Matches or Mismatches? Exploring Shifts in Individuals’ Beliefs About Written Corrective Feedback as Students and Teachers-to-be

Abstract

This qualitative study was conducted to investigate participants’ beliefs about the different types of written corrective feedback (WCF) when they were students and to explore their beliefs about the same issue when they became teachers-to-be. The study also examined the types of feedback that the teachers-to-be provided on an essay to identify any (mis)matches between their beliefs and actual performance. A total of 52 participants took part in this research, and the data were triangulated from a variety of sources: pre-participation essays, two rounds of semi-structured interviews with the participants (when they were students and when they became teachers-to-be), and the participants’ own WCF on an essay. The data analysis revealed that the majority of the participants expressed positive attitudes towards WCF both as students and as teachers-to-be. Interestingly, their beliefs about the different types of WCF at those different stages were found to be generally congruent. When they were students, they expressed the preference for indirect, global, and unfocused WCF, and as teachers-to-be, they preferred the provision of direct, indirect, global, and focused WCF. Furthermore, the textual analysis of the participants’ WCF revealed the presence of all types of feedback and that their beliefs matched their performance to a great extent. The study concluded with a discussion of the pedagogical implications of the findings and suggestions for further research.