Exploring the Effects of Error Correction versus Reformulation on Students' Revision in a Collaborative Writing Context

A case study was conducted to compare the effect of one common type of written corrective feedback - direct error correction - with an alternative type of feedback - reformulation - in an EFL writing class at a Korean university. It also aimed to examine how the different types of feedback were processed by students in collaborative contexts and how the process was related to the quality of the students' revisions. The study documented four students' collaborative writing texts and their dialogic interaction from the composing stage (Stage 1) and feedback comparing stage (Stage 2), to the revised written product (Stage 3). A microanalysis of the data shows that neither of the feedback types had long-term impact on the accuracy of student revisions. It also reveals that the students often noticed the feedback without overt discussion; in addition, they sometimes did not even understand the feedback. These results can be interpreted as indicating that: (1) the process of dispensing feedback could be an important factor on the effectiveness of the feedback itself; and (2) written corrective feedback might not be beneficial if the students do not have the knowledge to understand the feedback. Pedagogical implications of the study, as well as limitations and directions for further research, are presented.