English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

While there is a significant amount of compelling evidence to support written corrective feedback (error correction), it is also acknowledged that research findings may not be applicable or conclusive enough given the great variability among studies. Nevertheless, no systematic attempt has been made to review and synthesize the extensive amount of literature to identify the sources that lead to such variation. is study aims to identify such variables. Results indicate that in a research base of 76 relevant publications, variations can be explained based on 11 main sources. Pursuant to these findings, this study sketches the main variance-related problems and outlines design recommendations to further expand L2 research and practice of error correction in Second Language Acquisition.

An Analysis of Variation Sources in Written Corrective Feedback Studies: What is the Next Step?