Abstract:
Abstract This study examined the effect of two types of feedback, post-text as a written feedback and recast as an oral one on written grammatical accuracy of Iranian intermediate EFL learners. To this end, 45 intermediate students who were studying at Ideal Language Institute in Sari were selected based on their performance on the Nelson proficiency test, and then divided into three groups (two experimental and one control groups) randomly. As pretest, the participants were asked to write 150-200 words about the worst memory they had in their life. Then, they were exposed to 10 weeks of treatment. Each week, they received a topic to write. One of the experimental groups received post-text feedback and another one recast. Afterwards, the three groups sat for the posttest. The obtained results were compared using ANCOVA. The findings revealed that there was a significant difference between the post-test scores of the students in different groups. It was made clear that both treatments were effective on the reduction of students grammatical errors in writing, but post-text feedback was much more effective than recast.
Machine summary:
recast, post-text, writing, grammatical accuracy, feedback Introduction Many studies indicate that in comparison to other skills, writing is most neglected by both teachers and students.
In the present study, since the major concern was to provide appropriate techniques to expand students’ grammatical accuracy needed to improve their writing skill, the researcher tried to compare two types of feedback, post-text written corrective feedback and recast, in order to see which one is more influential on students’ grammatical accuracy in writing.
So, in order to help learners to write with minimal errors and maximal accuracy, the teacher must provide appropriate feedback to the students and write useful comments on the students’ errors (Creme & Lea, 1997; Ennis, 1996; Ferris, 2002; Harmer, 2001; Krashen, 1987; Kroll, 2001).
The present study seeks to indicate that teachers’ written and oral corrective feedback can play a role in improving grammatical accuracy of Iranian intermediate learners’ writing.
Among different types of WCF, the researcher used post-text feedback as a written form of corrective feedback and recast as an oral one in order to encourage learners to revise their writings and correct their errors based on the feedback given by the teacher.
Does the teacher's oral and written corrective feedback affect Iranian intermediate EFL learners' grammatical accuracy in writing?
2. There is no significant difference between post-text written corrective feedback and recast in terms of their effect on Iranian intermediate students’ accuracy in writing.