EFL Students' Preferences for Written Corrective Feedback: Do Error Types, Language Proficiency, and Foreign Language Enjoyment Matter?

“Drawing on the broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 2001), positive emotions such as FLE is crucial in SLA as it boosts learners’ capacity to notice things in language input, increases learners’ resilience and hardiness in inevitable moments of struggle, and has longer-term consequences in…”

“Truscott (1996) has argued that, theoretically, no single form of WCF can be expected to help learners address all types of errors.”

“Moreover, affective factors are recognized as being important in understanding learners’ actions in L2 learning activities (Dörnyei, 2005).”

“SLA researchers have been primarily concerned with highly focused WCF in relation to theoretical claims about the importance of, as Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 660564 Schmidt suggests, “attention” and “understanding” (Schmidt, 2001).”

“Lexical errors are idiosyncratic and involve item learning (Ellis, 2005); metalinguistic explanation or error code may help clarify the type of error (e.”

“Research onWCF has identified differentWCF types provided by teachers in the classroom (Ellis, 2009).”

“In terms of the distinction between selective and comprehensive WCF, SLA researchers (e.g., Sheen, 2007; Bitchener, 2008) suggested that lower proficiency learners may benefit more from highly or mid-focused WCF due to their limited attentional resources.”

“Highly unfocused WCF is postulated to be less effective than highly focused WCF because it can easily lead to an overload of information processing (Bitchener, 2008; Sheen et al., 2009).”

“FLE has also been demonstrated to be a strong predictor of learners’ willingness to communicate (Dewaele and Dewaele, 2018), learners’ performances on lexical decision tasks (Dewaele and Alfawzan, 2018) and L2 achievement (Jin and Zhang, 2018).”

“Theoretically, the computational model of Gass (1997) has explained that for learning to take place, learners need first to attend to the target feature and notice the mismatch between the WCF input and their output.”

“Highly unfocused WCF is postulated to be less effective than highly focused WCF because it can easily lead to an overload of information processing (Bitchener, 2008; Sheen et al., 2009).”

“This also applies to the instruction of WCF. Learner affective engagement with teacher WCF can affect how learners perceive and respond to the WCF they receive (Ellis, 2010).”

“Specifically, Dewaele et al. (2018) found that intermediate learners were reported to have more FLE than low intermediate learners.”

“Highly unfocused WCF is postulated to be less effective than highly focused WCF because it can easily lead to an overload of information processing (Bitchener, 2008; Sheen et al., 2009).”

“As discussed in the literature review section, investigations of WCF need to consider the ecological validity of findings for the classroom (Storch, 2010).”

“Lee (2017) explained that providing metalinguistic explanation is a timeconsuming process and, therefore, not commonly employed by teachers in practice.”

“Not surprisingly, pragmatic competence is acknowledged to be difficult for L2 learners to master (Rose, 2005), especially Thai EFL learners who appear to struggle with pragmatic transfer (Wannaruk, 2008).”

“WCF occurs in response to linguistic errors made in learners’ writing (Bitchener and Ferris, 2012).”

“Indirect WCF appears to be the most frequently used feedback type in the classroom; however, it seems not to be preferred by lower proficiency learners (e.g., Lee, 2008; Amrhein and Nassaji, 2010; Chen et al., 2016).”

“According to participants’ scores on the FLES, two subgroups (low and high FLE) were formed using a thirdsplit method as in previous studies (e.g., Sheen, 2008; Zhang and Rahimi, 2014).”

“FLE has also been demonstrated to be a strong predictor of learners’ willingness to communicate (Dewaele and Dewaele, 2018), learners’ performances on lexical decision tasks (Dewaele and Alfawzan, 2018) and L2 achievement (Jin and Zhang, 2018).”

“Given that an adequate discussion of the effect of emotions on WCF is notably missing from WCF studies (Bitchener and Storch, 2016), this study aims to investigate further learners’WCF preferences concerning their emotional states.”

“WCF is inevitably explicit in nature (Shintani and Ellis, 2013) to function as a noticing facilitator; however, the degree of explicitness of WCF affects the noticing of it.”

“To increase its practical value, researchers suggest students should be supplied with a metalinguistic explanation handout (as in Shintani and Ellis, 2013; Shintani et al., 2014).”

“…2001), positive emotions such as FLE is crucial in SLA as it boosts learners’ capacity to notice things in language input, increases learners’ resilience and hardiness in inevitable moments of struggle, and has longer-term consequences in classrooms (see Dewaele et al., 2019 for a review).”

“Previous studies have found variation in FLE as a function of gender difference (Dewaele et al., 2016), teacher and teacher practice (Dewaele et al.”

“…on pragmatic errors (e.g., the incorrect forms of politeness), which are pragmatically inappropriate but grammatically correct; they could only guess about the possible reason for the correction, as explained by Schauer (2006), probably due to their lack of awareness of pragmatic infelicities.”

“FLE has also been demonstrated to be a strong predictor of learners’ willingness to communicate (Dewaele and Dewaele, 2018), learners’ performances on lexical decision tasks (Dewaele and Alfawzan, 2018) and L2 achievement (Jin and Zhang, 2018).”

“For instance, teachers are suggested to correct a certain number of errors at a time to minimize learners’ negative emotions (Lee, 2019); however, learners tend to prefer to have all errors corrected (e.g., Lee, 2005; Alshahrani and Storch, 2014).”

“For example, Hanaoka (2007) showed that WCF was more likely to direct the attention of Japanese learners of English to lexical errors but not to other types of errors.”

“, 2020), whereas positive emotions like enjoyment is also experienced by learners in WCF situations (Han and Hyland, 2019), and to date, little is known about its influence on learners’ preferences for WCF types.”

“As discussed in the literature review section, investigations of WCF need to consider the ecological validity of findings for the classroom (Storch, 2010).”

“According to participants’ scores on the FLES, two subgroups (low and high FLE) were formed using a thirdsplit method as in previous studies (e.g., Sheen, 2008; Zhang and Rahimi, 2014).”

“Specifically, research on OCF found that low-anxiety learners benefited most from metalinguistic explanation (similar to the one provided in the written context), whereas high-anxiety learners benefited most from recasts (Rassaei, 2015).”

“Not surprisingly, pragmatic competence is acknowledged to be difficult for L2 learners to master (Rose, 2005), especially Thai EFL learners who appear to struggle with pragmatic transfer (Wannaruk, 2008).”

“Positive attitudes held by learners toward WCF indicate their need for improvement in writing performance (Chen et al., 2016), andmismatched perceptions ofWCF between learners and teachers is likely to impede learners’ ability to use WCF effectively (Zhang, 2018; Saeli and Cheng, 2019).”

“However, the highly focused WCF is criticized for its lack of ecological validity and pedagogical significance for real classrooms (Storch, 2010), given that learners generally expect an overall accuracy improvement by having all errors corrected (e.g., Lee, 2005; Amrhein and Nassaji, 2010).”

“Drawing on the skill acquisition theory (DeKeyser, 2007), it is understandable that the proceduralization of L2 knowledge can occur if learners have opportunities to use the knowledge through practice.”

“It has been suggested that the more explicit the WCF is, the more the accurate understanding of errors is likely to be (Stefanou and Révész, 2015; Suzuki et al., 2019).”

“While understanding of how learners perceive the role of oral corrective feedback (OCF) such as recasts on pragmatic is growing (e.g., Yoshida, 2010; Yang, 2016), this area is underexplored for WCF research.”

“It has been suggested that the more explicit the WCF is, the more the accurate understanding of errors is likely to be (Stefanou and Révész, 2015; Suzuki et al., 2019).”

“A handful of experimental studies have attempted to explore learners’ favorite WCF types (e.g., Diab, 2015; Rummel and Bitchener, 2015).”

“…2001), positive emotions such as FLE is crucial in SLA as it boosts learners’ capacity to notice things in language input, increases learners’ resilience and hardiness in inevitable moments of struggle, and has longer-term consequences in classrooms (see Dewaele et al., 2019 for a review).”

“Similarly, the learners in Bonilla López et al. (2018) favored overt correction over error code.”

“Thus, as Cheng and Zhang (2021) suggest, future research on WCF can benefit from examining teacher variables.”

“A handful of experimental studies have attempted to explore learners’ favorite WCF types (e.g., Diab, 2015; Rummel and Bitchener, 2015).”

“For instance, teachers are suggested to correct a certain number of errors at a time to minimize learners’ negative emotions (Lee, 2019); however, learners tend to prefer to have all errors corrected (e.g., Lee, 2005; Alshahrani and Storch, 2014).”

“It is interesting, however, to note that this finding is similar to those found in several studies on oral error correction (e.g., Yang, 2016).”

“As mentioned in the literature, WCF can only be effective when learners understand the errors for which they received the WCF (Simard et al., 2015).”

“However, the highly focused WCF is criticized for its lack of ecological validity and pedagogical significance for real classrooms (Storch, 2010), given that learners generally expect an overall accuracy improvement by having all errors corrected (e.g., Lee, 2005; Amrhein and Nassaji, 2010).”

“Previous studies have found variation in FLE as a function of gender difference (Dewaele et al., 2016), teacher and teacher practice (Dewaele et al., 2018), other teacher-centered variables such as attitudes toward the teacher, friendliness of the teacher, and joking by the teacher (Dewaele and…”

“, 2016), our findings appear to mirror previous experimental studies reporting an advantage for more explicit types of WCF when focusing on specific linguistic errors (e.g., Bitchener, 2008; Guo and Barrot, 2019).”

“, 2016), andmismatched perceptions ofWCF between learners and teachers is likely to impede learners’ ability to use WCF effectively (Zhang, 2018; Saeli and Cheng, 2019).”

“It is a ubiquitous intervention method to scaffold L2 learners’ writing process and facilitate their writing output (Lee, 2013a; Lee, Mak, & Burns, 2015; Zhang, 2013; Zhang & Cheng, 2021; Zhang et al., 2021).”

“The advantage of mixed-methods research is also evinced by Cheng and Zhang (2021), who incorporated quantitative analysis of feedback (frequencies and percentages) and qualitative analysis of feedback instances (error type and feedback strategies) to present a complete picture of feedback scope and…”

“Notably, language learning enjoyment also played a significant role in influencing learners’ attitudinal and behavioral responses (Zhang et al., 2021).”

“…al., 2020), learning goals (e.g., Hyland, 2003), students’ motivation (e.g., Fredricks et al., 2004; Goldstein, 2006); language proficiency (Han & Hyland, 2015; Lee, 2008; Qi & Lapkin, 2001; Zheng & Yu, 2018), writing self-efficacy (Tsao, 2021), and foreign language enjoyment (Zhang et al., 2021).”

“For example, EFL learners often approach feedback instrumentally, including correcting errors to secure higher scores rather than as opportunities for rhetorical improvement (Lu et al. 2024; Zhang et al. 2021).”

“Students often need support and help to improve their writing skills, specifically second language (L2) writing skills (Saragih et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2021).”

“speakers and non-native speakers may provide WCF in natural settings (Zhang et al., 2021).”

“…more sustainable learner engagement in the language learning process (Jin and Zhang, 2019; Dewaele and Li, 2020; Mercer and Dörnyei, 2020; Guo, 2021), increased levels of L2 grit (Elahi Shirvan et al., 2021a), and better perception of the value of written corrective feedback (Zhang et al., 2021).”

“Specifically, metalinguistic WCF can either provide an error code to indicate specific errors or a brief metalinguistic expla‐ nation [24].”

“We chose to include both direct WCF and two types of indirect WCF – underlining and metalinguistic coding – as they are commonly used in language classrooms (Zhang et al., 2021) and for their theoretical suitability for learners of intermediate proficiency.”

“Research has shown that many students experience confusion when interpreting teachers ’ error codes or explicit corrections, often fi nding them unclear or struggling to understand why the supposedly correct parts are erroneous (Simard et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2021).”

“Many English language learners preferred the feedback that was informative on the content and provided metalinguistic explanations for orthographic and grammatical errors (Bastola & Hu, 2021; Zhang et al., 2021).”

“Furthermore, languages other than English (Crosthwaite et al., 2022) or the possible impact of other variables such as proficiency or educational context on students’ attitudes (Elwood & Bode, 2014; Schulz, 2001; Zhang et al., 2021) have hardly been explored in WCF.”

“Finally, by focusing on high school students—a relatively underexplored group—this study complements prior research primarily conducted in higher education settings (Cheng & Zhang, 2021; Kılıc x kaya, 2022; Zhang et al., 2021).”

“Such a strong notion has been consistent that was seen by Zhang et al. (2021)’s. Taking a Thai EFL classroom as the context, the learners strongly preferred metalinguistic explanation and overt correction as the more favourable kinds of explicit feedback.”

“This is consistent with the findings of Chen et al. [7] and Zhang et al. [28], who discovered that students preferred receiving direct written corrective feedback since it effectively addressed their problems and provided clear solutions for improvement.”

“…emotions when dealing with written feedback, it is revealed that regardless of their skill and foreign language enjoyment (FLE) level, EFL undergraduate students favor more explicit types of WCF (i.e., overt correction and metalinguistic explanation) for most error types (Zhang, et.al, 2021).”

“As Zhang et al. (2021) argues, proficiency in a foreign language may not be a complete product of the language system but a consideration of other factors, including cultural concerns.”

“Zhang et al. (2021), using both quantitative and qualitative methods, looked into learners’ preferences for four forms of written corrective feedback (WCF) on grammatical, lexical, orthographic, and pragmatic mistakes, which are frequently addressed in the literature.”

“The data from 15 writing samples produced by 6th-semester English language education students were analyzed(Zhang et al., 2021).”

“Zhang et al. (2021) found a general preference for explicit forms of WCF, such as direct corrections and metalinguistic annotations, irrespective of proficiency levels.”

“…in English writing tasks for master’s degree students (Hapsari, Ginting, & Bram, 2019), which is mainly influenced by the interference of students’ first language, affection toward and existing knowledge of the language as well as teacher’s role (Spahiu & Kryeziu, 2021; Zhang et al., 2021).”

“This is because the effectiveness of written CFs depends on the comprehension of L2 learners (Zhang et al., 2021).”

“Zhang et al. (2021) advocated that second language teachers bring about more convivial, dialogic, and student-friendly writing conference dynamics during the application of written corrective feedback, through which they subconsciously practice their communication and writing competencies with the…”

“Other researchers confirmed that WCF feedback could be useless if there is a di screpancy between learners’ preferences for feedback and teachers’ practices (Zhang et al., 2021).”

“Dewaele and MacIntyre found that teacher-related variables were the strongest predictors of FLE, while Zhang et al. showed that students with higher FLE were more motivated to engage with teacher-provided written corrective feedback [41,42].”

“This methodology not only addresses the cognitive aspects of learning but also acknowledges the emotional and practical dimensions, fostering a more comprehensive and effective learning experience (Johnson, 1988; Zhang et al., 2021).”

“…in comparison to the other types of WCF. Similarly, Sarvestani and Pishkar (2015) found that students' performance improved significantly after eight weeks of teaching writing with the provision of WCF. Similarly, Zhang et al. (2021) investigated the preferences of 117 Tai University students.”

“Error codes “(1) enable learners to understand the nature of the error, and (2) provide learners with opportunities to self-correct, thereby facilitating reflection on partially acquired knowledge of an L2” (Zhang, Chen, Hu, & Ketwan, 2021, p.2).”

“Richards and Rogers (1986), supported by Zhang et al. (2021), stated that English proficiency has three levels: basic, intermediate, and advanced.”