The effects of direct and indirect written corrective feedback on second language acquisition

Among many techniques for providing written feedback a distinction is usually made between direct feedback, when students are given the solution of the error, and indirect feedback, when they have to find it on their own. The identification of the most effective corrective technique is a matter of debate and results in the literature are mixed (see Bitchener & Ferris, 2012 for a review).

In this paper, we present the results of an experimental study that, following the SLA perspective, aims at investigating how feedback can enhance language acquisition and at comparing the effects of the two above-mentioned techniques in order to find out which one can be more effective for this purpose. The study was conducted on 26 Italian as a Foreign Language learners in a high school in Bordeaux. Students were divided into three groups and performed two writing tasks. One group received direct feedback, one group received indirect feedback and the control group did not receive feedback. A pre-test, an immediate and a delayed post-test were also administered to learners.

The outcomes show that students in the experimental groups outperformed students in the control group both in the immediate and delayed post-test. Students who received direct feedback outperformed students who received indirect feedback. Receiving feedback, notably in the form of direct correction, can therefore help students to progress in second language acquisition.

Reference

Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.