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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Correcting and providing feedback to the written work of the learners has always been one of the hotly-debated issues over the last decades. While a group of scholars argue in favor of the effectiveness of the written corrective (CF) feedback, others question the utility and usefulness of the CF on writing of the learners. Even there seem to be fewer consensuses on the typology of the CF. Metalinguistic written corrective feedback (CF) (e.g., brief grammatical descriptions and error codes) is a type of written feedback, through which teacher gives metalinguistic clue to the nature of the errors (Ellis, 2009). In this study, a different type of metalinguistic feedback, conceptualized as spatial intelligence-based (SIB) metalinguistic written CF_ using the colorful stationery to write, highlight, locate, or underline the linguistic errors of the learners while giving feedback_ was used while providing feedback to the learner’s work. In order to investigate the effectiveness of SIB metalinguistic written CF on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ development in writing, 47 intermediate learners were randomly assigned into two groups. The learners in the first group received SIB metalinguistic written CF for their errors in writing, while the ones in the second group only obtained metalinguistic written CF for their errors. An independent samples t-test applied on the scores achieved from a posttest showed a significant difference in scores of the first group and that of the experimental group. Results indicated that the accuracy (mechanics) and style of the writing of the first group of students who received SIB correction for their linguistic errors exceled that of the second group students whose received written correction was only metalinguistic. However, there was no significant difference between the groups in the content, and organization of their writing.

The Effect of Spatial Intelligence-based Metalinguistic Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Development in Writing