The Effect of Technology-Mediated Written Corrective Feedback on Vocabulary, Grammar, and Mechanics in EFL Writing

Show Details XML PDF
  • Maryam Meshkat1,
  • Sanaz Rahnavard2,
  1. Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Faculty of Humanities, Lavizan, Tehran, Iran
  2. Farzanegan High School, Sampad, Karaj, Iran

Published in Issue 2025-10-19

How to Cite

Meshkat, M., & Rahnavard, S. (2025). The Effect of Technology-Mediated Written Corrective Feedback on Vocabulary, Grammar, and Mechanics in EFL Writing. Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 18(1). https://oiccpress.com/jelpp/article/view/19495

PDF views: 14

Abstract

This quasi-experimental study, grounded in cognitive theory, examined the impact of written corrective feedback (WCF) on specific components of writing: grammar, vocabulary, and mechanics. The research aimed to determine the effectiveness of targeted WCF on A2-level English language learners' writing proficiency. The participants comprised 110 secondary students enrolled in online English classes conducted via the SHAD application over a nine-month period. The students were randomly assigned to three treatment groups based on their availability, each receiving WCF focused on either grammar, vocabulary, or mechanics. To measure writing improvement, all participants completed the A2 Key examination as both the pre-test and post-test. The analysis of the gain scores indicated that technology-mediated WCF was generally effective in enhancing writing skills across all three categories. Specifically, improvements were observed in grammar, vocabulary, and mechanics following the intervention. However, the statistical analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the effectiveness of WCF across the three error categories. This suggests that while WCF improved writing performance in all areas, the degree of improvement did not vary significantly depending on whether the feedback focused on grammar, vocabulary, or mechanics. These findings offer valuable insights for educators, students, teacher training programs, and curriculum developers, informing the design and implementation of targeted feedback strategies in online language learning environments.

Keywords

  • written corrective feedback,
  • error,
  • grammar,
  • vocabulary,
  • mechanics,
  • writing
PDF

References

  1. Abasi, F., Hejazi, E., & Hakimzadeh, R. (2020). Tajrobe zisteh moaleman doreh ebtedai az forsatha va chaleshhaye tadris dar shabakeh amouzeshi daneshamouzan (SHAD): Yek motal’e padidarshenasi [Lived experience of elementary school teachers about the opportunities and challenges of teaching in the Educational Network of Students (SHAD): A phenomenological study]. Journal of Teaching Research, 8(3), 1-24.
  2. Alshahrani, A., & Storch, N. (2014). Investigating teachers’ written corrective feedback practices in a Saudi EFL context. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 37(2), 101-122. https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.37.2.02als
  3. Altamimi, O. A., & Masood, M. (2021). Teacher electronic written corrective feedback, trends and future directions. Arab World English Journal, 12(3), 308-322. https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no3.21
  4. Arindra, M. Y., & Ardi, P. (2020). The correlation between students’ writing anxiety and the use of writing assessment rubrics. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network Journal, 13(1), 76-93.
  5. Avci, H. (2019). Assessing writing in accordance with the descriptors of the Common European Framework of Reference for languages [master’s thesis, Hacettepe University]. Hacettepe University.
  6. Bagheri, M., & Rassaei, E. (2022). The effects of two forms of written corrective feedback and ambiguity tolerance on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. English Teaching & learning, 46, 19-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-021-00082-6
  7. Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004
  8. Bitchener, J. (2012). A reflection on ‘the language learning potential’ of written CF. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 348-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.006
  9. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409-431. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362168808089924
  10. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback. System, 37(2), 322-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.12.006
  11. Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters.
  12. Boggs, J. A. (2019). Effects of teacher-scaffolded and self-scaffolded corrective feedback compared to direct corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy in English L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 46, 100671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.100671
  13. Bozorgian, H., & Yazdani, A. (2021). Direct written corrective feedback with metalinguistic explanation: Investigating language analytic ability. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 65-85. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2021.120976
  14. Brown, H. D. (2014). Principles of language learning and teaching (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
  15. Bruton, A. (2009). Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were… System, 37(4), 600-613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.005
  16. Cambridge English. (2016). Principles of good practice: Research and innovation in language learning and assessment. Cambridge English. https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/Images/22695-principles-of-goodpractice.pdf
  17. Cambridge English. (n.d.). Quality management and validation in language assessment: Reporting reliability figures. Cambridge English. https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/research-and-validation/quality-andaccountability/
  18. Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267-296.
  19. Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Council of Europe Publishing. www.coe.int/lang-cefr.
  20. Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., Orsmond, P., Gomez, S., & Park, J. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students? Computer & Education, 58(1), 386396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.025
  21. Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effect of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3). 353-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001.
  22. Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2014). Learner uptake of teacher electronic feedback in ESL composition. System, 46, 80-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.011
  23. Farrahi Avval, S., Asadollahfam, H., & Behin, B. (2021). Effects of receiving corrective feedback through online chats and class discussion on Iranian EFL learners’ writing quality. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching & Research, 9(34), 203-212.
  24. Fathman, A. K., & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.). Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 178-190). Cambridge University Press.
  25. Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80110-6
  26. Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81–104). Cambridge University Press.
  27. Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490
  28. Ferris, D. R. (2011). Treatment of error in second language student writing (2nd ed.). The University of Michigan Press.
  29. Hartshorn, K. J., & Evans N. W. (2012). The differential of comprehensive corrective feedback on L2 writing accuracy. Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching, 3(2), 25-50.
  30. Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2018). The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing. Language Teaching Research, 24(4), 519-539. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362168818802469
  31. Ko, M. (2019). Students’ reactions to using smartphones and social media for vocabulary feedback. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(8), 920-944. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1541360
  32. Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal, 66(2), 140-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15404781.1982.tb06973.x
  33. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed., pp. 256-270). Cengage Learning.
  34. Larsen-Freeman, D., & DeCarrico, J. (2020). Grammar. In N. Schmitt, M. P.H. Rodgers (Eds.), An introduction to applied linguistics (3rd ed., pp. 1934). Routledge.
  35. Lee, I. (2017). Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3924-9
  36. Lee, I. (2019). Teacher written corrective feedback: Less is more. Language Teaching, 52(4), 524-536. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000247
  37. Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Z. Han (Ed.). Understanding second language process (pp. 27–44). Multilingual Matters.
  38. Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  39. Liu, Q., & Brown, D. (2015). Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 66-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.011
  40. Mao, Z., & Lee, I. (2020). Feedback scope in written corrective feedback: Analysis of empirical research in L2 contexts. Assessing Writing, 45, 100469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100469
  41. Mohebbi, H. (2021). 25 years on, the written error correction debate continues: an interview with John Truscott. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 6(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862021-00110-9
  42. Olshtain, E. (2014). Practical tasks for mastering the mechanics of writing and going just beyond. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton, & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed., pp. 208-221). Heinle Cengage Learning.
  43. Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (4th ed.). Allen & Unwin.
  44. Rastgou, A., Storch, N., & Knoch, U. (2020). The effect of sustained teacher feedback on CAF, content and organization in EFL writing. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 8(2), 41-61.
  45. Richards, J. C. (2015). Key issues in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
  46. Robb. T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 83-95. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586390
  47. Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23(1), 103-110.
  48. Sherpa, S. Z. (2021). Effects of direct and indirect written corrective feedback on Bhutanese learners’ grammatical accuracy over time. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 14(1), 574-603.
  49. Shintani, N., & Aubrey, S. (2016). The effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy in a computer-mediated environment. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 296-319. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12317
  50. Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2015). Does language analytic ability mediate the effect of written feedback on grammatical accuracy in second language writing? System, 49, 110-119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.01.006
  51. Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42(2), 181-207.
  52. Storch, N. (2018). Written corrective feedback from sociocultural theoretical perspectives: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 51(2), 262-277. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000034
  53. Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners’ processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing: Case studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 303-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990532
  54. Truscott, J. (1996). Review article: The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.
  55. Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “the case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 337-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.05.002
  56. Truscott, J. (2001). Selecting errors for selective error correction. Concentric: Studies in English Literature and Linguistics, 27(2), 93-108.
  57. Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 111122.
  58. Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003
  59. Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003
  60. Van Beuningen, C. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119171
  61. Zarei, A., & Rahnama, M. (2013). The effect of written corrective feedback modes on EFL learners’ grammatical and lexical writing accuracy: From perceptions to facts. International Journal on Studies in English language and Literature, 1(3), 1-14.