000 02627cam a2200325 a 4500
003 EG-GiCUC
005 20250223032327.0
008 190715s2018 ua f m 000 0 eng d
040 _aEG-GiCUC
_beng
_cEG-GiCUC
041 0 _aeng
049 _aDeposite
097 _aM.A
099 _aCai01.02.12.M.A.2018.Ha.I
100 0 _aHaidy Ahmed Emam Ahmed
245 1 4 _aThe impact of coded &uncoded written corrective feedback of grammatical errors on students' writing accuracy /
_cHaidy Ahmed Emam Ahmed ; Supervised Norice William Methiasc
246 1 5 _aتأثير التصحيح الكتابى للأخطاء النحوية باستخدام الرموز او عدمه على دقة كتابة دارسى اللغة الانجليزية كلغة اجنبية
260 _aCairo :
_bHaidy Ahmed Emam Ahmed ,
_c2018
300 _a120 P. ;
_c25cm
502 _aThesis (M.A.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Arts - Department of English
520 _aThepresent research investigates two different strategies of written corrective feedback (WCF) to improve students{u2019} grammatical accuracy in writing. These two strategies are coded and uncoded WCF. In Coded written corrective feedback the teacher mentions where the error takes place and she identifies the type of the error in the form of a code. For instance, SVA means there is an error in the use of subject verb agreement. UncodedWCF occurs when the teacher makes a circle or underlines the exact error and rewrites the correction on top.The present study focuses on coded and uncoded WCF with respect to the present simple and present perfect only. The present study was conducted on 37 students and they were divided into two groups; group A for coded which consisted of 19 students while group B for the uncoded which included 18 students. The study lasted for seven weeks. Week one and seven served as pre-test and post-test. In the last session (week seven) the teacher distributed the questionnaire to the students to reveal their attitudes towards coded and uncoded written corrective feedback. The results revealed that the coded group outperformed the uncoded one in using both tenses. Additionally, the questionnaire showed the coded group prefer the coded CF method rather than the uncoded group
530 _aIssued also as CD
653 4 _aCoded corrective feedback
653 4 _aUncoded corrective feedback
653 4 _aWritten corrective feedback
700 0 _aNorice William Methias ,
_eSupervisor
856 _uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf
905 _aNazla
_eRevisor
905 _aShimaa
_eCataloger
942 _2ddc
_cTH
999 _c72853
_d72853