Review reports that asking students to notice particular errors decreased errors in a subsequent draft without reducing overall writing quality (Chandler)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on a source with no registered publication record (a web page, book or unpublished report). It is kept because 4 design pages cite it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In Chandler's (2003) study as reported by the review, when students were asked to notice particular errors in their writing, errors decreased in a subsequent draft without a reduction in the overall quality of writing. → Barnawi 2010

Evidence¶

Barnawi 2010¶

Barnawi, O. Z. (2010). Promoting Noticing Through Collaborative Feedback Tasks in EFL College Writing Classrooms. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22(2). https://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/

q2 · i? · theoretical · r3

The review reports Chandler's (2003) study of feedback about error in students' writing improvement, viewing such feedback as a medium for encouraging students to notice errors. The review states "errors decreased in a subsequent draft without a reduction in the overall quality of writing." No effect size is printed.

"She found that when students were asked to notice particular errors in their wr iting, errors decreased in a subsequent draft without a reduction in the overall quality of writing."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Writing Skills — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Explicit L2 grammar instruction leads to larger learning effects than implicit instruction, as reported in the reviewed synthesis literature — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Process Writing Improves Writing Quality — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Review reports that collaborative feedback tasks improved students' writing accuracy for both low and highly proficient students (Tang & Tithecott) — related
• Review reports that collaborative feedback tasks promoted noticing and peer dialogs enhanced meta-cognitive processing in a university ESL writing class (Riddiford) — related
• Peer Feedback Improves Writing — related
• A review of 50 studies reports that AWE tools can improve the organization and overall quality of writing and encourage self-directed learning — related
• A formative assessment script increases the quantity and quality of peer feedback vocational students generate on a peer's draft — related