Combining the strategies of using focused written corrective feedback: a study with upper-elementary Chilean EFL learners

Abstract

This report describes a mixed study comparing the writing performance of 60 EFL students in three intact groups, during their first semester of an English undergraduate Program at a university in the South of Chile. Three types of focused, Indirect Written Corrective Feedback (henceforth WCF) were used: group 1, coding (n=23); group 2, brief grammatical explanation (n=22); and group 3, underlining (n=15). Feedback was given on five targeted linguistic categories. A pretest was applied before the 16-week treatment took place, as well as a posttest. Students received explicit grammar training and knowledge of genres; multiple-drafting was used in a writing portfolio based class that allowed them to see their progress over time. Frequency and standard deviation of errors were calculated for the pre and posttest. Qualitative data was collected from group semi-structured interviews and were analyzed using content analysis. Results show that 3 out of the 5 linguistic categories have a significant improvement in terms of accuracy, and there are differences among types of feedback. Interviews indicate that students are satisfied with the writing portfolio system because it allows them to keep track on their progress; they value the systematic feedback and have a positive attitude towards multiple drafting and the writing process approach.