The Preferences of ESL Albanian Students for Error Correction in University Level Writing Classes

Florije Bilalli


The present study, both qualitative and quantitative, explored thirty-three ESL learners’ preferences for receiving error feedback on different grammatical units as well as their beliefs about teacher feedback strategies. The study also examined the effect of the students’ level of writing ability on their views about the importance of teacher feedback on different error types. Data was gathered through the administration of two questionnaires, verbal protocol analysis, and students’ writing scores. The results of repeated measures, multivariate analysis, and  frequency  counts  revealed  that  the  majority  of  the students expect and value teachers’ written feedback on the following surface-level errors: transitional words, sentence structure, verb tenses, adverbs, punctuation, prepositions, and spelling, respectively. The results of think-aloud protocol analysis indicated that students’ beliefs about the importance of feedback on different grammatical units are formed as a result of the teacher’s practice and his emphasis on certain types of feedback and corrective feedback strategies. Finally, the findings of thestudy showed that the L2 learners’ level of writing ability influences their views about the importance of corrective feedback on errors pertinent to particular grammatical units.

Keywords: feedback, error, percepton, preferences, writing.

Full Text:




Copyright © 2012-2020 ANGLISTICUM. Journal of the Association-Institute for English Language and American Studies,Tetovo, Republic of North Macedonia.

All Rights Reserved.

The publication is licensed under a Creative Commons License (CC BY)  View Legal Code                                                                                                                 

ISSN (print): 1857-8179. ISSN (online): 1857-8187.

Disclaimer: Articles on Anglisticum have been reviewed and authenticated by the Authors before sending for the publication.

The Journal, Editors and the editorial board are not entitled or liable to either justify or responsible for inaccurate and misleading data if any. It is the sole responsibility of the Author concerned.