THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FEEDBACK FOR L1-ENGLISH AND L2-WRITING DEVELOPMENT: A META-ANALYSIS

ETS Research Report Series

Volumn 2011, Issue 1, 2011, Pages i-99

  Biber, Douglas ^a   Nekrasova, Tatiana ^a   Horn, Brad ^a  

^a NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

commenting; error analysis; feedback; meta analysis; writing development

Indexed keywords

EID: 85125609950     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23308516     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/j.2333-8504.2011.tb02241.x     Document Type: Article

References (324)

1. Ashwell, T. (2000). 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, 9, 227–257.
2. Becker, L. A. (1999). Effect size calculator [Computer software]. Available at http://web.uccs.edu/lbecker/Psy590/escalc3.htm.
3. Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 215–241.
4. Bitchner, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 191–205.
5. Brakel-Olson, V. L. (1990). The revising processes of sixth-grade writers with and without peer feedback. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 22–29.
6. *Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error correction for improvement of the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267–296.
7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. DiPardo, A., & Freedman, S. W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretical foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58, 119–149.
9. Dunlap, W. P., Cortina, J. M., Vaslow, J. B., & Burke, M. J. (1996). Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychological Methods, 1, 170–177.
10. Ferris, D. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33–53.
11. Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1–10.
12. Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. 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, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14. Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161–184.
15. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445–476.
16. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
17. *Hillocks, G. (1982). The interaction of instruction, teacher comment, and revision in teaching the composing process. Research in the Teaching of English, 16, 261–277.
18. Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31, 217–230.
19. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Interpersonal aspects of response: Constructing and interpreting teacher written feedback. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 206–224). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20. Leki, I. (2006). “You cannot ignore”: Graduate L2 students' experience of and response to written feedback practices within their disciplines. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 266–285). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. McGroarty, M. E., & Zhu, W. (1997). Triangulation in classroom research: A study of peer revision. Language Learning, 47, 1–43.
23. Min, H.-T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118–141.
24. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
25. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2006). Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
26. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2007). The future of research synthesis in applied linguistics: Beyond art or science. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 805–815.
27. Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83–93.
28. Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R. L., & Rubin, D. B. (2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners' ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255–272.
30. Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 147–170.
31. Woods, A., Fletcher, P., & Hughes, A. (1986). Statistics in language studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
32. Allal, L., Lopez, L. M., Lehraus, K., & Forget, A. (2005). Whole-class and peer interaction in an activity of writing and revision. In T. Kostouli (Ed.), Writing in context(s): Textual practices and writing processes in sociocultural settings (pp. 69–91). New York, NY: Springer.
33. Allwright, R. L., Woodley, M-P., & Allwright, J. M. (1988). Investigating reformulation as a practical strategy for the teaching of academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 9, 236–256.
34. Anderson, K., Benson, C., & Lynch, T. (2001). Feedback on writing: Attitudes and uptake. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED463672).
35. Andrade, H. & Boulay, B. (2003). Role of rubric-referenced self-assessment in learning to write. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 21–34.
36. Anson, C. M. (2000). Response and the social construction of error. Assessing Writing, 7, 5–21.
37. Artemeva, A., & Logie, S. (2002). Engineering students to intellectual teamwork: The teaching and practice of peer feedback in the professional communication classroom. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 6(1). Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/llad/v6n1/artemeva.pdf.
38. *Ashwell, T. (2000). 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, 9, 227–257.
39. Atari, O. F., & Triki, M. A. (2000). The formal features of oral and literate strategies of communication: Their implications for EFL writing revision. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 95–107.
40. Bailey, J., & Vardi, I. (1999). Iterative feedback: Impacts on student writing. Paper presented at the HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
41. Bardine, B., Bardine, M., & Deegan, E. (2000). Beyond the red pen: Clarifying our role in the response process. English Journal, 90(1), 94–101.
42. Beach, R. (1976). Self-evaluation strategies of extensive revisers and non-revisers. College Composition and Communication, 27, 160–164.
43. Beach, R. (1979). The effects of between-draft teacher evaluation versus student self-evaluation on high school students' revising of rough drafts. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 111–119.
44. Beason, L. (1993). Feedback and revision in writing across the curriculum classes. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 395–421.
45. Belcher, D. (1990). Peer vs. teacher response in the advanced composition class. Issues in Writing, 2, 128–150.
46. Belcher, D. (1994). The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: Graduate students and their mentors. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 23–34.
47. *Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 215–241.
48. Bernhardt, S. A. (1988). Text revisions by basic writers: Impromptu first draft to take-home revision. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 266–280.
49. *Bitchner, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 191–205.
50. Blain, S. (2001). Study of verbal peer feedback on the improvement of the quality of writing and the transfer of knowledge in francophone students in grade 4 living in a minority situation in Canada. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 14(1), 156–170.
51. Bolt, P. (1992). An evaluation of grammar-checking programs as self-help learning aids for learners of English as a foreign language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 5, 49–91.
52. Braine, G. (1997). Beyond word processing: Networked computers in ESL writing classes. Computers and Composition, 14, 45–58.
53. *Brakel Olson, V. L. (1990). The revising processes of sixth-grade writers with and without peer feedback. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 22–29.
54. Brice, C. (1995). ESL writers' reactions to teacher commentary: A case study. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED394312)
55. Bridwell, L. S. (1980). Revising strategies in twelfth grade students' transactional writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 14, 197–222.
56. Brown, A. (2005). Self-assessment of writing in independent language learning programs: The value of annotated samples. Assessing Writing, 10, 174–191.
57. Burston, J. (2001). Computer-mediated feedback in composition correction. CALICO Journal, 19(1), 37–50.
58. Caffarella, R., & Barnett, B. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39–52.
59. Callahan, S. (2000). Responding to the invisible student. Assessing Writing, 7, 57–77.
60. *Cardelle, M., & Corno, L. (1981). Effects on second language learning of variations in written feedback on homework assignments. TESOL Quarterly, 15, 251–261.
61. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1994). Writing groups: Cross-cultural issues. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 17–30.
62. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 1–19.
63. Caulk, N. (1994). Comparing teacher and student responses to written work. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 181–187.
64. 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, 267–296.
65. Chandler, J. (2004). A response to Truscott. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 345–348.
66. Chandrasegeran, A. (1986). An exploratory study of EFL student revision and self-correction skills. RELC Journal, 17(2), 26–40.
67. Chandrasegeran, A., & Ellis, M. (2005). Essay assist—Developing software for writing skills improvement in partnership with students. RELC Journal, 36, 137–155.
68. Charles, M. (1990). Responding to problems in written English using a student self-monitoring technique. ELT Journal, 44(4), 286–293.
69. Chaudron, C. (1984). The effects of feedback on students' composition revisions. RELC Journal, 15(2), 1–15.
70. Chen, J. F. (1997). Computer generated error feedback and writing process: A link. TESL-EJ, 2(3), 1–19.
71. Chi, F-M. (1999). The writer, the teacher, and the text: examples from Taiwanese EFL college students. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED442272).
72. Chiu, C-Y., & Savignon, S. J. (2006). Writing to mean: Computer-mediated feedback in online tutoring of multidraft compositions. CALICO Journal, 24, 97–114.
73. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48. 409–426.
74. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23, 260–294.
75. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Wilson, R. W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 891–901.
76. Clare, L., Valdes, R., & Patthey-Chavez, G. (2000). Learning to write in urban elementary and middle schools: An investigation of teachers' written feedback on student compositions. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED446207).
77. Cohen, A. D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 57–69). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
78. Cohen, A. D., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (1990). Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 155–177). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
79. Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 257–276.
80. Connors, R. J., & Lunsford, A. (1988). Frequency of formal errors in current college writing, or Ma and Pa Kettle do research. College Composition and Communication, 39(4), 395–409.
81. Connors, R. J., & Lunsford, A. (1993). Teachers' rhetorical comments on student papers. College Composition and Communication, 44, 200–23.
82. Crank, V. (2002). Asynchronous electronic peer response in a hybrid basic writing classroom. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 30, 145–155.
83. Crehan, K., & Curfman, M. (1999). The effect on performance of rapid feedback on state writing assessments. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED435629).
84. Cresswell, A. (2000). Self-monitoring in student writing: Developing learner responsibility. ELT Journal, 54, 235–244.
85. Dalgish, G. (1991). Computer-assisted error analysis and courseware design: Applications for ESL in the Swedish context. CALICO Journal, 9(2), 39–56.
86. *Davis, W., & Fulton, J. (1997). The effects of professors' feedback on the growth of students' overall writing quality in two college freshman English courses. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED414570).
87. *Davis, W., & Mahoney, K. (1999). The effects of computer skills and feedback on the gains in students' overall writing quality in college freshman composition courses. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED435097).
88. De Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (1994). Social-cognitive dimensions of interaction in L2 peer revision. Modern Language Journal, 78, 484–496.
89. De Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Scaffolding in L2 peer revision. Modern Language Journal, 84, 51–68.
90. Dheram, P. K. (1995). Feedback as a two-bullock cart: A case study of teaching writing. ELT Journal, 49(2), 160–168.
91. Diab, R. L. (2005). Teachers' and students' beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canada Journal, 23, 28–43.
92. DiGiovanni, E., & Nagaswami, E. (2001). Online peer review: An alternative to face-to-face? ELT Journal, 55, 263–272.
93. DiPardo, A., & Freedman, S. W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretical foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58, 119–149.
94. Dodigovic, M. (2002). Developing writing skills with a cyber-coach. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 9–25.
95. Dohrer, G. (1991). Do teachers' comments on students' papers help? College Teaching, 39, 48–54.
96. Dwyer, H., & Sullivan, H. (1993). Student preferences for teacher and computer composition marking. Journal of Educational Research, 86(3), 137–141.
97. Enginarlar, H. (1993). Student response to teacher feedback in ESL writing. System, 21, 193–204.
98. Evans, K. A. (1997). Writing, response, and contexts of production or, Why it just wouldn't work to write about those bratty kids. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 2(1). Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/llad/v2n1/evans.pdf.
99. Eyres, S., Hatch, D., Turner, S., & West, M. (2001). Doctoral students' responses to writing critique: Message for teachers. Journal of Nursing Education, 40(4), 149–155.
100. Faigley, L., & Witte, E. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32, 400–414.
101. *Fathman, A., & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178–190). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
102. Fazio, L. L. (2001). The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority- and majority-language students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 235–249.
103. Ferris, D. R. (1995a). Can advanced ESL students be taught to correct their most serious and frequent errors? CATESOL Journal, 8(1), 41–62.
104. Ferris, D. R. (1995b). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33–53.
105. Ferris, D. R. (1995c). Teaching ESL composition students to become independent self-editors. TESOL Journal, 4(4), 18–22.
106. Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315–339.
107. Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1–11.
108. Ferris, D. R. (2001). Teaching writing for academic purposes. In Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 298–314). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
109. Ferris, D. R. (2004). The “Grammar Correction” debate in L2 Writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime …?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49–62.
110. *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. 81–105). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
111. Ferris, D. R., Pezone, S., Tade, C. R., & Tinti, S. (1997). Teacher commentary on student writing: Descriptions & implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6, 155–182.
112. *Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161–184.
113. Figueredo, L., & Varnhagen, C. K. (2006). Spelling and grammar checkers: Are they intrusive? British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 721–732.
114. Fitzgerald, J., & Stamm, C. (1990). Effects of group conferences on first graders' revision in writing. Written Communication, 7, 96–135.
115. Flower, L., Hayes, J. R., Carey, L., Schriver, K., & Stratman, J. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37, 16–55.
116. Frankenberg-Garcia, A. (1999). Providing student writers with pre-text feedback. ELT Journal, 53, 100–106.
117. Frantzen, D. (1995). The effects of grammar supplementation on written accuracy in an intermediate Spanish content course. Modern Language Journal, 79, 329–344.
118. Frantzen, D., & Rissel, D. (1987). Learner self-correction of written compositions: What does it show us? In B. VanPatten, T. R. Dvorak, & J. F. Lee (Eds.), Foreign language learning: A research perspective (pp. 92–107). Cambridge, England: Newbury House.
119. Franzke, M., Kintsch, E., Caccamise, D., & Dooley, S. (2005). Summary street: Computer support for comprehension and writing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(1), 53–80.
120. Gaskell, D., & Cobb, T. (2004). Can learners use concordance feedback for writing errors? System, 32, 301–319.
121. Goldstein, L. M. (2004). Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: Teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 63–80.
122. Goldstein, L. M., & Conrad, S. M. (1990). Student input and negotiation of meaning in ESL writing conferences. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 443–460.
123. Goodfellow, R., Lamy, M-N., Jones, G. (2002). Assessing learners' writing using lexical frequency. ReCALL, 14, 133–145.
124. Goodrich Andrade, H., & Boulay, B. A. (2003). Role of rubric-referenced self-assessment in learning to write. Journal of Educational Research, 97, 21–34.
125. Greenman, C. (2004). Coaching academic English through voice and text production models, ReCALL, 16, 51–70.
126. Guénette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 40–53.
127. Hacker, D. J., Plumb, C., Butterfield, E. C., Quathamer, D., & Heineken, E. (1994). Text revision: Detection and correction of errors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 65–78.
128. Hall, C. (1990). Managing the complexity of revising across language. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 43–60.
129. Hamid, M. O. (2007). Identifying second language errors: How plausible are plausible reconstructions? ELT Journal, 61, 107–116.
130. Hansen, J. G., & Liu, J. (2005). Guiding principles for effective peer response. ELT Journal, 59, 31–38.
131. Haswell, R. (2006). The complexities of responding to student writing; or, looking for shortcuts via the road of excess. Across the Disciplines, 3. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/articles/haswell2006.cfm.
132. Hayes, J. R., Flower, L., Schriver, K. A., Stratman, J. F., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics: Vol. 2. Reading, writing, and language learning (pp. 176–240). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
133. Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1992). Collaborative oral/aural revision in foreign language writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 255–276.
134. Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 141–163.
135. Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1996). Some input on input: Two analyses of student response to expert feedback in L2 writing. Modern Language Journal, 80, 287–308.
136. Heift, T. (2001). Error-specific and individualised feedback in a Web-based language tutoring system: Do they read it? ReCALL, 13, 99–109.
137. Heift, T. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in CALL. ReCALL, 16(2), 416–431.
138. Heift, T. (2006). Context-sensitive help in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19, 243–259.
139. Hendrickson, J. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching. Recent theory, research and practice. Modern Language Journal, 80, 387–398.
140. Hendrickson, J. (1980). The treatment of error in written work. Modern Language Journal, 82, 216–221.
141. Hewett, B. L. (2000). Characteristics of interactive oral and computer-mediated peer group talk and its influence on revision. Computers and Composition, 17, 265–288.
142. Hillocks, G. (1982). The interaction of instruction, teacher comment, and revision in teaching the composing process. Research in the Teaching of English, 16, 261–277.
143. Holdich, C. E., Holdich, R. G., & Chung, P. W. H. (2002). Assessing aspects of children's written grammar: Automating the process. Computers & Education, 39, 37–50.
144. Hopkins, S., & Youngs, E. (1988). A FAIR response to student writing. Computers and Composition, 5, 83–97.
145. Horner, B. (1992). Rethinking the “sociality” of error: Teaching editing as negotiation. Rhetoric Review, 11(1), 172–199.
146. Huang, S-Y. (2000a). The nature of an EFL teacher's audiotaped and written feedback on student writing: A case study. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED438728)
147. Huang, S-Y. (2000b). A quantitative analysis of audiotaped and written feedback produced for students' writing and students' perceptions of the two feedback methods. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED448604).
148. Hunter, D., Mayenga, C., & Gambell, T. (2006). Classroom assessment tools and uses: Canadian English teachers' practices for writing. Assessing Writing, 11, 42–65.
149. Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 255–286.
150. Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4, 33–54.
151. Hyland, F. (2001a). Dealing with plagiarism when giving feedback. ELT Journal, 55, 375–381.
152. Hyland, F. (2001b). Teacher management of writing workshops: Two case studies. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 272–294.
153. Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31, 217–230.
154. Hyland, F., & Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 185–212.
155. Hyland, K. (1990). Providing productive feedback. ELT Journal, 44(4), 279–285.
156. Hyland, K., & Anan, E. (2006). Teachers' perceptions of error: The effects of first language and experience. System, 34, 509–519.
157. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101.
158. Jacobs, G. (1987). First experiences with peer feedback on compositions: Student and teacher reaction. System, 15, 325–333.
159. Jacobs, G. (1989). Miscorrection in peer feedback in writing class. RELC Journal, 20(1), 68–75.
160. Jacobs, G. M., Curtis, A., Braine, G., & Huang, S.-Y. (1998). Feedback on student writing: Taking the middle path. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 307–317.
161. Jansen, C. J. M., Steehouder, M. F., Pilot, A., Schrauwen, D., & Looijmans, P. J. M. (1986). ALEXIS: Computer-assisted feedback on written assignments. Computers and Composition, 4(1), 32–45.
162. Jeffery, F., & Selting, B. (1999). Reading the invisible ink: Assessing the responses of non-composition faculty. Assessing Writing, 6, 179–197.
163. Johanson, R. (1999). Rethinking the red ink: audio-feedback in the ESL writing classroom. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED467865).
164. Johnson, D. M. (1992). Interpersonal involvement in discourse: Gender variation in L2 writers' complimenting strategies. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 195–215.
165. Jones, I. (1998). The effect of computer-generated spoken feedback on kindergarten students' written narratives. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education 9(1), 43–56.
166. *Kamimura, T. (2006). Effects of peer feedback on ESL student writers at different levels of proficiency: A Japanese context. TESL Canada Journal, 23(2), 12–39.
167. Kastman Breuch, L. M., & Racine, S. J. (2000). Developing sound tutor training for online writing centers: Creating productive peer reviewers. Computers and Composition, 17, 245–263.
168. Keh, C. L. (1990). Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation. ELT Journal, 44(4), 294–304.
169. Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. Modern Language Journal, 75, 305–313.
170. Kiefer, K., & Neufeld, J. (2002). Making the most of response: Reconciling coaching and evaluating roles for teachers across the curriculum. Academic Writing, 3. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/aw/articles/kiefer_neufeld_2002.pdf.
171. Kim, L. (2004). Online technologies for teaching writing: Students react to teacher response in voice and written modalities. Research in the Teaching of English, 38(3), 304–337.
172. Knutsson, O., Pargman, T. C., Eklundh, K. S., & Westlund, S. (in press). Designing and developing a language environment for second language writers. Computers & Education.
173. Kouritzin, S. G., & Vizard, C. (1999). Feedback on feedback: Preservice ESL teachers respond to evaluation practices. TESL Canada Journal, 17(1). 16–39.
174. Kubota, M. (2001). Error correction strategies used by learners of Japanese when revising a writing task. System, 29, 467–480.
175. Kumari Dheram, P. (1995). Feedback as a two-bullock cart: A case study of teaching writing. ELT Journal, 49(2), 160–168.
176. Lai, P. C. (1986). The revision processes of first-year students at the National University of Singapore. RELC Journal, 17, 71–84.
177. *Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66, 140–149.
178. Lane, T., & Potter, B. (1998). Teaching collaborative feedback strategies in intermediate writing. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED427530).
179. *Lee, I. (1997). ESL learners' performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for teaching. System, 25, 465–477.
180. Lee, I. (2003). L2 writing teachers' perspectives, practices and problems regarding error feedback. Assessing Writing, 8, 216–237.
181. Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 285–312.
182. Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, 22(2), 1–16.
183. Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 57–68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
184. Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 23, 203–218.
185. Leppänen, S., & Kalaja, P. (1995). Experimenting with computer conferencing in English for Academic Purposes. ELT Journal, 49(1), 26–36.
186. Levine, A., Oded, B., Connor, U., & Asons, I. (2002). Variation in EFL-ESL peer response. TESL-EJ, 6(3), 1–18.
187. Lin, D. (2001). How mind works to revise compositions. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 472654).
188. Lindgren, E. (2004). The uptake of peer-based intervention in the writing classroom. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) & G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Vol. Eds.), Studies in writing, 14, (pp. 259–274). Norwell, MA: Springer.
189. Liou, H.-C. (1992). An automatic text-analysis project for EFL writing revision. System, 20, 481–492.
190. Liu, J., & Sandler, R. W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes of L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 193–227.
191. Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1995). Analyzing talk in ESL peer response groups: Stances, functions, and content. Language Learning, 45, 605–655.
192. MacDonald, R. (1991). Developmental students' processing of teacher feedback in composition instruction. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED354965).
193. Mangelsdorf, K., & Schlumberger, A. (1992). ESL student response stances in a peer-review task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 235–254.
194. Mathison Fife, J., & O'Neill, P. (2001). Moving beyond the written comment: Narrowing the gap between response practice and research. College Composition and Communication, 53, 300–320.
195. *Matsumura, L. C., Patthey-Chavez, G. G., Valdes, R., & Garnier, H. (2002). Teacher feedback, writing assignment quality, and third-grade students' revision in lower- and higher-achieving urban schools. Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 3–22.
196. Matsumura, S., & Hann, G. (2004). Computer anxiety and students' preferred feedback methods in EFL writing. Modern Language Journal, 88, 403–415.
197. *McCutchen, D., Francis, M., & Kerr, S. (1997). Revising for meaning: Effects of knowledge and strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 667–676.
198. McCutchen, D., Hull, G. A., & Smith, W. L. (1987). Editing strategies and error correction in basic writing. Written Communication, 4, 139–152.
199. McGarrell, H., & Verbeem, J. (2007). Motivating revision of drafts through formative feedback. ELT Journal 61(3), 228–236.
200. *McGroarty, M. E., & Zhu, W. (1997). Triangulation in classroom research: A study of peer revision. Language Learning, 47, 1–43.
201. Medcalf, J., Glynn, T., & Moore, D. (2004). Peer tutoring in writing: A school systems approach. Educational Psychology in Practice, 20(2), 157–178.
202. Melby-Mauer, J. (2003). Using e-mail assignments and online correction in ESL instruction. TESOL Journal, 12(2), 37–38.
203. Mellen, C., & Sommers, J. (2003). Audiotaped response and the two-year-campus writing classroom: The two-sided desk, the “guy with the ax,” and the chirping birds. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 31(1), 25–39.
204. Mendonca, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 745–768.
205. Miao, Y., Badger, R., & Zhen, Y. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200.
206. Michaud, L. N., McCoy, K. F., & Pennington, C. A. (2000, November). An intelligent tutoring system for deaf learners of written English. Paper presented at Assets'00 Conference, Arlington, VA.
207. Min, H.-T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33, 293–308.
208. Min, H.-T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118–141.
209. Morris, L. A. (1998). Differences in men's and women's ESL writing at the junior college level: Consequence for research on feedback. Canadian Modern Language Review, 55, 219–238.
210. Muncie, J. (2000). Using written teacher feedback in EFL composition classes. ELT Journal, 54, 47–53.
211. Murphy, S. (2000). A sociocultural perspective on teacher response: Is there a student in the room? Assessing Writing, 7, 79–90.
212. Myers, S. (1997). Teaching writing as a process and teaching sentence-level syntax: Reformulation as ESL composition feedback. TESL-EJ, 2(4), 1–16.
213. Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. TESL-EJ, 6(2), 1–20.
214. Nagata, N. (1993). Intelligent computer feedback for second language instruction. Modern Language Journal, 77, 330–339.
215. Nelson, G. L., & Carson, J. G. (1998). ESL students' perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 113–131.
216. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1992). An L2 writing group: Task and social dimensions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 171–193.
217. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1993). Peer response groups: Do L2 writers use peer comments in revising their drafts? TESOL Quarterly, 27, 135–141.
218. Norton, L., & Norton, J. (2001). Essay feedback: How can it help students improve their academic writing? Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED454530).
219. *Olson, M., & Raffeld, P. (1987). The effects of written comments on the quality of student compositions and the learning of content. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 8, 273–293.
220. Patthey-Chavez, G. G., & Ferris, D. R. (1997). Writing conferences and the weaving of multi-voiced texts in college composition. Research in the Teaching of English, 31(1), 51–90.
221. Paulson, E. J., Alexander, J., & Armstrong, S. (2007). Peer review re-viewed: Investigating the juxtaposition of composition students' eye movements and peer-review processes. Research in the Teaching of English, 41(3), 304–335.
222. Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 265–289.
223. Peckham, I. (1996). If it ain't broke, why fix it?: Disruptive and constructive computer-mediated response group practices. Computers and Composition, 13, 327–339.
224. Pennington, M. C. (1993). A critical examination of word processing effects in relation to L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2, 227–255.
225. Perpignan, H. (2003). Exploring the written feedback dialogue: A research, learning and teaching practice. Language Teaching Research, 7, 259–278.
226. Peterson, S., Childs, R., & Kennedy, K. (2004). Written feedback and scoring of sixth-grade girls' and boys' narrative and persuasive writing. Assessing Writing, 9, 160–180.
227. Peterson, S. S., & Kennedy, K. (2006). Sixth-grade teachers' written comments on student writing: Genre and gender influences. Written Communication, 23, 36–62.
228. Phelps, L. W. (2000). Cyrano's nose: Variations on the theme of response. Assessing Writing, 7, 91–110.
229. Phinney, M., & Khouri, S. (1993). Computers, revision, and ESL writers: The role of experience. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2, 257–277.
230. *Polio, D., Fleck, C., & Leder, N. (1998). “If I only had more time:” ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 43–68.
231. Porte, G. (1997). The etiology of poor second language writing: The influence of perceived teacher preferences on second language revision strategies. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6, 61–78.
232. Porte, G. (2001). Losing sight of errors: The effects of typographical conditions on error salience in L2 proof-reading. System, 29, 137–148.
233. Porto, M. (2001). Cooperative writing response groups and self-evaluation. ELT Journal, 55, 38–46.
234. Powers, J. K., & Nelson, J. V. (1995). L2 writers and the writing center: A national survey of writing center conferencing at graduate institutions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 113–138.
235. Pujola, J-T. (2001). Did CALL feedback feed back? Researching learners' use of feedback. ReCALL, 13, 79–98.
236. Qi, D. S., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 277–303.
237. Radecki, P. M., & Swales, J. M. (1988). ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16, 355–365.
238. Reed, M., & Burton, J. (1986). Effective and ineffective evaluation of essays: Perceptions of college freshmen. Journal of Teaching Writing, 4(2), 270–283.
239. Reid, J. (1994). Responding to ESL students' texts: The myths of appropriation. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 273–292.
240. Richardson, S. (2000). Students' conditioned response to teachers' response. Portfolio proponents, take note! Assessing Writing, 7, 117–141.
241. Rieber, L. (2006). Using peer review to improve student writing in business courses. Journal of Education for Business, 82(6), 322–326.
242. Riedel, E., Dexter, S., Scharber, C., & Doering, A. (2006). Experimental evidence on the effectiveness of automated essay scoring in teacher educated cases. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(3), 267–287.
243. Rilling, S. (2005). The development of an ESL OWL, or learning how to tutor writing online. Computers and Composition, 22, 357–374.
244. Rinnert, C., & Kobayashi, H. (2001). Differing perceptions of EFL writing among readers in Japan. Modern Language Journal, 85, 189–209.
245. Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83–91.
246. Rock, J. L. (2007). The impact of short-term use of Criterion on writing skills in ninth grade. (ETS Research Report RR-07-07). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
247. Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59, 23–30.
248. Rothschild, D., & Klingenberg, F. (1990). Self and peer evaluation of writing in the interactive ESL classroom: An exploratory study. TESL Canada Journal, 8(1), 52–65.
249. Rouiller, Y. (2004). Metacognitive regulations, peer interactions and revision of narratives by sixth-graders. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) & G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing, 14 (pp. 77–89). Norwell, MA: Springer.
250. Sachs, R., & Polio, C. (2007). Learners' uses of two types of written feedback on a L2 writing revision task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 67–100.
251. Saito, H. (1994). Teachers' practices and students' preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46–70.
252. Schacter, J. (1991). Corrective feedback in historical perspective. Second Language Research, 7(2), 89–102.
253. Schultz, J. M. (2000). Computers and collaborative writing in the foreign language classroom. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language learning: Concepts and practice (pp. 121–150). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
254. Schunk, D., & Swartz, C. (1993a). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on self-efficacy and writing achievement. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED359216).
255. Schunk, D., & Swartz, C. (1993b). Writing strategy instruction with gifted students: effects of goal and feedback on self-efficacy and skills. Retrieved from ERIC database. (EJ465444).
256. Semke, H. D. (1984). The effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195–202.
257. Sengupta, S. (1998). Peer evaluation: “I am not the teacher.” ELT Journal, 52, 19–28.
258. *Sengupta, S. (2000). An investigation into the effects of revision strategy instruction on L2 secondary school learners. System, 28, 97–113.
259. Severino, C. (1993). The sociopolitical implications of response to second language and second dialect writing. Journal of Second Language Studies, 2, 181–201.
260. Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103–110.
261. Shin, S. J. (2003). The reflective L2 writing teacher. ELT Journal, 57, 3–10.
262. Simpson, J. M. (2006). Feedback on writing: Changing EFL students' attitudes. TESL Canada Journal, 24(1), 96–112.
263. Sipple, S. (2007). Ideas in practice: Developmental writers' attitudes toward audio and written feedback. Journal of Developmental Education, 30(3), 22–31.
264. Smith, S. (1997). The genre of the end comment: Conventions in teacher responses to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 48, 249–268.
265. Smith Taylor, S., & Patton, M. D. (2006). Ten engineers reading: Disjunctions between preference and practice in civil engineering faculty responses. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 36, 253–271.
266. Sommers, N. (1980). Revision strategies of student writers and experienced adult writers. College Composition and Communication, 31, 378–388.
267. Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 148–156.
268. Sommers, N. (2006). Across the drafts. College Composition and Communication, 58, 248–257.
269. Song, M. (1998). Experimental study of the effect of controlled vs. free writing and different feedback types on writing quality and writing apprehension of EFL college students. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED423703).
270. Sperling, M., & Freedman, S. W. (1987). A good girl writes like a good girl: Written responses to student writing. Written Communication, 9(9), 337–355.
271. Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 217–233.
272. Stern, L.A., & Solomon, A. (2006). Effective faculty feedback: The road less traveled. Assessing Writing, 11, 22–41.
273. Storch, N., & Tapper, J. (1996). Patterns of NNS student annotations when identifying areas of concern in their writing. System, 24, 323–336.
274. Storch, N., & Tapper, J. (2000). The focus of teacher and student concerns in discipline-specific writing by university students. Higher Education Research & Development, 19, 337–355.
275. Straub, R. (1996). The concept of control in teacher response: Defining the varieties of “directive” and “facilitative” commentary. College Composition and Communication, 47(2), 223–251.
276. Straub, R. (1997). Students' reactions to teacher comments: An exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 31(1), 91–119.
277. Straub, R. (2000). The student, the text, and the classroom context: A case study of teacher response. Assessing Writing, 7, 23–55.
278. Strenski, E., O'Dwyer Feagin, C., & Singer, J. A. (2005). Email small group peer review revisited. Computers and Composition, 22, 191–208.
279. Sugita, Y. (2006). The impact of teacher' comment types on students' revision. ELT Journal, 60(1), 34–41.
280. Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: a computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29(4), 491–501.
281. Sullivan, K., & Lindgren, E. (2002). Self-assessment in autonomous computer-aided second language writing. ELT Journal, 56, 258–266.
282. Sweeney, M. R. (1999). Relating revision skills to teacher commentary. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 27, 213–218.
283. Tang, G. M., & Tithecott, J. (1999). Peer response and ESL writing. TESL Canada Journal, 16(2), 20–38.
284. Tang, R. (2000). Do we allow what we encourage? How students are positioned by teacher feedback. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 23, 157–168.
285. Thonus, T. (2001). Triangulation in the writing center: Tutor, tutee, and instructor perceptions of the tutor's role. Writing Center Journal, 22(1), 59–82.
286. Thonus, T. (2002). Tutor and student assessments of academic writing tutorials: What is “success”? Assessing Writing, 8, 110–134.
287. Todd, R. W., Mills, N., Palard, C., & Khamcharoen, P. (2001). Giving feedback on journals. ELT Journal, 55, 354–359.
288. Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249–276.
289. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327–369.
290. Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111–122.
291. Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 337–343.
292. Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 147–170.
293. Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and Composition, 21, 217–235.
294. Van Gelderen, A. (1997). Elementary students' skills in revising: Integrating quantitative and qualitative analysis. Written Communication, 14(3), 360–397.
295. Villamil, O. S., & De Guerrero, M. C. M. (1998). Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 19, 491–514.
296. Wallace, D. L., & Hayes, J. R. (1991). Redefining revision for freshmen. Research in the Teaching of English, 25, 54–66.
297. Wallace, D. L., Hayes, J. R., Hatch, J. A., Miller, W., Moser, G., & Silk, C. M. (1996). Better revision in eight minutes? Prompting first-year college writers to revise globally. Journal of Education Psychology, 88, 682–688.
298. Warden, C. A., (2000). EFL business writing behaviors in differing feedback environments. Language Learning, 50, 573–616.
299. Warden, C. A., & Chen, J. (1995). Improving feedback while decreasing teacher burden in R.O.C. ESL business English writing classes. In P. Bruthiaux, T. Boswood, & B. Du-Babcock (Eds.), Explorations in English for professional communications (pp. 125–137). Hong Kong, People's Republic of China: City University of Hong Kong.
300. Waring, H. Z. (2005). Peer tutoring in a graduate writing centre: Identity, expertise, and advice resisting. Applied Linguistics, 26, 141–168.
301. Weigle, S. C., & Nelson, G. L. (2004). Novice tutors and their ESL tutees: Three case studies of tutor roles and perceptions of tutorial success. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 203–225.
302. Weltig, M. S. (2004). Effects of language errors and importance attributed to language on language and rhetorical-level essay scoring. Spaan Fellow Working Papers in Second or Foreign Language Assessment, 2, 53–81.
303. Whetherbee Phelps, L. (2000). Cyrano's nose: Variations on the theme of response. Assessing Writing, 7, 91–110.
304. Whitington, V., Glover, A., & Harley, F. (2004). Preservice early childhood students' perceptions of written feedback on their essays. Early Child Development and Care, 174(4), 321–337.
305. Wible, D., Kuo, C.-H., Chien, F.-Y., Liu, A., & Tsao, N.-L. (2001). A web-based EFL writing environment: Integrating information for learners, teachers, and researchers. Computers & Education, 37, 297–315.
306. Williams, J. (2002). Undergraduate second language writers in the writing center. Journal of Basic Writing, 21(2), 73–91.
307. Williams, J. (2004). Tutoring and revision: Second language writers in the writing center. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 173–201.
308. Wiltse, E. (2001). The effects of motivation and anxiety on students' use of instructor comments. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED458630).
309. Wiltse, E. (2002). Correlates of college students' use of instructors' comments. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 57(2), 126–138.
310. *Xiang, W. (2004). Encouraging self-monitoring in writing by Chinese students. ELT Journal, 58, 238–246.
311. Yagelski, R. (1995). The role of classroom context in the revision strategies of student writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 216–338.
312. Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200.
313. Yao, Y.-C., & Warden, C. (1996). Process writing and computer correction: Happy wedding or shotgun marriage? CALL Electronic Journal, 1(1). Retrieved from http://www.tell.is.ritsumei.ac.jp/callej/1-1/Warden1.html.
314. Yates, R., & Kenkel, J. (2002). Responding to sentence-level errors in writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 29–47.
315. Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 79–101.
316. Zellermayer, M. (1989). The study of teachers' written feedback to students' writing: Changes in theoretical considerations and the expansion of research contexts. Instructional Science 18, 145–165.
317. Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 209–222.
318. Zhang, S. (1999). Thoughts on some recent evidence concerning the affective advantage of peer feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 321–326.
319. Zhu, W. (1995). Effects of training for peer response on students' comments and interaction. Written Communication, 12, 492–528.
320. Zhu, W. (2001). Interaction and feedback in mixed peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 251–276.
321. Zhu, W. (2004). Faculty views on the importance of writing, the nature of academic writing, and teaching and responding to writing in the disciplines. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 29–48.
322. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory skills. Journal of Education Psychology, 91, 241–250.
323. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 660–668.
324. Ziv, N. (1984). The effect of teacher comments on the writing of four college freshmen. In R. Beach & L. Bridwell, (Eds.), New directions in composition research (pp. 362–380). New York, NY: Guilford.