Purpose: This study adopted a mixed-method approach, including a classroom experiment and 24 in-depth interviews, to investigate the effects of two feedback techniques (coded focused and unfocused written corrective feedback) on ESL learners' writing in a self-financed tertiary institution in Hong Kong. Methodology: Three intact classes of 47 students served as the experimental and control groups; the control group only received feedback on content and organization, whereas the two experimental groups also received focused and unfocused linguistic feedback, respectively. The feedback intervention was conducted over an eight-week intensive summer course, focusing on three grammar errors (articles, singular/plural nouns and verb forms). Altogether, students wrote seven pieces, four of which were analysed for the present research. Results: The study found that students who received focused written corrective feedback (WCF) significantly outperformed the other two groups, though the effects varied across error types. Meanwhile, no significant differences were found between the unfocused and control groups. In-depth interviews explored how individual learners' metalinguistic understanding and engagement affect their intake of WCF. The results revealed that learners who received focused feedback developed a deeper understanding of the linguistic nature of specific error types. Learners with limited English proficiency were less likely to apply their linguistic knowledge to revise a task or write a new one. Conclusion: Because not all errors deserve equal attention, teachers and students should consider how feedback can be used more effectively, particularly in areas where comprehensive feedback is considered obligatory. When teaching students with limited language proficiency, it is recommended that, rather than providing a wide range of error corrections, teachers provide focused feedback complemented with carefully designed metalinguistic support. Copyright © 2022 National

This study investigated the English writing anxiety experienced by preservice English as second/foreign language teachers in Hong Kong, and its impact on their written corrective feedback (WCF). A total of 34 highly proficient preservice teachers responded to the Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory (Cheng, 2004), which measured writing anxiety in three dimensions (i.e., cognitive, somatic and avoidance anxiety). Ten were selected to provide WCF to a sample student writing and receive an individual interview immediately afterwards. Over half of the 34 participants were found suffering from moderate or high levels of writing anxiety, especially in the cognitive dimension. Compared to their less apprehensive peers who adopted more indirect feedback, highly anxious student teachers had a clear preference to direct and comprehensive feedback. Their WCF practices were found affected by five factors, including their conception of English writing, concerns of teacher professional credibility and work ethics, concerns of student cognition and motivation, confidence in students’ ability, and their feedback experience as students and student teacher during teaching practicum. These factors were synthesized into a grounded-theory model of four internal forces that drive student teachers towards either a focus-on-form, direct, comprehensive approach to WCF or a broad-based, indirect and selective approach. Suggestions were made for further research. Copyright © 2020 Qin Xie and Junting Yuan.

Previous research on comprehensive/focused written corrective feedback (WCF) has been dominated by the experimental/quasi-experimental tradition, with low ecological validity and limited pedagogical relevance, and without sufficiently recognizing the complex issues that influence teacher WCF practices in authentic classrooms. To fill this gap, this study adopts an ecological approach informed by a complexity perspective to investigate two secondary teachers’ attempts at focused WCF in the Hong Kong EFL writing context. Data were gathered for one academic year from interviews with teachers and students, classroom observations, students’ writing, as well as pre-and post-writing tests. The findings suggest that focused WCF is feasible in authentic classrooms when it is aligned with writing instruction and provided on preselected error types and selective errors based on individual students’ needs, providing an impetus for teachers to strengthen their writing pedagogy and freeing them up to enhance feedback on other areas of student writing. The study points to the potential of focused, student-specific WCF in enhancing written accuracy as well as students’ engagement with revision, and concludes with implications for the pedagogy of WCF in similar contexts. Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.