Further thoughts on Anthony Bruton’s critique of the correction debate

Abstract In this response I discuss several points that Bruton made in his own response paper. I first argue that his main theme, that design factors should be emphasized over statistical analysis, has never been a genuine issue; it is two independent issues, and for each of them I have some concerns about his discussion. I then consider his comments on our respective “points of departure”. If I have one, it is not at all what he says it is, and I find his own point of departure problematic in several respects. I also discuss, more briefly, three additional issues: his earlier accusations that I “misrepresent” the work of others and “inexplicably” fail to mention aspects of the research that might be troublesome for the case against correction, the ecological validity of research on correction, and explanations for the fact that some learners become highly skilled second language writers. I then offer a perspective on the state of the correction debate.

[1]  Ken Sheppard.  Two Feedback Types: Do They Make A Difference? , 1992 .

[2]  J. Truscott.  The Case for "The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes": A Response to Ferris , 1999 .

[3]  John Truscott,et al.  Error correction, revision, and learning , 2008 .

[4]  Icy Lee,et al.  Error correction in L2 secondary writing classrooms: The case of Hong Kong , 2004 .

[5]  D. Ferris.  THE CASE FOR GRAMMAR CORRECTION IN L2 WRITING CLASSES: A RESPONSE TO TRUSCOTT (1996) , 1999 .

[6]  Christine Goring. Kepner.  An Experiment in the Relationship of Types of Written Feedback to the Development of Second‐Language Writing Skills , 1991 .

[7]  Anthony Bruton,et al.  Another reply to Truscott on error correction: Improved situated designs over statistics , 2010 .

[8]  Lucy L Fazio,et al.  The Effect of Corrections and Commentaries on the Journal Writing Accuracy of Minority- and Majority-Language Students. , 2001 .

[9]  Steven J. Ross,et al.  SALIENCE OF FEEDBACK ON ERROR AND ITS EFFECT ON EFL WRITING QUALITY , 1986 .

[10]  Anthony Bruton,et al.  Designing research into the effects of grammar correction in L2 writing: Not so straightforward , 2009 .

[11]  Jean Chandler,et al.  THE EFFICACY OF VARIOUS KINDS OF ERROR FEEDBACK FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THE ACCURACY AND FLUENCY OF L2 STUDENT WRITING , 2003 .

[12]  D. Ferris.  The ‘‘Grammar Correction’ ’ Debate in L2 Writing: , 2022 .

[13]  John Truscott,et al.  The effect of error correction on learners' ability to write accurately , 2007 .

[14]  Ilona Leki,et al.  Second Language Writing: Coaching from the margins: issues in written response , 1990 .

[15]  Jean Chandler.  A response to Truscott , 2004 .

[16]  John Truscott,et al.  Selecting Errors for Selective Error Correction , 2001 .

[17]  Dana Ferris,et al.  Feedback in Second Language Writing: Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction , 2006 .

[18]  Harriet D. Semke.  Effects of the Red Pen , 1984 .

[19]  John F. Lalande.  Reducing Composition Errors: An Experiment , 1982 .

[20]  John Truscott,et al.  Review Article The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes , 1996 .

[21]  John Bitchener,et al.  The Effect of Different Types of Corrective Feedback on ESL Student Writing. , 2005 .

[22]  John Truscott,et al.  Arguments and appearances: A response to Chandler , 2009 .

[23]  Icy Lee,et al.  ESL learners' performance in error correction in writing: Some implications for teaching , 1997 .

[24]  Jean Chandler.  DialogueResponse to Truscott , 2009 .

[25]  Anthony Bruton,et al.  Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were… , 2009 .

[26]  Taka-Yoshi Makino.  Learner self-correction in EFL written compositions , 1993 .

[27]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  A power primer. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[28]  J. Truscott.  EVIDENCE AND CONJECTURE ON THE EFFECTS OF CORRECTION: A RESPONSE TO CHANDLER , 2004 .