‘Yes, I recall that mistake. I think about it every time I write <i>estos</i> now’: A case study on written corrective feedback and lexical development in L2 Spanish

Despite its widespread use, the efficacy of written corrective feedback (WCF) in foreign language teaching remains a subject of debate. Furthermore, methodological challenges involved in its study, especially concerning vocabulary development, have resulted in contradictory and inconclusive findings in the field. This article assesses the effects of five WCF formats on the lexical development of 21 C1-level adult learners of second language (L2) Spanish in a real classroom setting. On one hand, we analysed four different tasks written by the participants, totaling 84, in terms of lexical sophistication, diversity, density, and accuracy. On the other hand, for every lexical error found, we annotated and tracked its type, the WCF format provided by the teacher, and whether it was subsequently corrected or repeated by the participants. Moreover, through questionnaires and post-intervention debriefings, we collected data on participants’ habits, beliefs, and preferences regarding WCF and further inquired about their understanding and application of the WCF they had received. Our results reveal that the lexical error rate decreased throughout tasks without compromising lexical complexity. Metalinguistic WCF proved to be the most effective and was preferred by participants. The type of error made influenced both the efficacy of the correction format and its recurrence. Additionally, participant habits and preferences were more closely linked to performance than their beliefs were. Therefore, careful consideration of what and how to correct is essential to facilitate language uptake.