This study investigated the effects of two different types of feedback on writing errors: error correction versus error detection with codes. Sixty pre-intermediate Iranian English learners were divided into two groups. One group received direct feedback through error correction, while the other received indirect feedback with error codes. Both groups completed a pre-test and post-test essay. The results showed that the group receiving feedback with codes saw greater improvement in their writing abilities compared to the group receiving direct error correction. The study suggests that indirect feedback using codes is more effective than direct error correction for improving learners' writing skills.

1. The Effect of Error Correction
VS. Error Detection
11/28/14

2. Identification of Authors & work
This study has been done by
1_Razie Abedi (MA student of the University of Isfahan)
2_ Mehdi Latifi (Ph.D candidate of the University of
Isfahan)
3_ Dr. Ahmed Moinzadeh (Ph.D and the faculty member
of the University of Isfahan)
This article is taken from CCSEnet.org.com
11/28/14

3. Disposition
Abstract
Introduction
Methodology
Results
Discussion
11/28/14

4. Abstract
- This study wants to investigate that what is the most
appropriate way to give feedback to students errors in
writing.
- The study was conducted on 60 pre-intermediate Iranian
English learners.
- The results suggested that error detection along with
codes led to better improvement in the learners writing
than the error correction treatment.
11/28/14

5. Introduction
Ferris (2003) states that:
- The danger of direct error feedback is that teachers may misinterpret
student’s meaning and put words into their mouths, though direct
feedback may be appropriate for beginner students and when errors
and untreatable.( errors that students are not able to self-correct,
such as syntax and vocabulary errors)
Seow (1995) holds that:
- The process approach to writing consists of four basic stages
(planning, drafting, revising, and editing). For example, at planning
stages teachers can help students to generate ideas through such
activities as brainstorming and rapid free writing. At revising stage
feedback has been considered as a key element contributing to skill
element. In revision stage the role of feedback by teacher would gain
prominence.
11/28/14

6. Introduction (cont.)
The research question which was addressed in
this article is:
- To what extent would the type of written feedback
(direct or indirect) determine the performance
improvement in new pieces of writing?
11/28/14

7. Methodology
Participants
- The students age ranged from teens to late twentieth
- The learners were given The American Headway
Placement Test to be homogenized in addition to a short
essay writing task as their pretest.
- The same task was given to learners as post test and
both tests were corrected by Analytic Scoring Rubric.
11/28/14

8. Methodology (cont.)
Procedure
- The students first were asked to write short essays to
make sure that there is no significant difference between
their writing ability.
- The treatment was lasted for five weeks and 3 sessions
per week.
- Each student was required to hand in at least 8 writings
which equals almost one every other session.
- Group one: received direct feedback on their writing
through error correction
- Group two: received indirect feedback in their writing
along with codes.
11/28/14

9. Results showed that:
Table one: see appendix (1) in this article
There is a significant in scores from the two groups
in the post test (t= 6.284 , p= 000)
This indicates that using coded feedback was
shown a positive effect on the writing ability
improvement of the learners compared to direct
ones.
- And the subjects performed better on writing
through exposure to the coded feedback not the
direct counterpart.
11/28/14

10. Discussion
11/28/14