The feedback process on academic writing in English: perceptions of university teachers

Marina López Casoli, Eliana Berardo

Abstract


Many studies in the field of academic writing have focused on studying written teacher feedback (WTF) on texts written by students of English as a Second Language (ESL). One line of research within this field has been the analysis of teachers’ and students’ perceptions and attitudes toward WTF. The objective of this qualitative investigation is to analyze teachers’ perceptions about their WTF practices with spanish-speaking students in the English Teacher Training Program at Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Argentina, on their written productions in ESL. Different writing instructors in the program were surveyed on several forms of TWF. Results show that teachers prefer holistic feedback on the organization and coherence of ideas as well as on linguistic aspects rather than selective feedback. Teachers also take into account the emotional impact on the students of their WTF practices, which are determined by factors such as lack of time and the clarity of the different kinds of comments. Finally, they agree on the educational power of TWF as they believe its conducive to learning and helps students become autonomous learners. These results reveal the importance of explaining to the students the WTF criteria prior to writing in order to make it more effective.


Keywords


Feedback; Writing; English as a second language; Teacher perceptions

References


AMRHEIN, H. R.; NASSAJI, H. Written corrective feedback: what do students and teachers prefer and why. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, v. 13, n. 2, p. 95-127, 2010.

BITCHENER, J. Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 17, p. 102–118, 2008.

BITCHENER, J. Written corrective feedback for L2 development: current. knowledge and future research, v. 46, n. 4, p. 855-860, dic. 2012.

BRUTON, A. Improving accuracy is not the only reason for writing, and even if it were… System, v. 37, p. 600-613, dic. 2009.

BURKE, D.; PIETERICK, J. Giving Students Effective Written Feedback. Berkshire: Open University Press, 2010.

CANAVOSIO, A. Análisis comparativo de retroalimentación docente en papel y a través de la computadora en la escritura en lengua extranjera a nivel universitario. En: MORRA, A. M. (Ed.). Investigación y práctica de la escritura en lengua extranjera en la universidad. Córdoba: Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2014. p. 63-79, 2014.

CARLESS, D. Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in higher education, v. 31, n. 2, p. 219-233, abr. 2006.

DAIB, R. Teachers and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: a case study. TESL Canada Journal, v. 23, n. 1, p. 28-432, oct. 2005.

DELGADO, R. Effects of different error feedback: approaches in students’ ability to self-edit their writing. Divergencias: Revista de Estudios Lingüísticos y Literarios, v. 5, n. 2, p. 3-16, invierno 2007.

DESROSIERS, L. A. Teacher response and subsequent student revision. Colegio Maebashi Kyoai Gakuen, v. 8, p. 111-128, mar. 2008.

EBADI, E. The effect of focused meta-linguistic written corrective feedback on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ essay writing ability. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, v. 5, n. 4, p. 878-883, jul. 2014.

ELLIS, R.; SHEEN, Y.; MURAKAMI, M.; TAKASHIMA, H. The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, v. 36, p. 353-371, feb. 2008.

FERRIS, D. The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, v. 31, n. 2, p. 315-339, verano 1997.

FERRIS, D. The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: a response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 8, n. 1, p. 1-11, 1999.

FERRIS, D. The ‘grammar correction’ debate in L2 writing: where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime . . .?). Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 13, p. 49-62, 2004.

FERRIS, D.; BROWN, J.; LIU, H.; STEIN, M. E. Responding to L2 students in college writing classes: teacher perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, v. 45, n. 2, p. 207-234, jun. 2011.

FRANTZEN, D. The effects of grammar supplementation on written accuracy in an intermediate Spanish content course. The Modern Language Journal, v. 79, n. 3, p. 329-344, sep. 1995.

HOSSEINY, M. The role of direct and indirect written corrective feedback in improving Iranian EFL students’ writing skill. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, v. 98, p. 668-674, may. 2014.

HYLAND, F.; HYLAND, K. Sugaring the pill: praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 10, p. 185-212, 2001.

IRAVANI, H.; HEMMATI, F.; AHMADPOOR, F. The impact of EFL teachers’ comment types on students’ revision. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, v. 7, n. 3, p. 326-338, feb. 2014.

LIZZIO, A.; WILSON, K. Feedback on assessment: students’ perceptions of quality and effectiveness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, v. 33, n. 3, p. 263-275, abr. 2008.

LÓPEZ CASOLI, M.; MACHADO, C.; LUCAS, S.; BERARDO, E. How effective is teacher written feedback in college writing?. En: Convención Annual de ARTESOL 2016. Asociación TESOL Argentina y Ministerio de educación de la Provincia de Corrientes, 1994, Corrientes, Argentina.

MACHADO, C.; LUCAS, S.; BERARDO, E. La influencia del feedback comprensivo y selectivo en el proceso de escritura en inglés como lengua extranjera. En: JELENS, XV Jornadas y I Congreso Latinoamericano de Enseñanza de Lenguas Extranjeras en el Nivel Superior, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2015, Córdoba, Argentina.

MACHADO, C.; BERARDO, E.; LUCAS, S. College students’ perceptions on written corrective feedback. En: 28° Convención Anual de Argentina TESOL. Maran Suites and Towers y Colegio Plaza Mayor, 2017, Paraná, Argentina.

MONTGOMERY, J. L.; BAKER, W. Teacher-written feedback: student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 16, p. 82-99. 2007.

MARTINEZ, J. I. La retroalimentación docente en la escritura en lengua extranjera: prácticas, reflexiones e implicancias pedagógicas. En: MORRA, A.M. (Comp.) Investigación y práctica de la escritura en lengua extranjera en la universidad. Córdoba: Facultad de Lenguas, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2014. p. 81-102.

MORRA, A. M.; ASÍS, M. I. The effect of audio and written teacher responses on EFL student revision. Journal of College Reading and Learning, v. 39, n. 2, p. 68-81, jul. 2014.

SAITO, H. Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on second language writing: a case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL du Canada, v. 11, n. 2, primavera 1994.

SHEEN, Y. The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, v. 41, n. 2, p. 255-283, jun. 2007.

SILVA CRUZ, M. I. La retroalimentación en la corrección de la escritura - Corrección y autocorrección en el aprendizaje de alumnos norteamericanos. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la Enseñanza de las Lenguas, v. 15. 2013.

SOTOUDEHNAMA, E.; MOLAVI, M. The effects of teachers’ written comment types and Iranian EFL learners’ attitudes. The Journal of Asia TEFL, v. 11, n. 4, p. 21-51, invierno 2014.

TAJIK, L.; FAKHARI, M.; HASHAMDAR, M.; ZADEH HABIB, S. Three types of comments on content: teacher vs. peer feedback. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, v. 7, n. 4, p. 141-166, invierno 2016.

TRUSCOTT, J. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, v. 46, n. 2, p. 327-369, jun. 1996.

TRUSCOTT, J. The case for ‘the case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes’: a response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 8, n. 2, p. 111-122, 1999.

TRUSCOTT, J. The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, v. 16, p. 255–272. 2007.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.18256/2447-3944.2018.v4i2.2462

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




e-ISSN: 2447-3944

 Licença Creative Commons
A Revista Brasileira de Ensino Superior está licenciada com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.

Indexadores

DOAJ.jpg latindex.jpg  
  REDIB  Diadorim.jpg
     
logos_DOI_CrossRef_CrossChek.png

  
 
 


  logos_DOI_CrossRef_CrossChek.png