investigating teachers' written corrective feedback practices in a Saudi EFL context: How do they align with their beliefs, institutional guidelines, and students' preferences Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 37.1, 101-122.
2. Aljaafreh, A. & J. P. Lantolf (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal 78.4, 465-483.
3. Basturkmen, H., M. East & J. Bitchener (2014). Supervisors' on-script feedback comments on drafts of dissertations: socialising students into the academic discourse community. Teaching in Higher Education 19.4, 432-445.
4. Bitchener, J. & N. Storch (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Bristol:MultilingualMatters.
5. Bitchener, J., S. Young & D. Cameron (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 14.3, 191-205.
6. Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 12.3, 267-296.
7. Chang, C. F. (2012). Peer review via three modes in an EFL writing course. Computers and Composition 29.1, 63-78.
8. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
9. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work 14.1, 133-156.
10. Erlam, R., R. Ellis & R. Batstone (2013). Oral corrective feedback on L2 writing: Two approaches compared. System 41.2 257-268.
11. Evans, N., J. Hartshorn & E. Tuioti (2010). Written corrective feedback: Practitioners' perspectives. International Journal of English Studies 10.2, 47-77.
12. Goldstein, L. (2001). ForKyla:What does the research say about responding to ESL writers? In T. Silva & P. Matsuda (eds.), On second language writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 73-90.
13. Goldstein, L. M. (2006). Feedback and revision in second language writing: Contextual, teacher, and student variables. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 185-205.
14. Guardado, M. & L. Shi (2007). ESL students' experiences of online peer feedback. Computers and Composition 24.4, 443-461.
15. Han, Y. & F. Hyland (2015). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing 30.1, 31-44.
16. Heift, T. & M. Schulze (2007). Errors and intelligence in computer assisted language learning. Parsers and pedagogies. New York/London: Routledge.
17. Heift, T. & M. Schulze (2015). Tutorial computer-assisted language learning. Language Teaching 48.4, 471-490.
18. Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing 7.3, 255-286.
19. Hyland, K. & F. Hyland (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching 39.1, 83-101.
20. Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (ed.), 1-26.
21. Lantolf, J. P. (ed.) (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Lantolf, J. P. & A. Aljaafreh (1995). Second language learning in the zone of proximal development: A revolutionary experience. International Journal of Educational Research 23.7, 619-623.
23. Lantolf, J. P. & M. E. Poehner (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperatives in L2 education. Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. New York: Routledge.
24. Lantolf, J. P. & S. L. Thorne (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of L2 development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics 27.4, 590-619.
26. Lee, G. & D. Schallert (2008). 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 17.3, 165-182.
27. Lee, I. (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing 17.1, 144-164.
28. Lee, I. (2014). Revising teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly 48.1, 201-2013.
29. Leont'ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
30. Leont'ev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V.Wertsch (ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 37-71.
31. Liu, J. & R.W. Sadler (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2.3, 193-227.
32. Morton, J., C. Thompson & N. Storch (2014). Feedback in the supervision of postgraduate students: Insights from the work of Vygotsky and Bakhtin. Journal of Academic Language and Learning 8.1, 24-36.
33. Nassaji, H. & M. Swain (2000). A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness 9.1, 34-51.
34. Pallotti, G. (2009). CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics 30.4, 590-601.
35. Poehner, M. E. (2009). Dynamic assessment as a dialectic framework for classroom activity: Evidence from second language (L2) learners. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology 8.3, 252-268.
36. Poehner, M. E. & J. P. Lantolf (2013). Bringing the ZPD into the equation: Capturing L2 development during computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA). Language Teaching Research 17.3, 323-342.
37. Polio, C. (1997).Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Language Learning 47.1, 101-143.
38. Qi, D. S. & S. Lapkin (2001). Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task. Journal of Second Language Writing 10.4, 277-303.
39. Sachs, R. & C. Polio (2007). Learners' uses of two types of written feedback on a L2 writing revision task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29.1, 67-100.
40. Schulze, M. & B. Smith (2015). In theory-we could be better. Editorial. CALICO Journal 32.1, i-vi.
41. Stevenson, M. & A. Phakiti (2014). The effects of computer-generated feedback on the quality of writing. Assessing Writing 19.1, 51-65.
42. Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback. International Journal of English Studies 10.2, 29-46.
43. Storch, N. & G. Wigglesworth (2010a). Learners' processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing: Case studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32.2, 303-334.
44. Storch, N. & G. Wigglesworth (2010b). Students' engagement with feedback on writing: The role of learner agency/beliefs. In R. Batstone (ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 166-185.
45. Sullivan, P. (2000). Playfulness as mediation in communicative language teaching in a Vietnamese classroom. In J. P. Lantolf (ed.), 115-132.
46. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (ed.), 97-114.
47. Swain, M. (2006). Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced language proficiency. In H. Byrnes (ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. London: Continuum, 95-108.
48. Swain, M., P. Kinnear & L. Steinman (2015). Sociocultural theory in second language education: An introduction through narratives (2nd edn.). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
49. Thorne, S. (2004). Cultural historical activity theory and the object of innovation. InO. St John, K. van Esch & E. Schalkwijk (eds.), New insights into foreign language learning and teaching. Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang, 51-70.
50. Van Beuningen, C. G., N. H. De Jong & F. Kuiken (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners' written accuracy. ITL-Review of Applied Linguistics 156, 279-296.
51. Van Beuningen, C. G., N. H. De Jong & F. Kuiken (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning 62.1, 1-41.
52. van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotis of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
53. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54. Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of highermental functions. In J. V.Wertsch (ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 144-188.
55. Wood, D., J. S. Bruner & G. Ross (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 17.2, 89-100.