Strides in Development of Medical Education

Document Type : Original Article


Department of General Courses, School of Medicine, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran


Background: Writing in English has always been emphasized in educational programs.
Objectives: This study aimed at investigating the effects of direct focused written feedback followed by amendments and group discussions on improving students’ English writing in different fields of medical sciences.
Methods: The present research employed a quasi-experimental design. The participants were 168 Iranian undergraduate students from seven entire classes (taught by the main researcher), studying at Ahvaz Jundishapur University of medical sciences in 2019-2020. The writing tasks were the topics suggested at the end of each unit of the Inside Reading ("Intro" and "One") series. The length required for each topic was a paragraph with a hundred words at most. After writing each essay, the researcher spotted grammatical errors, recorded their types and frequencies, and gave direct feedback. The students received the corrected essays, and through group discussions and based on extra explanations provided by the researcher, the students became totally informed of their errors and were asked to apply this knowledge on their succeeding works.
Results: Wrong tenses ( 30.47%), incorrect articles (23.48%), word order (17.48%), singular/plural nouns (11.59%), prepositions (10.90%), and subject-verb agreement (6.08%) were found to be the most common errors, respectively.
Conclusion: Comparing the number of errors in the first essay with the errors spotted in the second and third essays showed that the corrective feedback was effective in improving the medical students’ essay writing.


  1. Tan KN, Manochphinyo A. Improving grammatical accuracy in Thai learners' writing: comparing direct and indirect written corrective feedback. The Journal of Asia TEFL. 2017; 14(3): 430-42. doi:10.18823/asiatefl.2017.
  2. Ellis R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
  3. Lyster R, Ranta L. Corrective feedback and learner uptake: negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 1997; 19(1): 37-6.
  4. Gass SM, Lewis K. Perceptions of interactional feedback: Differences between heritage language learners and non-heritage language learners. In A. Mackey ed. Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007: 79-9.
  5. Ellis R. The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In: Mackey A, ed. Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007: 339-60.
  6. Oladejo J. Error correction in ESL: Learners’ preferences. TESL Canada Journal 1993; 10(1): 71-89. doi:10.18806/tesl.v10i2.619.
  7. Ahmadpour L, Asadollahfam H, Ahmadpour S. The Timing of Feedback and Learners' Age on Implicit and Explicit Grammar Learning. Research in English Language Pedagogy. 2019; 7(1): 167-86.
  8. Ferris DR. Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2010; 32(2): 181-01. doi:10.1017/S0272263109990490.
  9. La Russa F. Treating Errors in Learners’ Writing: Techniques and Processing of Corrective Feedback. In: Piechurska-Kuciel E, Szymańska-Czaplak E, Szyszka M. eds.  At the Crossroads: Challenges of Foreign Language Learning. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2017: 3-17. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55155-5_1.
  10. Rezaie A, Izadpanah S, Shahnavaz A. The effects of corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners' writing. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies. 2017; 5(4): 107-17.
  11. Norton LS. Essay-writing: what really counts? High Educ. 1990; 20(4): 411-42. doi:10.1007/BF00136221.
  12. Hounsell, D. Essay planning and essay writing. High Educ Res Dev. 1984; 3(1): 13-31. doi:10.1080/0729436840030102.
  13. Chur-Hansen A. Medical students' essay-writing skills: criteria-based self- and tutor-evaluation and the rule of language background. Med Educ. 2000 Mar;34(3):194-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00457.x. [PMID: 10733705].
  14. Reynolds JF, Mair DC, Fischer PC. Writing and Reading Mental Health Records. Issues and Analysis. California: Sage; 1992.
  15. Hayatbakhsh-Abbasi M, Sepehri G, Ahmadipour H, Bakhshaei S. Evaluation of the Prescription Writing Pattern of Interns for Common Diseases in Kerman University of Medical Sciences Iran in 2013. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2016; 13(1): 34-40. [In Persian]
  16. Edwards R, White M, Jackie G, Fischbacher C. Use of journal club and letter-writing execise to teach critical appraisal to medical undergraduates. Med Educ. 2001 Jul;35(7):691-4. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.00972.x. [PMID: 11437973].