Determining Efficient Post-Writing Activity for Error Correction: Self-Editing, peer Review, or Teacher Feedback?

Abstract

Writing in English has always been a formidable obstacle for learners; accordingly, many studies aimed to find not band-aid but complete solutions for learners to improve their writing proficiency. One of these solutions, largely thought to reduce language errors, is error correction. However, instructors seem to be alternating between different corrective feedbacks with the purpose of determining the most efficient one for their students. Previous research largely compared peer feedback and teacher correction and ignored self-editing. In this sense, this study investigated three error correction methods, namely self-editing, peer review, and teacher corrections. To achieve this, three student groups were created and each group, composed of 10 students, was tested with one method. Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests were employed for analyses and the results yielded significant differences in terms of all methods concerning comparisons of pre- and post-tests. On the other hand, the test to determine inter-group differences found significant results for the method of teacher correction. Furthermore, the most frequent linguistic errors in students' writing were revealed. This research contributes to teaching pedagogy by comforting instructors regarding the efficiency of teacher correction and suggests instructors focus on particularly spelling, punctuation, and article to prompt writing development.