EFL Students' Preferences Towards Written Corrective Feedback: An Exploratory Study on Age and Level of Proficiency

Sara Orts, Patricia Salazar


Corrective feedback (CF, henceforth) has been an issue of investigation in second language acquisition for a number of years now. In the English-as-a-foreign-language classroom, students may have different preferences towards how to have their errors corrected. Research has shown that differences in the learning styles of the students will affect the learning environment by either supporting or inhibiting their intentional cognition and active engagement. In the classroom, teachers can use this information as a tool to motivate students and help them improve in their learning process. This exploratory study was carried out to analyse students’ preferences towards written correction in two different groups at a high school in Spain. Students filled out a questionnaire and results were analysed in order to determine whether age and level of English may be factors affecting their preferences for error correction.


corrective feedback; age; proficiency; preferences; error

Full Text:



Alavi, Seyyed and Shiva Kaivanpanah. “Feedback expectancy and EFL learners’ achievement in English.” Journal of Theory and Practice in Education 3.2 (2007): 181-96.

Ammar, Ahlem and Nina Spada. “One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28/4 (2006): 543-574. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060268

Amrhein, Hannah R. and Hossein Nassaji. “Written Corrective Feedback: What do students and teachers prefer and why?” Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 13 (2010): 95-127.

Chandler, Jean. “The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing.” Journal of Second Language Writing 12 (2003): 267-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9

Chen, Sibo, Hossein Nassaji and Qian Liu. “EFL learners’ perceptions and preferences of written corrective feedback: a case study of university students from Mainland China.” Asian Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education 1.5 (2016). Web. 20 April 2016.

Cohen, Andrew D. and Marilda Cavalcanti. “Feedback on written compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports.” Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. Ed. Barbara Kroll. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. 155-77.

Corder, Stephen P. Introducing Applied Linguistics. Middlesex: Penguin, 1973.

Dulay, Heidi and Marina Burt. “Natural sequences in child second language acquisition.” Language Learning 24.1 (1974): 37-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1974.tb00234.x

Fathman, Ann and Elisabeth Whalley. “Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content.” Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. Ed. Barbara Kroll. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. 178-90.

Ferris, Dana. “Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms.” TESOL Quarterly 29.1 (1995a): 33-53.


---. “Teaching ESL composition students to become independent self-editors.” TESOL Journal 4.4 (1995b): 18-22.

---. Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2002.

---. Response to Student Writing: Implications for Second Language Students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2003.

Ferris, Dana and Marie Helt. “Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2 writing classes.” Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference. Vancouver, March 2000.

Ferris, Dana and Barrie Roberts. “Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?” Journal of Second Language Writing 10.3 (2001): 161-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00039-X

Hamouda, Arafat. “A study of students and teachers’ preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context.” English Language Teaching 4.3 (2011): 128-41.


Havranek, Gertraud and Hermann Cesnik. “Factors affecting the success of corrective feedback.” EUROSLA Yearbook Volume 1. Eds. Susan Foster-Cohen and Anna Nizegorodzew. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001. 99-122.

Hedgcock, John and Natalie Lefkowitz. “Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing.” Journal of Second Language Writing 3.2 (1994): 141-63.


---. “Some input on input: Two analyses of student response to expert feedback on L2 writing.” The Modern Language Journal 80.3 (1996): 287-308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01612.x

Hendrickson, James. “Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice.” The Modern Language Journal 62.8 (1978): 387-98. https://doi.org/10.2307/326176.

Hyland, Fiona. “The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers.” Journal of Second Language Writing 7.3 (1998): 255-86.


Hyland, Ken and Fiona Hyland. “Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing: An introduction.” Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. Eds. Ken Hyland and Fiona Hyland. Cambridge: CUP, 2006. 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.003

Lee, Icy “How do Hong Kong English teachers correct errors in writing?” Educational Journal 31.1 (2003): 153-69.

Leki, Iliona. “The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes.” Foreign Language Annals 24.3 (1991): 203-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x

Lim, L. K. Students’ Attitudes toward Errors and Error Correction in Language Learning. An Academic Exercise submitted for the award of the degree of B.A., National U of Singapore, 1990.

Lyster, Roy, Saito Kazuya. and Sato Masatoshi. “Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms.” Language Teaching, 46 (2013): 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365

Manchón, Rosa María, Julio Roca de Larios and Liz Murphy. “An approximation to the study of backtracking in L2 writing.” Learning and Instruction 10 (2000): 13-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(99)00016-X

Oladejo, James. “Error correction in ESL: Learners’ preferences.” TESL Canada Journal 10.2 (1993): 71-89. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v10i2.619

Oxford University Press, University of Cambridge, and Association of Language Testers in Europe. Quick Placement Test Paper and Pen Test. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Schachter, Jacquelyn. “Corrective feedback in historical perspective.” Second Language Research 7.2 (1991): 89-102.


Schulz, Renate. “Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar.” Foreign Language Annals 29.3 (1996): 343-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01247.x

---. “Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction.” The Modern Language Journal 85.2 (2001): 244-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00107

Sheen, Younghee. Corrective Feedback, Individual Differences and Second Language Learning. New York: Springer, 2011.


Sheen, Younghee and Rod Ellis. “Corrective feedback in language teaching.” Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Ed. Eli Hinkel. New York: Routledge, 2011. 593-610.

Storch, Neomy and Gillian Wigglesworth. “Learners’ processing, uptake and retention of corrective feedback.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32.2 (2010): 303-34.


Touchie, Hanna. “Second Language Learning Errors: their Types, Causes, and Treatment.” JALT Journal 8.1 (1986): 75-80.

Truscott, John. “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes.” Language Learning 46/2 (1996): 327-69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x

Zacharias, Nugrahenny. “Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback.” RELC Journal 38.1 (2007): 38-52.


Zarei, Nahid. The relationship between age and corrective feedback in oral communication. Online Journal of ICT for Language Learning. 5th ed. 2011.

Zhu, Honglin. “An analysis of college students’ attitudes towards error correction in EFL context.” English Language Teaching 3.4 (2010): 127-30. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n4p127

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17561/grove.v23.a8


  • There are currently no refbacks.