Selective vs. comprehensive grammar correction in writing pedagogy: Counter evidence to Truscott's view

To date, controversy among scholars exists on whether or not teachers should react to EFL learner's written grammar errors. This study investigated the effect of three feedback types (i.e., selective, comprehensive, and the one recommended by Truscott (1999), that is, no correction) with regard to possible improvements in accuracy in the writings of a total of 66 elementary EFL learners. It, further, sought whether such an effect would last in the long run. During 11 weeks, selected global (e.g., past tense, countable/uncountable, and comparative adjectives) and all grammar errors in the written pieces of the subjects in two treatment groups (n = 22 in each) were reacted through coded underlining. However, in line with Truscott, the only reaction participants in the third group (n = 22) received were comments such as great, good, ok, etc.. Analysis of the written pieces in the immediate and delayed post tests revealed that selective feedback had a significantly more positive influence on learner's accurate use of selected grammatical structures both in the short and in the long run. The implications are discussed in terms of effective guidelines for teaching writing in EFL contexts.