English Teaching & Learning

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 165–188 | Cite as

Learner Concordancing for EFL College Writing Accuracy

  • Hsien-Chin LiouEmail author
Original Paper


As technologies advance, the use of corpora and concordance programs has shown their potential to help second language writing classes. Although some writing research has demonstrated usefulness of corpora in different ways, much less is known concerning how corpora can scaffold students’ correction and uptake of written corrective feedback for revision. The current study adopted a semester-long classroom-based research design keeping classroom ecology in order to examine how second-year EFL college students took up teacher-coded feedback by consulting corpus tools and other e-reference resources to rectify errors in their essays. Fourteen participants composed three multi-draft essay assignments plus a diagnostic essay in various genres. They used two Chinese–English concordance programs and “Corpus of Contemporary American English” to help their revisions. Questionnaires, interviews, students’ marked and revised essays, their written revision records, and video recording of learner–corpus interaction were analyzed and triangulated. Errors were found to decrease with increased frequency of corpus consultation over the semester. Although most participants appreciated the assistance of corpus tools, reservations were noted in the process. Two student cases with average writing performance point to learners’ engagement with corpora as one crucial factor interacting with perceptions and outcomes of lookups. Pedagogical implications and limitations are discussed.


Written corrective feedback Corpus consultation Classroom ecology College English writing 





書面勘誤回饋 語料庫檢索 課堂生態 大專英文寫作 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

They all signed a consent form giving permission to use their essays and relevant data.


  1. 1.
    Boulton, A., & Cobb, T. (2017). Corpus use in language learning: a meta-analysis. Language Learning, 67(2), 348–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    British National Corpus, the version 3 (BNC XML Edition). (2007). Distributed by Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium. Retrieved on 24 February 2019 from
  3. 3.
    Chambers, A., & O’Sullivan, I. (2004). Corpus consultation and advanced learners’ writing skills in French. ReCALL, 16(1), 158–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chang, W. L., & Sun, Y. C. (2009). Scaffolding and web concordancers as support for language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(4), 283–302.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cobb, T., & Boulton, A. (2015). Classroom applications of corpus analysis. In D. Biber & R. Reppen (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics (pp. 478–497). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cotos, E., Link, S., & Huffman, S. (2017). Effects of DDL technology on genre learning. Language Learning & Technology, 21(3), 104–130. Retrieved on 24 February 2019 from
  7. 7.
    Crosthwaite, P. (2017). Retesting the limits of data-driven learning: feedback and error correction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(6), 447–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davies, M. (2008). The corpus of contemporary American English: 560 million words, 1990-present. Retrieved on 24 February 2019 from
  9. 9.
    Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gabrielatos, C. (2005). Corpora and language teaching: just a fling, or wedding bells? TESL-EJ, 8(4), A1, 1–37.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gaskell, D., & Cobb, T. (2004). Can learners use concordance feedback for writing errors? System, 32(3), 301–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guerrettaz, A. M., & Johnston, B. (2013). Materials in the classroom ecology. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 779–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2015). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johns, T. (1991). Should you be persuaded: two samples of data-driven learning materials. English Language Research Journal, 4, 1–16.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kang, E. Y., & Han, Z. H. (2015). The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: a meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lai, S. L., & Chen, H. J. H. (2015). Dictionaries vs. concordancers: actual practice of the two different tools in EFL writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28, 341–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, C. Y., & Liou, H. C. (2003). A study of using web concordancing for English vocabulary learning in a Taiwanese high school context. English Teaching & Learning, 27(3), 35–56.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li, S. (2017). Using corpora to develop learners’ collocational competence. Language Learning & Technology, 21(3), 153–171. Retrieved on 24 February 2019 from
  19. 19.
    Lin, M. H. (2016). Effects of corpus-aided language learning in the EFL grammar classroom: a case study of students’ learning attitudes and teachers’ perceptions in Taiwan. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 871–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu, Q., & Brown, D. (2015). Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    O’Sullivan, Í., & Chambers, A. (2006). Learners’ writing skills in French: corpus consultation and learner evaluation. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 49–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Park, K. (2012). Learner-corpus interaction: a locus of microgenesis in corpus-assisted L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 33(4), 361–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Park, K., & Kinginger, C. (2010). Writing/thinking in real time: digital video and corpus-query analysis. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 30–49. Retrieved on 24 February 2019 from
  24. 24.
    Quinn, C. (2015). Training L2 writers to reference corpora as a self-correction tool. ELT Journal, 69(2), 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sun, Y. C., & Wang, L. Y. (2003). Concordancers in the EFL classroom: Cognitive approaches and collocation difficulty. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(1), 83–94.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Suzuki, W. (2016). The effect of quality of written languaging on L2 learning. Writing & Pedagogy, 8(3), 461–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Todd, W. R. (2001). Induction from self-selected concordances and self-correction. System, 29, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tono, Y., Satake, Y., & Miura, A. (2014). The effects of using corpora on revision tasks in L2 writing with coded error feedback. ReCALL, 26(2), 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wu, Y. J. (2015). Utilizing corpus resources companied by other consultation resources in enhancing collocation accuracy and collocation richness in L2 writing. Dissertation in University of California, Santa Barbara, March.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yeh, Y., Liou, H. C., & Yu, Y. T. (2007). The influence of computerized feedback and bilingual concordancing on EFL students’ writing. English Teaching and Learning, 31(1), 117–160. Retrieved on 24 February 2019 from
  31. 31.
    Yoon, C. (2011). Concordancing in L2 writing class: an overview of research and issues. Journal of English for Academic Purpose, 10(3), 130–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yoon, C. (2016). Concordancers and dictionaries as problem-solving tools for ESL academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 20(1), 209–229. Retrieved on 24 February 2019 from

Copyright information

© National Taiwan Normal University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Feng Chia UniversityTaichungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations