(Mis) Alignment of Iranian EFL Teacher’s Written Corrective Feedback beliefs and practices from an Activity Theory Perspective

References

• Al Shahrani, A., & Storch, N. (2013). Investigating teachers' written corrective feedback practices in a Saudi EFL context: How do they align with beliefs, institutional guidelines, and students' preferences?. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 37(2), 101–18.
   Google Scholar
• Al Shahrani, A., & Storch, N. (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. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.37.2.02als
   Google Scholar
• Al-Jarrah, R. (2016). A suggested model of corrective feedback provision. Ampersand, 3, 98–107. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2016.06.003
   Google Scholar
• 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(3), 227–257. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8
   Google Scholar
• Ataee, M. R., & Mazloom, F. (2013). English language teaching curriculum in Iran: Planning and practice. The Curriculum Journal, 24/3(3), 389–411. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2012.744327
   Google Scholar
• Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The value of a focused approach to written corrective feedback. ELT journal, 63(3), 207–211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8
   Google Scholar
• Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81–109. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903
   Google Scholar
• Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Casanave, C. P. (2004). Controversies in second language writing: Dilemmas and decisions in research and instruction. In D. Belcher & J. Liu (Eds.), Michigan series on teaching multilingual writers (pp. 25-54). The University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, A., & Poth, J. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, R. (2010). Language teaching as sociocultural activity: Rethinking language teacher practice. Modern Language Journal, 94(3), 434–452. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01058.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahmardeh, M. (2009). English Language Teaching in Iran. VDM Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R. (2009). A Typology of Written Corrective Feedback Types. ELT Journal, 63(2), 97–107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ene, E., & Kosobucki, V. (2016). Rubrics and corrective feedback in ESL writing: A longitudinal case study of an L2 writer. Assessing Writing, 30, 3–20. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Oreinta-Konsultit
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960–974. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/001401300409143
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747
   Google Scholar
• Farhady, F., & Hedayati, H. (2009). Language policy in Iran. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 132–141. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190509090114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, D. (1995). Students' reactions to teachers response in multiple draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing. Implications for second language students. Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Ferris, D., Roberts, B. (2001). Error Feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, (10)3, 161–184.
   Google Scholar
• Ferris, D. R. (2014). Responding to student writing: Teachers’ philosophies and practices. Assessing Writing, 19, 6–23. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, D. R., Brown, J., Liu, H., & Stine, M. E. A. (2011a). Responding to L2 students in college writing classes: What teachers say and what they do. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 207–234. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.247706
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, R. D., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307–329. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, D. (2004). Language, sociocultural theory, and L2 teacher education: Examining the technology of subject matter and the architecture of instruction. In M. R. Hawkins (Ed.), Language learning and teacher education: A sociocultural approach (pp. 169–197). Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Hamouda, A. (2011). A study of students and teachers’ preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128–141. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p128
   Google Scholar
• Han, Y. (2017). Mediating and being mediated: Learner' beliefs and learners' engagement with written corrective feedback. System, 69, 133–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, K. E. (2006). The sociocultural turn and its challenges for second language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 235–257. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/40264518
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Junqueira, L., & Payant, C. (2015). “I just want to do it right, but it’s so hard”: A novice teacher’s written feedback beliefs and practices. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 19–36. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang, E., & Han, Z. (2015). The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta-analysis. Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. Nardi, (Ed.), Context and consciousness, (pp–17–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lantolf, J. P. (2004b). Sociocultural Theory and L2 Learning: an exegesis. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of second language research (pp–335–354). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
   Google Scholar
• Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2005). Error correction in the L2 writing classroom: What do students think? TESL Canada Journal, 22(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v22i2.84
   Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2008b). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 69–85. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2009). Ten mismatches between teachers’ beliefs and written feedback practice. ELTJournal, 63(1), 13–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2014). Revising teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 201–2013. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2016). Teacher education on feedback in EFL writing: Issues, challenges, and future directions. Tesol Quarterly, 50(2), 517–527. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2018). Teachers’ frequently asked questions about focused written corrective feedback. TESOL Journal, 10(3), e00427. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.427
   Google Scholar
• Lei, X. (2016). Understanding writing strategy use from a sociocultural perspective: The case of skilled and less-skilled writers. System, 60, 105–116. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y. (2013). Three ESL students writing a policy paper assignment: An activity-analytic perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(2), 73–86. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness and effectiveness. The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 536–556. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00465.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mak, P., & Lee, I. (2014). Implementing assessment for learning in L2 writing: An activity theory perspective. System, 47, 73–87. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mao, S., & Crosthwaite, P. (2019). Investigating written corrective feedback: (Mis)alignment of teachers’ beliefs and practice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45(2019), 46–60. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118–141. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montgomery, J. L., & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher written feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(2), 82–99. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naghdipour, B. (2016). English Writing Instruction in Iran: Implications for second language writing curriculum and pedagogy. Journal of Second Language Writing, 32, 81–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortega, L. (2012). Epilogue: Exploring L2 writing–SLA interfaces. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 404–415. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radecki, P., & Swales, J. (1988). ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16(3), 355–365. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(88)90078-4
   Google Scholar
• Rahimi, M. (2013). Is training student reviewers worth its while? A study of how training influences the quality of students’ feedback and writing. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 67–89. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812459151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, W. –. M. (2014). Reading activity, consciousness, personality dialectically: Cultural-historical activity theory and the centrality of society. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(1), 4–20. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2013.771368
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saslow, J., & Ascher, A. (2014). Top-Notch series, (2th edition). Pearson Education (Inc).
   Google Scholar
• Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2016). Exploring Chinese students’ strategy use in a cooperative peer feedback writing group. System, 58, 1–11. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.02.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255–283. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storch, N. (2018). written corrective feedback from sociocultural theoretical perspectives: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 51(2), 262–277. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, K., & Lindgren, E. (2002). Self-assessment in autonomous computer-aided second language writing. ELT Journal, 56(3), 258–266. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.3.258
   Google Scholar
• Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y.-P. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292–305. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Beuningen, C., de Jong, N. H. Kuiken, F. (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 Learners' Written Accuracy. ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 279–296.
   Google Scholar
• Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1–41. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00674.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University. Press (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37–70). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2018). Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing, 37(37), 13–24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar