The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patterns of Teacher Response to Student Writing in a Multiple-Draft Composition Classroom: Is Content Feedback Followed by Form Feedback the Best Method?
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Zamel, V. (1985) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586773 · Cited by 763
The Composing Processes of Advanced ESL Students: Six Case Studies
Zamel, V. (1983) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586647 · Cited by 712
The influence of teacher commentary on student revision
Ferris, D. R. (1997) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3588049 · Cited by 618
Cited by
Evidence in support of written corrective feedback
Bitchener, J. (2008) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004 · Cited by 871
Ferris, D. R. (2004) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005 · Cited by 679
Ferris, D. R. (2010) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109990490 · Cited by 523
Error correction, revision, and learning
Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y.-P. (2008) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003 · Cited by 414
Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education
Jonsson, A. (2013) · Active Learning in Higher Education · doi:10.1177/1469787412467125 · Cited by 414
The Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta‐Analysis
Kang, E., & Han, Z. (2015) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12189 · Cited by 385
Automated written corrective feedback: how well can students make use of it?
Ranalli, J. (2018) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2018.1428994 · Cited by 228
Exploring student engagement with peer feedback on L2 writing
Fan, Y., & Xu, J. (2020) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100775 · Cited by 222
Dikli, S., & Bleyle, S. (2014) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2014.03.006 · Cited by 193
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
Li, J., & De Luca, R. (2014) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2012.709494 · Cited by 154
Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing studies
Ferris, D. R. (2012) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444812000250 · Cited by 108
Motivating revision of drafts through formative feedback
McGarrell, H., & Verbeem, J. (2007) · ELT Journal · doi:10.1093/elt/ccm030 · Cited by 102
(2007) · Cited by 78
How Teacher and Grammarly Feedback Complement One Another in Myanmar EFL Students’ Writing
Thi, N. K., & Nikolov, M. (2022) · The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher · doi:10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2 · Cited by 77
The effects of teacher-written direct vs. indirect feedback on students' writing
Jamalinesari, A., Rahimi, F., Gowhary, H., & Azizifar, A. (2015) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.018 · Cited by 55
The Nature of Automated Essay Scoring Feedback
Dikli, S. (2011) · CALICO Journal · doi:10.11139/cj.28.1.99-134 · Cited by 52
Zhang, Y., Yu, S., & Yuan, K. (2020) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2018.1543261 · Cited by 29
Pourmousavi, Z., & Mohamadi Zenouzagh, Z. (2020) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-020-00088-w · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Ashwell, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Second Language Writing
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2000-09
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 227-257
- ISSN
- 1060-3743 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2011149221
- Cited by
- 516
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 11.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
