Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
364198 | Journal of Second Language Writing | 2009 | 6 Pages |
Abstract
This paper presents a critical analysis of two recent studies on error correction, Ellis, Sheen, Murakami, and Takashima (2008) and Bitchener (2008) and argues that neither study constitutes evidence for error correction based on discussion of the comparability of participants, design issues, and analysis flaws in both studies. The paper further suggests that research into the efficacy of error correction should focus on linguistic features that are more treatable but less teachable if this practice is to hold out any pedagogical promise.
Keywords
Related Topics
Social Sciences and Humanities
Arts and Humanities
Language and Linguistics
Authors
Cuiqin Xu,