Article by K. James Hartshorn, Norman W. Evans, Paul F. Merrill, Richard R. Sudweeks, Diane Strong-Krause, and

Neil J. Anderson

Presented by Jillian WhetstoneESL 501

What is Dynamic Corrective Feedback?WCF – Written Corrective FeedbackInstructional strategy developed for

improving student accuracyBased on practice, research and theory

Formative Feedback has a moderate to strong positive effect in many disciplines.

Negative feedback that draws attention to linguistic form may play a meaningful role in L2 language development.

What is the purpose of this article?To provide rationale for Dynamic WCFTo test its efficacy in and ESL learning context

Skill Acquisition TheoryWhat one knows (declarative knowledge) is

required for the development of what one can do (procedural knowledge).

Theory predicts that accuracy is a function of practice.

Theory predicts that procedural knowledge doesn’t transfer well.

If students are to learn to produce accurate writing, practice tasks and activities must be authentic.

There needs to be a balance of explicit instruction and extensive practice.

How Is This Method Dynamic?WCF provides feedback that reflects what an

individual needs most, as demonstrated by what the learner produces.

WCF is a principled approach that ensures that writing tasks and feedback are meaningful, timely, constant and manageable for both student and teacher.

WCF Needs to be MeaningfulFeedback is provided in the form of coded

symbols that identify error type and location.This raises students awareness and identifies

high-frequency errors.High-frequency errors determine explicit

instruction.Students are responsible for correcting

errors on subsequent drafts.

WCF Needs to be Timely and Constant TIMELY

Writing should be marked and returned the following class period.

CONSTANTStudents produce

new pieces of writing and receive feedback nearly every class period.

WFC Needs to be ManageableFeedback is

manageable for a student when…

Feedback is manageable for a teacher when…

“I have enough time to attend to the quality and

completeness of what I

communicate to students.”

“I have the time and ability to process, learn

from, and apply the needed

feedback from my teacher.”

Feedback Cycle for Dynamic WCF

Writing AccuracyRhetorical Competence

Writing FluencyWriting Complexity

Writing AccuracyError-free T-unit ratio

EFT/T is calculated as the total number of error-free

T- units in a given piece of writing divided by the total number of T-units.

Rhetorical CompetenceCaptures the substance, organization and

flow of ideas in student writing

Is scored using a rubricCan students address writing task

successfully?Do students provide appropriate examples,

details, or support?Do students convey a sense of unity and

coherence?

Writing Fluency and ComplexityFLUENCY

Number of words a writer is able to include in their writing within a particular period of time

COMPLEXITYThe mean length of

T-units, or the average number of words per T-unit

Brigham Young University47 advanced-low to advanced-mid ESL students

Treatment Group – 28 students ages 18-45Contrast Group – 19 students ages 18-33

Five highly effective teachers Trained writing scorers and raters

Students Were Given a 30-Minute Writing Pretest and Posttest.

Pretest Prompt:Do you agree or disagree with the following

statement? Only people who earn a lot of money are successful. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

Posttest Prompt:In your opinion, what is the most important

characteristic that a person can have to be successful in life? Use specific reasons and examples from your experience to explain your answer.

Differences Between GroupsTreatment Group

Students wrote 10 minute compositions nearly every day.

Classroom discussions and activities were centered on the most frequent types of errors produced in daily writing.

Contrast GroupTeachers taught skills common to process

writing.Teachers focused on linguistic accuracy.

ResultsPros

Significantly higher accuracy scores were produced by those who received the treatment than those instructed with traditional approach.

On average, writing of the students in the treatment group was just over 75% more accurate than the writing of the students in the contrast group, based on the error-free T-unit ratio.

ResultsCons

The instructional methodology may have had a slight negative effect on writing fluency and complexity.

Students in the treatment group produced approximately 9% less text compared with the contrast group in 30 minutes.

ConclusionsThere are trade-offs: as students strive to

write more accurately, fluency and complexity may be inhibited slightly as they monitor their production more accurately.

Results suggest that WCF is effective and that substantial progress in writing accuracy is possible.

Explicit instruction, ongoing practice, and dynamic WCF equals quicker language development for many L2 learners.

Hartshorn, K. James; Evans, Norman W.; Merrill, Paul F.; Sudweeks, Richard R.; Strong-Krause, Diane; Anderson, Neil J. (2010). Effects of Dynamic Corrective Feedback on ESL Writing Accuracy  TESOL Quarterly, 26, 84-109.

Questions1. This study suggested that while there was

an increase in writing accuracy from dynamic WCF, there was a slight decrease in fluency and complexity. Do you think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks? Why or why not?

2. This study took place in a college setting. Do you think that dynamic WCF is a method that could be implemented in an elementary or secondary setting? What parts would be easiest and hardest for you to implement?