Fostering accuracy in L2 writing: impact of different types of corrective feedback in an experimental blended learning EFL course

Abstract

Corrective feedback (CF) can be provided to learners in different ways (explicit or implicit, focused or unfocused) and is the subject of major controversies in second language acquisition research. As no clear consensus has been reached so far about the most effective approach to CF with a view to fostering accuracy in second language (L2) writing – and as this also holds true for blended learning environments – our study aims at investigating the optimal conditions for effective CF in an experimental blended learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) course. To explore this question, 93 study participants from Sorbonne Université (Paris, France) were divided up into seven groups: six treatment groups which received six different online CF types and one control group which received no CF. A performance comparison in terms of accuracy between the study participants’ first and last pieces of writing was carried out to analyse the relative effectiveness of the different CF strategies. The results show that any type of CF is better than no CF at all, and that the repeated provision of unfocused indirect CF (with metalinguistic comments on the nature of errors) combined with extra computer-mediated micro-tasks over a certain period of time (24 weeks) seems to be the most efficient CF type in our context. This also points to the usefulness of integrating tutorial CALL activities in the CF provided as these seem to impact output accuracy positively.

Keywords:

• Corrective feedback
• accuracy
• learner corpus
• error analysis
• L2 writing

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on an earlier version of this article.

Notes

1 Which is equivalent to level B1 on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages scales (Council of Europe, 2001).

2 EFL is used here as English is taught to students in France, a country where English is not the primary language (as opposed to English as a Second Language – ESL).

3 Tools such as Criterion, CyWrite or WriteToLearn are examples of such systems.

4 See, for example, a micro-task to work on relative pronouns: https://www.englisch-hilfen.de/en/exercises/pronouns/relative_pronouns.htm

5 More precisely, we used version 1.3 of the Louvain error tagging tool.

6 (LWT-FWT)/LWT)*100

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Cédric Sarré

Cédric Sarré is a senior lecturer at Sorbonne Université, School of Education (ESPE de Paris), where he teaches English as a Foreign Language and English Language Learning and Teaching. He is a member of the CeLiSo (Centre de Linguistique en Sorbonne, EA 7332) research unit. His research focuses on language learning technologies (Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Computer-Mediated Communication). His research interests also include ESP didactics, ESP course development in online settings, language proficiency testing, peer interaction in L2 learning and teacher education.

Muriel Grosbois

Muriel Grosbois is Professor of English and Applied Linguistics at Conservatoire national des arts et métiers, Cnam Paris, France. She is a member of the FAP (Formation et Apprentissages Professionnels, EA 7529) research unit and Director of the Language Department. Her research and teaching focus on foreign language learning in a technology-enhanced context.

Cédric Brudermann

Cédric Brudermann is a lecturer in English for Specific Purposes and instructional technology at Sorbonne Université (college of science and engineering) and head of a Language Centre. He is a member of the CeLiSo - EA 7332 research unit. His research interests include computer-assisted language learning, SLA, curriculum design, instructional technology, TBLT and ESP.