Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2022 (last 5 years) | 1 |
| Since 2017 (last 10 years) | 1 |
| Since 2007 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
| Process Approach (Writing) | 2 |
| Protocol Analysis | 2 |
| Writing Evaluation | 2 |
| Accuracy | 1 |
| Achievement Tests | 1 |
| Comparative Analysis | 1 |
| Educational Benefits | 1 |
| Error Correction | 1 |
| Error Patterns | 1 |
| Feedback (Response) | 1 |
| Grade 5 | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Research | 2 |
Education Level
| Elementary Secondary Education | 1 |
| Grade 5 | 1 |
| Grade 8 | 1 |
| Higher Education | 1 |
| Postsecondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewed
Download full textLeow, Ronald P.; Thinglum, Anne; Leow, Stephanie A. – Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2022
Whether type of written corrective feedback (WCF) impacts L2 learning has been investigated for decades. While many product-oriented studies report conflicting findings, the paucity of studies adopting both a process-oriented and curricular approach (e.g., Caras, 2019) underscores the call for further research on: (1) the processing dimension of…
Descriptors: Error Correction, Second Language Learning, Second Language Instruction, Spanish
Direct linkCrawford, Lindy; Lloyd, Susan; Knoth, Kelly – Assessment for Effective Intervention, 2008
Type and quality of revisions made by students between first and final drafts of a state writing test were scored using a revision taxonomy. Scorers categorized revisions first by unit (e.g., word, phrase, sentence), and then by type (e.g., addition, substitution, spelling). They then evaluated the impact of each revision on the readability of the…
Descriptors: Writing Tests, Revision (Written Composition), State Standards, Writing Evaluation
