The impact of "recast" as indirect corrective feedback on writing and the learning outcome in grades eight and nine

Giving feedback is a crucial part of the language acquisition process, but there has always been confusion about the kind, timing, and delivery of feedback. While some people are in favour of indirect corrective feedback, others are in favour of direct corrective feedback. Six EFL classes in Grades 8 and 9 were examined in this study, with one serving as the control group and the other as the treatment group. The former group received direct correction from the teacher, who provided the model, while the latter group received indirect correction from the teacher, who pointed out the error's location and frequency. The group was then given their papers back by the teacher, who instructed them to revise them at home and return them for the final grade. This would aid in determining whether putting such a technique into practice enhances language acquisition more than using the models and solutions offered by conventional methods. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used in this study's data collecting and analysis from study participants. There was both primary and secondary analysis. In addition, the results of three writing assessments given at three different times throughout the term were compiled to determine how successful the two forms of feedback were. In order to ensure that the teacher gave each group in the study the necessary corrective comments, the researcher carefully reviewed the compositions of the students. Ultimately, the researcher conducted an interview with the instructor, inquiring about her experiences with the two classes following the experiment's execution.