Since the emergence of the process-oriented approach in second language writing instruction, the issues of writing instruction have been predominantly concerned with what and how error Feedback should be given to the students’ writing. The present study investigated the effect of Explicit Corrective Feedback on writing accuracy of Iranian intermediate EFL learners (N=44) in Hamedan Islamic Azad University. The three most frequent occurring errors in EFL learners’ writing pre-test were chosen to be targeted. Two groups were formed: the Explicit Corrective Feedback group (N=22), and the control group (N=20). Paired samples t-tests revealed that both the Explicit and control groups increased their writing accuracy in immediate post-test in comparison with pre-test, but Independent t-test indicated that there was not a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the control and experiment groups (p=0.65). In delayed post-test, there was no significant differences between writing accuracy of Explicit and control groups (p=0.72). Paired samples t-tests indicated that there was no significant accuracy mean difference between writing pre-test and delayed post-test of the Explicit group. The writing accuracy gain of the control group in delayed post-test in comparison with writing pre-test was statistically significant.

This investigation examined the mixed effects of visual input enhancement, Explicit instruction, pushed output, and Corrective Feedback on noticing and intake of English conjunctive adverbs. Participants included 83 intermediate EFL students enrolled in a grammar and writing course. They were assigned to a control group (n = 22), Explicit instruction + pushed output + Explicit Corrective Feedback group (n = 25), visual input enhancement + pushed output + implicit Corrective Feedback group (n = 17), and visual input enhancement + enriched input group (n = 19). Design was a pretest, immediate posttest, and delayed posttest type. To assess the participants’ intake of the targeted structures, 3 tests were developed. One-way ANOVA and a series of post-hoc Scheffe tests were performed on the results. Taken together, the results indicated that all the combined procedures had both positive and lasting effects on the noticing and subsequent intake of the discourse markers (conjunctive adverbs) at issue. Results, further, revealed that the effects of the mixed procedures on the rate and durability of intake of the targeted forms was differential.

Over the last few years, the realm of foreign language learning has witnessed an abundance of research concerning the effectiveness of Corrective Feedback on the acquisition of grammatical features, with the study of other target language subsystems, such as pronunciation, being few and far between. In order to bridge this gap, the present study intended to investigate and compare the immediate and delayed effect of Explicit (overt) and implicit (covert) Corrective Feedback (CF) on treating segmental word-level pronunciation errors committed by adult EFL learners of an institute in Tabriz named ALC. To this end, through a quasi-experimental study and random sampling, three groups were formed, an Explicit, an implicit and a control group, each consisting of 20 low proficient EFL learners. Besides, considering the levels that learners were assigned to, based on the institute’s criteria, a Preliminary English Test (PET) was administered in order to determine the proficiency level of learners. Having administered the pretest before treatment, to measure the longer-term effect of Explicit vs. implicit CF on segmental word-level pronunciation errors, the study included delayed posttests in addition to immediate posttests all of which included reading passages containing 40 problematic words. The collected data were analyzed by ANCOVA and the obtained findings revealed that both Explicit and implicit Corrective Feedback are effective in reducing pronunciation errors showing significant differences between experimental and control groups. Additionally, the outcomes showed that immediate implicit and immediate Explicit Corrective Feedback have similar effects on reduction of pronunciation errors. The same result comes up regarding the delayed effect of Explicit Feedback in comparison with delayed effect of implicit Feedback. However, the delayed effect of Explicit and implicit CF lowered comparing to their immediate effect due to time effect. Pedagogically, this study could enhance teachers’ effort, knowledge, and beliefs in teaching pronunciation and providing Corrective Feedback to pronunciation errors.

Since the emergence of the process-oriented approach to second language writing instruction two main questions have been what and how error Feedback should be given to the students. The question of whether teachers should provide Feedback on grammar in the writing assignments of English as a foreign language students, and if so how, has been a matter of considerable debate in the field of second language writing. The present study investigated the possible effect of implicit and Explicit Corrective Feedback on descriptive writing accuracy of Iranian intermediate EFL learners (N=39) in Hamedan Islamic Azad University. Two groups were selected: Explicit Corrective Feedback group (N=22) and implicit Corrective Feedback group (N=17). They received Corrective Feedback on three grammatical structures. The results showed that written Corrective Feedback can lead to writing accuracy improvement in the short-term, but it may be unhelpful in the long-run.

The study is designed to examine the effectiveness of Corrective Feedback (CF) from Chinese second language (L2) teachers to their students in mainland China. Investigations into how CF works were carried out based on three aspects: teachers’ perceptions of CF effectiveness, factors affecting it, and their interplay. An ecological approach—the nested ecosystem model—was employed to analyze data collected from interviews and stimulated recall interviews. A total of 22 class periods from 11 teachers were observed, and 8 teachers were interviewed. Collected data were then analyzed with Nvivo 11. Findings suggest that teachers’ main criterion for effective CF is raising students’ awareness of the error. Factors affecting teachers’ perceptions of CF effectiveness can be direct or indirect. Direct factors refer to the manner of CF provision, which was determined by reasons including error, teaching focus, audience, learners’ individual difference, teaching experience and class time. Indirect factors include empathy, cultural stereotypes and learners’ emotions. The influence of each individual factor on CF effectiveness, as well as the influence of their interplay, was examined. This study suggests that in the context of mainland China, teachers’ perceptions of effective CF were based on raising students’ awareness on the error; factors affecting CF effectiveness were largely the same as those in previous studies. What is new to the current study is that it highlights the influence of indirect factors from cultural and affective dimensions on teachers’ CF perceptions and the dynamic nature of CF effectiveness.

This paper aimed at examining the Iranian EFL teachers and learners’ preferences for two types of direct oral Corrective Feedback, including Explicit correction and metalinguistic clues, and two types of indirect oral Corrective Feedback, including recast and repetition. The participants included 39 teachers and 84 EFL learners, selected through purposive sampling. A scenario-based questionnaire was constructed based on Lyster and Ranta’s (1997) typology of Corrective Feedback (CF) for the purpose of collecting data on the teachers and learners’ preferences for the type of CF. Feedback scenarios were extracted from the literature on CF. The questionnaire was distributed to the participants by one of the researchers. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted in order to triangulate the data gathered through the questionnaire. The results of the study indicated that the EFL teachers and learners preferred direct CF more than indirect CF. The results also revealed significant differences among EFL teachers with differing levels of teaching experience (i.e., low, moderate and high). The present study drew attention to the fact that direct types of CF were preferred over others in EFL context. This study has implications for EFL teachers, learners, and material developers.

Prompted by the interaction hypothesis and focus on form instruction, Corrective Feedback has received much attention in recent years within the interactionist framework. This study investigated the effects of three types of written Corrective Feedback (i.e., recast without saliency, recast with saliency, and metalinguistic Feedback) on Iranian high school EFL learners’ grammatical accuracy of two structures in English: conditional sentences and relative clauses. To this end, four intact classes, comprising 104 low-intermediate Iranian high school EFL learners, were selected and randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The three experimental groups received recasts without saliency, recast with saliency, and metalinguistic Feedback in written picture description tasks/activities. Grammaticality judgment tests were used as the instruments to collect data on the participants’ grammatical accuracy of the two structures in a pretest-posttest control group design. ANCOVA and MANOVA showed that using written Corrective Feedback significantly improved the participants’ grammatical gains in the experimental groups. Moreover, metalinguistic and recast with saliency Feedback (i.e., Explicit Feedback) was more effective than the recast without saliency Feedback (i.e., implicit Feedback). Furthermore, there was a significant differential effect of metalinguistic Feedback for the type of grammatical structure. The study concludes with several pedagogical implications.