Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 854

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to truscott (1996)

Ferris, Dana·1999·Journal of Second Language Writing
DOI 10.1016/s1060-3743(99)80110-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1060-3743(99)80110-6

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Cardelle, 1981, Effects on second language learning of variations in written feedback on homework assignments, TESOL Quarterly, 15, 251, 10.2307/3586751 · DOI
  2. Ellis, 1998, Teaching and research: Options in grammar teaching, TESOL Quarterly, 32, 39, 10.2307/3587901 · DOI
  3. Ferris, 1995, Can advanced ESL students be taught to correct their most serious and frequent errors?, CATESOL Journal, 8, 41
  4. Ferris, 1995, Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms, TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33, 10.2307/3587804 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Ferris, 1995, Teaching ESL composition students to become independent self-editors, TESOL Journal, 4, 18
  6. Hedgcock, 1994, Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing, Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 141, 10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Kepner, 1991, An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills, Modern Language Journal, 75, 305, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05359.x · DOI · Paper page
  8. Lalande, 1982, Reducing composition errors: An experiment, Modern Language Journal, 66, 140, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x · DOI · Paper page
  9. Leki, 1991, The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes, Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203, 10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x · DOI · Paper page
  10. Radecki, 1988, ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work, System, 16, 355, 10.1016/0346-251X(88)90078-4 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Robb, 1986, Salience of feedback and its effect on EFL writing quality, TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83, 10.2307/3586390 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Semke, 1984, The effects of the red pen, Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195, 10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x · DOI · Paper page
  13. Sheppard, 1992, Two feedback types: Do they make a difference?, RELC Journal, 23, 103, 10.1177/003368829202300107 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Truscott, 1996, The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes, Language Learning, 46, 327, 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Ferris, D.
Venue
Journal of Second Language Writing
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
1-11
ISSN
1060-3743 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s1060-3743(99)80110-6
OpenAlex
W2031577085
Cited by
854
References
1
FWCI
23.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

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.