This study proposed a three-step writing conference in which foreign/second language (L2) students, under the guidance of their writing instructor, first fastened their attentional focus on a form-related error, analysed a collection of standard L2 samples to deduce the underlying knowledge, and then planned for their error correction as well as future learning of this knowledge. The ultimate goal of this formative assessment practice was to scaffold student engagement with written corrective feedback (WCF). Using a between-group experiment design, the present study compared the effects on the success rate of error correction and L2 uptake of the above writing conference (n = 14) against those brought about by a typical Teacher–Student (n = 12) and a typical Student–Student one (n = 12). Research participants were 38 intermediate learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) recruited from three intact classes at a language-learning center in Vietnam. The suggested writing conference was indeed found to yield better error correction and L2 uptake than the other counterparts. A closer look at the students’ mental engagement with WCF revealed that such engagement was moderately correlated with their L2 uptake. These findings altogether suggest that student engagement with WCF should not be taken for granted or, in other words, this engagement should be contingently supported by the writing instructor in order to foster learning from WCF.

本研究提出了一个三步写作会议，外语/第二语言 (L2) 学生在写作导师的指导下，首先将注意力集中在与形式相关的错误上，分析一组标准的 L2 样本以推断基础知识，然后计划他们的纠错以及未来对这些知识的学习。这种形成性评估实践的最终目标是通过书面纠正反馈 (WCF) 来促进学生的参与。本研究采用组间实验设计，比较了上述写作会议（n = 14）对纠错成功率和 L2 吸收的影响与典型教师-学生（n = 12）和一个典型的学生-学生（n = 12）。研究参与者是从越南语言学习中心的三个完整班级招募的 38 名英语作为外语 (EFL) 的中级学习者。确实发现建议的写作会议比其他同行产生更好的纠错和 L2 吸收。仔细观察学生对 WCF 的心理参与发现，这种参与与他们的 L2 吸收呈中度相关。这些发现共同表明，不应将学生参与 WCF 视为理所当然，换句话说，这种参与应该得到写作教师的偶然支持，以促进从 WCF 学习。