Investigating ESL/EFL students’ approaches in response to feedback: A case study

Amerah Abdullah Alsharif, Hesham Suleiman Alyousef


This case study investigated the revision processes of six upper-intermediate ESL/EFL learners with high motivation for improving their writing. It aimed to provide in-depth and detailed information related to the participants’ approaches to revision, and to analyse the participants’ texts and confirm the results from their own point of view. The study employed three data sources: structured and retrospective interviews, the students’ written texts, and the tutors’ written feedback. The students’ revised drafts were analysed using Faighly and Witte's (1981) taxonomy of revisions, which helped to clarify the dominant features of the students’ revisions. The findings showed that three students focused on surface-level changes (labelled as local-oriented students) and the other three focused on broader meaning-level changes (labelled as global-oriented students). This indicates that students need to be aware of the different revision strategies and the various ways they can use to incorporate feedback into their revision process.


tutor feedback; ESL/EFL students approach to revision; meaning-level and surface-level changes; taxonomy of revision processes

Full Text:



Alnasser, S. M., & Alyousef, H. S. (2015a). Improving the effectiveness of the peer feedback technique: The impact of focusing EFL student-writers on macro level features. International Journal of English Language Education, 3(1), 92-112.

Alnasser, S. M., & Alyousef, H. S. (2015b). Investigating Saudi learners’ preferences for giving and receiving macro and/or micro level peer feedback on their writing. English Language Teaching (ELT) Journal, 8(6), 57-68.

Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of second language writing, 9(3), 227-257.

Belcher, D. (1989). How professors initiate nonnative speakers into their disciplinary discourse communities. Texas papers in foreign language education, 1(3), 207-225.

Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student Approaches to Learning and Studying. Research Monograph. Melbourne: ERIC.

Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of second language writing, 17(2), 102-118.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback. System, 37(2), 322-329.

Brown, J. D., & Rodgers, T. S. (2003). Doing second language research (2nd. ed.). U.K.: Oxford University Press.

Bruton, A. (2009). Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were…. System, 37(4), 600-613.

Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of second language writing, 12(3), 267-296.

Cohen, A. D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning (pp. 57-69). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Cohen, A. D., & Robbins, M. (1976). Toward assessing interlangage performance: The relationship between selected errors, learners' characteristics, and learners' explanations. Language learning, 26(1), 45-66.

Conrad, S. M., & Goldstein, L. M. (1999). ESL student revision after teacher-written comments: Text, contexts, and individuals. Journal of second language writing, 8(2), 147-179.

Duppenthaler, P. M. (2002). The effect of three types of written feedback on student motivation. JALT Journal, 24(2), 130-154.

Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT journal, 63(2), 97-107.

Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371.

Faigley, L., & Witte, S. (1981). Analyzing revision. College composition and communication, 32(4), 400-414.

Fazio, L. L. (2001). The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority-and majority-language students. Journal of second language writing, 10(4), 235-249.

Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of second language writing, 8(1), 1-11.

Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New

evidence on the short-and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp. 81-104). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of second language writing, 10(3), 161-184.

Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL quarterly, 29(1), 33-53.

Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Goldstein, L. (2006). Feedback and revision in second language writing: Contextual, teacher, and student variables. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp. 185-205). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Guénette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct?: Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing. Journal of second language writing, 16(1), 40-53.

Hayes, J. R. (2004). What triggers revision? In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy & P. Largy (Eds.), Cognitive and Instructional Processes (pp. 9-20). New York: Springer.

Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing. Journal of second language writing, 3(2), 141-163.

Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1996). Some input on input: Two analyses of student response to expert feedback in L2 writing. The Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 287-308.

Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of second language writing, 7(3), 255-286.

Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31(2), 217-230.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues: Cambridge University Press.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal, 66(2), 140-149.

Lee, I. (2004). Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of second language writing, 13(4), 285-312.

Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of second language writing, 17(2), 69-85.

Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203-218.

Lindgren, E., Spelman Miller, K., & Sullivan, K. P. (2008). Development of fluency and revision in L1 and L2 writing in Swedish high school years eight and nine. ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 133-151.

Manchón, R. M., Roca de Larios, J., & Murphy, L. (2009). The temporal dimension and problem-solving nature of foreign language composing processes: Implications for theory. Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching, and research, 102-129.

Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265-289.

Polio, C., & Fleck, C. (1998). “If I only had more time:” ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of second language writing, 7(1), 43-68.

Radecki, P. M., & Swales, J. M. (1988). ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16(3), 355-365.

Rowe, A. D., & Wood, L. N. (2008). What feedback do students want? In

P. Jeffery (Ed.), Proceedings of 2007 Australian Association for Research in Education International Education Research Conference. Freemantle, WA. Deakin, ACT: AARE.

Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC journal, 23(1), 103-110.

Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners' processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(02), 303-334.

Sze, C. (2002). A case study of the revision process of a reluctant ESL student writer. TESL Canada Journal, 19(2), 21-36.

Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2012). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and models (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language learning, 46(2), 327-369.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1980). Macrostructures: An interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition: Lawrence Erlbaum.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

  Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2017 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies