Volume 4,Issue 5
Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback and L2 Writing Development: Unpacking the Role of Feedback Literacy
This study, from the perspective of Activity Theory, adopted a mixed-methods approach to explore the impact of feedback literacy on L2 writing performance in the context of dynamic written corrective feedback (WCF). The study lasted for six weeks and involved 100 freshmen English majors from a Chinese university. Quantitative data were acquired using a feedback literacy questionnaire and writing exams. Qualitative data were gathered from logs of writing revision. The study indicated that dynamic WCF was more successful than non-dynamic WCF in establishing L2 writing proficiency. In the non-dynamic WCF group, a significant link was found only between feedback literacy and error-free T-unit ratio. Since dynamic WCF is meaningful for learners, it is less likely to be influenced by feedback literacy. Besides, students with higher feedback literacy are more cognitively, behaviorally, and emotionally involved in the revision process.
[1] Truscott J, 1996, The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes. Language Learning, 46(2): 327–369.
[2] Bitchener J, 2008, Evidence in Support of Written Corrective Feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2): 102–118.
[3] Hartshorn KJ, Evans NW, Merrill PF, et al., 2010, Effects of Dynamic Corrective Feedback on ESL Writing Accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1): 84–109.
[4] Zhang LJ, Cheng XL, 2021, Examining the Effects of Comprehensive Written Corrective Feedback on L2 EAP Students’ Linguistic Performance: A Mixed-Methods Study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 54: 101043.
[5] Evans NW, Hartshorn KJ, McCollum RM, et al., 2010, Contextualizing Corrective Feedback in Second Language Writing Pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 14(4): 445–463.
[6] Xian L, 2024, Written Corrective Feedback and Individual Differences on Second Language Writing Development. Thesis, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
[7] Carless D, Boud D, 2018, The Development of Student Feedback Literacy: Enabling Uptake of Feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8): 1315–1325.
[8] Boggs JA, Manchón RM, 2023, Feedback Literacy in Writing Research and Teaching: Advancing L2 WCF Research Agendas. Assessing Writing, 58: 100786.
[9] Evans NW, Hartshorn KJ, Strong-Krause D, 2011, The Efficacy of Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback for University-Matriculated ESL Learners. System, 39(2): 229–240.
[10] Kurzer K, 2018, Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback in Developmental Multilingual Writing Classes. TESOL Quarterly, 52(1): 5–33.
[11] Engeström Y, 2001, Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1): 133–156.
[12] Storch N, 2018, Written Corrective Feedback from Sociocultural Theoretical Perspectives: A Research Agenda. Language Teaching, 51(2): 262–277.
[13] Molloy E, Boud D, Henderson M, 2020, Developing a Learner-Centred Framework for Feedback Literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4): 527–540.
[14] Takahashi J, 2026, Feedback Literacy and Student Engagement with WCF by Beginner JFL Learners: A Classroom Study. Applied Linguistics Review, 17(1): 47–69.
[15] Kristina M, Yumarnamto M, 2024, Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) Preferences in Writing Class: Developing Pedagogy for Feedback Literacy. Beyond Words, 12(2): 157–177.
