Perceptions and Preferences of Senior High School Students About Written Corrective Feedback in Pakistan
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3511719 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ushba Rasool (0000-0002-0940-0241, Zhengzhou University, corresponding author), Raasheed Mahmood (0000-0001-7163-0577, Okan University), Muhammad Zammad Aslam (0000-0002-1475-5741, Northern University of Malaysia), Sami Hussein Hakeem Barzani (0000-0003-3333-064X, Tishk International University), Jiancheng Qian (Zhengzhou University) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Publication date | 2023-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | SAGE Open (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2158-2440 • E-ISSN: 2158-2440 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/21582440231187612 |
| OpenAlex | W4385147549 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 54 |
Written corrective feedback (WCF) in enhancing writing proficiency has been the subject of numerous studies, but few studies have examined students' perceptions about the value of feedback on their written errors. Language teachers use global tools and techniques to give students feedback on their written work. How feedback is delivered and received by students is valued differently. The current study concentrated on how students interpret written corrective feedback and which WCF tactics they favor in writing classrooms. To examine these objectives empirically, the researchers employed a self-administered questionnaire to collect data from 180 participants from a high secondary school in Multan, Pakistan. At the same time, 40 participants were interviewed for their opinions about written corrective feedback (WCF). Some participants expressed concerns about ambiguous feedback that confuses them about their errors, whereas most participants favored the feedback process as beneficial. The most preferred strategies were meta-linguistic explanation and direct written corrective feedback that facilitated writing proficiency and language knowledge. Overall, WCF guides errors to avoid and how to adapt their writing style for composing compelling manuscripts
Corrective Feedback · Language proficiency · Linguistics · Mathematics education · Peer feedback · Perception · Second language · Second language writing · Writing process · Written language · EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning · Psychology · Student Assessment and Feedback
Translanguaging and Speaking Development among Low-Proficiency ESL Undergraduates
Educational psychology perspectives on cognitive load and written corrective feedback
The influence of humanistic education on tertiary English teachers' writing assessment practices
Undergraduate EFL learners’ preferences for three different types of written corrective feedback
AI-generated content and business English speaking
Examining the beliefs of non-native English-speaking teachers and EFL students about WCF in enhancing writing skills
Beyond traditional classrooms
Less is NOT more for learners
Investigating EFL Learners’ Perceptions of Using Grammarly in Enhancing Writing Proficiency in Bangladesh
Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing
Practice in a Second Language
Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching
Getting the Message Across
Evidence in support of written corrective feedback
Epilogue
The qualitative content analysis process
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)
Content analysis and thematic analysis
Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error
The Contribution of Written Corrective Feedback to Language Development
Incidental corrective feedback provision for formulaic vs. Non-formulaic errors
Children's school readiness in the ECLS-K
Students' perceptions of teachers' feedback practice in teaching English as a foreign language
The effects of feedback explicitness and type of target structure on accuracy in revision and new pieces of writing
Mediating and being mediated
Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System
Teacher written corrective feedback
Comparing the effects of direct and indirect synchronous written corrective feedback
| Citations per year | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |