Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Feeding Back On Students’ Writing?

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Feeding Back On Students’ Writing?"— Presentation transcript:

1 Feeding Back On Students’ Writing?
Try talking to them! by Wayne Trotman Izmir Katip Çelebi UniversityTurkey

2 Options Available Self-evaluation Peer correction (PC)
Teacher error correction (EC) Teacher written comments (TWC) Computer mediated feedback Teacher-student conferencing (TSC)

3 Self evaluation It’s important not to overlook writers as critical readers of their own work Feedback may be more effective when it is combined with that of self and others “..the ultimate aim of any form of feedback should be to move students to a more independent role where they can critically evaluate their own writing…” (Hyland &Hyland 2006a)

4 Peer correction Research claims many positive effects for PC
Involves students actively; more authentic audience Recent research questions effectiveness of PC Students are more likely to rely on teacher feedback Questions about the quality of peer feedback Careful preparation and training for PC are essential

5 Teacher response: two types
Teacher error correction / written feedback Research in 1980s & 1990s began to question the effectiveness of fbk on student improvement, because it was too often: poor quality vague inconsistent misunderstood

6 Teacher error correction (EC)
Truscott (1996) saw little benefit in EC Felt EC was harmful, as it was time consuming Students expect to see teacher response to error Difficult to draw conclusions and generalisations from the literature, although .. Overall students appear to attend to EC and use it to make accurate changes in their texts

7 Teacher written feedback
L2 students are positive about this, although.. Contribution to immediate and long term writing development is still unclear Studies suggest students… ignore or misuse comments when revising drafts understand the problem but cannot respond delete the problem to avoid issues raised

8 Computer-mediated feedback
Increasingly common in distance learning and online supervision Conferencing: synchronous and asynchronous Synchronous – real time chat Asynchronous – Claimed to make writing more collaborative

9 Teacher student conferencing
Advantages: In TSC students receive more focused and usable feedback (Zamel 1985) TSC supplements the limitations of the usual ‘one way’ feedback TSC saves teacher-time on marking papers later TSC allows students to ask questions about feedback

10 “The use of teacher-student conferencing is therefore intuitively attractive and supported by the positive experiences of many teachers, but empirical research on this area is rather limited.” (Ken Hyland, 2003)

11 Forms of TSC Usually one-to-one, outside the classroom, and may…
..focus on completed work, drafts in progress or student writing strategies done on an ‘ad hoc’ or planned basis during lessons an optional extra or compulsory feature of the course. TSC should always end with a possible course of action

12 Planning decisions hold conferences in class or outside?
one-to-one or in small groups? how frequently? how much time for each student? which topics to cover? ask students to prepare for the conference? how to manage the conference? how to follow up the conference?

13 Conducting conferences
TSC should involve the teacher and writer, and address the most noticeable issues in the writing Research cautions against being over-directive Teachers should support students’ work, rather than edit it Students should be encouraged to initiate issues

14 Suggested procedures for TSC
make the situation non-threatening find something to praise establish a collaborative relationship engage the student in the analysis respond to writing as ‘work in progress’ ask the student to sum up the conference end with praise and encouragement

15 Action Research? “.. is a process through which teachers collaborate in evaluating their practice, try out new strategies, and record their work in a form that is understandable by other teachers.” Elliot (1991)

16 Burns (2005) AR framework exploring – identifying
planning – data collection analysing / reflecting hypothesising / speculating intervening – observing reporting – writing - presenting

17 Identifying Two out of five teachers engaged in TSC
EM only conferenced in her office; planned, ‘pastoral care’ MT conferenced ‘ad hoc’ in the classroom in quiet moments.. and EM “highly recommended” conferencing after noting an increase in student interest

18 Data collection Three teachers; each with two students
Analysed six transcripts, varying in length Collected and analysed first drafts and follow-up drafts; noted improvements

19 Comments by teachers “I exercised my power on these students I didn’t let them express themselves..maybe I killed their ability to create nw things.” “I could have let them do it their own way, instead of my own.”

20 Analysing: noting desirable features
Eliciting error correction Praise with mitigation (‘however’..) Teacher-questioning Pausing

21 Intervening: a new team
Stage two conferencing Teachers read, then implemented desirable features noted from stage one analysis Observed what happened...

22 Observing: Praise and mitigation
Our study is on-going but.. One of the most dominant features appears to be related to how teachers preface their criticism in conferencing... how they ‘soften the blow’ or ‘sugar the pill.’ “This sentence is fine, however there are some problems”

23 Summary: Conferencing is a potentially useful method of providing feedback on students’ work On-going action research reveals desirable features exist, one of which appears to relate to praise with mitigation

24 Contact details Dr. Wayne Trotman Izmir Katip Çelebi University
School Foreign Languages Izmir-Turkey

25 References Hyland, K. Second Language Writing, Cambridge University Press : CUP Hyland K & Hyland F. Feedback on second language students’ writing. In ‘Language Teaching’, 39.2, 2006: CUP Hyland K & Hyland F. Feedback in Second Language Writing: contexts and issues. 2006: CUP

Download ppt "Feeding Back On Students’ Writing?"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google