1 |
A three-stage model for implementing focused written corrective feedback
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
2 |
FACTORS INFLUENCING EFL STUDENTS’ UTILISATION OF TEACHER WRITTEN FEEDBACK
|
|
|
|
In: TEFLIN Journal, Vol 33, Iss 1, Pp 98-122 (2022) (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
3 |
Written Corrective Feedback, Working Memory, and the Development of Explicit and Implicit Knowledge of English Plurals ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
The Role of Individual Preferences in the Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in an English for Academic Purposes Writing Course
|
|
|
|
In: Australian Journal of Teacher Education (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
5 |
Assessing Writing in French-as-a-Foreign-Language: Teacher Practices and Learner Uptake
|
|
|
|
In: Languages; Volume 6; Issue 4; Pages: 210 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
Student engagement with teacher written feedback on IELTS Writing Task 2 rehearsal essays
|
|
Pearson, WS. - : University of Exeter, 2021. : Graduate School of Education, 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
7 |
Can a ‘pedagogical’ spellchecker improve spelling accuracy in L2 Spanish?
|
|
Blazquez-Carretero, Miguel; Woore, Robert. - : University of Hawaii National Foreign Language Resource Center, 2021. : Center for Language & Technology, 2021. : (co-sponsored by Center for Open Educational Resources and Language Learning, University of Texas at Austin), 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
8 |
Focused direct corrective feedback: Effects on the elementary English learners’ written syntactic complexity
|
|
|
|
In: Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol 7, Iss 1, Pp 132-150 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
9 |
Am I Promoting Feedback Cycle and Sociomaterial Learning?
|
|
|
|
In: Issues in Language Studies, Vol 10, Iss 1 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
10 |
Written Comments on Undergraduate Theses Written in Spanish as a First Language and English as a Foreign Language
|
|
|
|
In: Signum: Estudos da Linguagem, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 52-68 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
Omani EFL writing instructors’ attitudes and reported and actual practices towards written corrective feedback in first year foundation programmes
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
12 |
An Inquiry into Effective Written Feedback from EFL Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives at a Saudi University
|
|
Albogami, M. - : University of Exeter, 2020. : School of Education, 2020
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
13 |
Validating written feedback in clinical formative assessment
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Formative assessment is widely accepted as being crucial to promoting student learning and, since 2010, the UK General Medical Council has mandated its use in workplace-based clinical training for all new doctors. As a result, the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) instituted a range of formative workplace-based assessments including the Radiology Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (Rad-DOPS), in which supervisors appraise trainees’ performance in carrying out clinical procedures. This paper reports on the quality of the written feedback in 2,500 Rad-DOPS online feedback forms in addressing the aims of the new assessment approach. Random samples of 500 were selected from the first three years of the new assessment implementation, 2010–13, and from 2016 to 17. Using an appropriate coding frame, the feedback was analysed across the samples against key trainee attributes including stage of training and level of adjudged competence. Criteria for identifying high quality feedback were derived from the literature and a simplified form of qualitative comparative analysis was used to identify the conditions associated with high quality feedback. An average of 97% of the assessments contained written feedback but the number of instances of high quality feedback was found to be exceedingly small at around 5%. The paper offers suggestions for making the feedback process more purposeful in achieving the aims of formative assessment.
|
|
Keyword:
Formative assessment; medical education; workplace-based assessments; written feedback
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30623 http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/30623/1/Written%20feedback%20in%20WBA%20Final%20clean%20copy.pdf https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1691974
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
14 |
Less is more? The impact of written corrective feedback on corpus-assisted L2 error resolution
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
15 |
THE TEACHERS’ BELIEFS IN TEACHER WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON THE STUDENTS' WRITING
|
|
|
|
In: Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature, Vol 5, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
16 |
The Effects of Direct and Indirect Written Corrective Feedbacks on the Business Communication Texts of Technical University Students in Ghana
|
|
|
|
In: Applied Linguistics Research Journal, Vol 4, Iss 2, Pp 25-39 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
17 |
Written corrective feedback in English compositions: Teachers’ practices and students’ expectations
|
|
|
|
In: English Language Teaching Educational Journal, Vol 3, Iss 2, Pp 95-107 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
18 |
The effects of different types of written corrective feedback on students’ texting mistakes
|
|
|
|
In: English Language Teaching Educational Journal, Vol 3, Iss 3, Pp 174-187 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
19 |
Students’ preferences and teachers’ beliefs towards written corrective feedback
|
|
|
|
In: ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching, Vol 9, Iss 1, Pp 85-95 (2020) (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|