ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work
Open accessThe claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The result is consistent with the findings of Radecki and Swales (1988), which found that students expressed approval for marking symbols.
“This is consistent with the findings of the study by Radecki and Swales (1988), which found that students expressed approval for marking symbols.”
From Error Correction in the L2 Writing Classroom: What Do Students Think? (2005) · cites this paper as Radecki and Swales (1988)
Radecki and Swales (1988) found that students regarded error marking as a major responsibility of teachers.
“Radecki and Swales (1988) also found that students regarded error marking as a major responsibility of teachers.”
From Error Correction in the L2 Writing Classroom: What Do Students Think? (2005) · cites this paper as Radecki and Swales (1988)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Zamel, V. (1985) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586773 · Cited by 763 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- BURKLAND, J. and GRIMM, N. (1984) Students" response to our response. Paper presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication, New York City, 1984.
- HENDRICKSON, J. M. (1976) The effects of error correction treatments upon adequate and accurate communication in the written compositions of adult learners of English as a second language. Unpublished dissertation, Ohio State University.
- MOHAN, B. A. and AN-YEUNG LO, W. (1985) Academic writing and Chinese students: transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly 19, 515-534.
- ROBB, T. et al. (1986) Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly 20, 83 -93.
- SEMKE, H. D. (1984) Effects of the Red Pen. Foreign Language Annals 17, 195-202.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The influence of teacher commentary on student revision
Ferris, D. R. (1997) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3588049 · Cited by 618 · see citing works
The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes
Leki, I. (1991) · Foreign Language Annals · doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x · Cited by 516 · see citing works
The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing
Paulus, T. M. (1999) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(99)80117-9 · Cited by 522 · see citing works
The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers
Hyland, F. (1998) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(98)90017-0 · Cited by 456 · see citing works
Focusing on form: student engagement with teacher feedback?
Hyland, F. (2003) · System · doi:10.1016/s0346-251x(03)00021-6 · Cited by 411 · see citing works
The Effectiveness of feedback for L1-English and L2-writing development: a meta-analysis.
Biber, D., Nekrasova, T., & Horn, B. (2011) · ETS Research Report Series · doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.2011.tb02241.x · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Error Correction in the L2 Writing Classroom: What Do Students Think?
Lee, I. (2005) · TESL Canada Journal · doi:10.18806/tesl.v22i2.84 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
- Authors
- Radecki, P. M., & Swales, J. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- System
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1988-01
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 355-365
- ISSN
- 0346-251X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2137125440
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 6.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- System (publishedVersion)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Keywords
- ESL learners, student attitudes toward feedback, written corrective feedback, revision, learner autonomy, second language writing, teacher role in writing instruction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
