Correcting writing takes a lot of time, and it’s unclear whether students use the corrections. Self-correction (teacher marks the location, student fixes it) was effective but too slow. The fixes: track changes for rule-based errors, comment banks, and a reflection prompt that checks uptake.
Practice (B2/C1 university writing, online)
- Track changes for rule-based errors, plus a comment explaining the rule.
- Comment bubbles for general points (split this paragraph, spell-check).
- A comment bank; later a text expander (espanso) with ~20 short triggers (“yes” = positive, “no” = suggestion), several variants per trigger (2021).
- A portfolio reflection prompt: What did you learn from my corrections?
- A tutorial on how to view tracked changes. Students often can’t see them.
- From the comments: an error / type / correction sheet, limited to 5 errors.
Limits
Anecdotal; uptake was never measured.
Research context (Claude)
The written CF debate (Truscott 1996 vs Ferris; Bitchener & Ferris 2012) favours focused feedback on a few error types, which is what the “limit to 5” suggestion does.
Apply in my context (Claude)
- For IELTS Pro Gang: a comment bank keyed to band-descriptor criteria plus a required “uptake” line on the next draft is cheap to build into the platform.
Connections
Turn writing feedback into a learning activity · ELT Research Bites - reading queue (written CF) · Design peer review so it produces useful feedback