Evaluating teacher feedback in writing classes.

Abstract

Process writing is marking intensive and is often seen to be unmanageable in large classes. The feedback given to students is an important part of the process, but many teachers question how much of their feedback students attend to on the various drafts they submit. This paper reports on research done with first-year composition students in the UAE which examines the students' perceptions of the importance of teachers' written feedback.

Overview of Process Writing

Process Writing has been used in both first language and ESL writing classes. It evolved over time in reaction to dissatisfaction with controlled compositions and the focus on product in writing classes (Silva, 2001). According to Badger and White, since the 1980s these two opposite approaches have "dominated much of the teaching of writing that happens in the EFL classroom" (2000, p. 153). Both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses but Silva and Leki note that Process Writing, "offers an understanding of writing as a complex, recursive, creative, exploratory and generative process, wherein ideas are discovered and meaning made, a process similar to its general outlines for L1 and L2 writers" (2004, p. 6).

Process Writing emphasizes "invention, revision, and formative feedback" (Matsuda & Silva, 2001, p. xv) and allows for the recursive nature of writing to be experienced by students. Although as Campbell points out, "there is no single writing process" (1998, p. 10), there are three basic stages writers go through: prewriting, drafting, and revising. These stages also have techniques associated with them. For example, students may be encouraged in the prewriting stage to do some brainstorming, free-writing, clustering, etc. Drafting is the actual writing of the paragraph, essay, short story, etc. In this stage students are encouraged to go through multiple drafts. Revising involves self, peer and teacher editing. Formative feedback from a variety of sources is considered ideal in process writing (Ferris & Hedgcock, 1998, Matsuda & Silva, 2001).

The role of teacher feedback in Process Writing

The teacher takes on an active role in the editing process in process writing but there has been considerable debate on what type of feedback should be given. According to Radecki and Swales (1988), "there is an emerging consensus among certain L1 and L2 writing researchers that an instructor's time is better spent in attending to textual meaning, rather than to grammatical errors, as a means of aiding students in reshaping their writing" (p. 72). Ferris and Hedgcock (1998) believe that such grammatical corrections are necessary but should not be given on first drafts of multiple draft essays. Comments on earlier drafts should, according to the authors, focus on organization and content rather than grammar. In contrast, Fathman and Whalley found that "grammar and content feedback, whether given alone or simultaneously, positively affect rewriting" (1990, 185). Citing research done by Lynch & Klemans (1978), Reed & Burton (1981) and Burkland & Grimm (1984) on L1 writing, Radecki and Swales note that the students stated a preference for their instructors to edit grammatical and other mechanical errors as they found these comments to be the most helpful (1988, p. 72).

Cindy Gunn, The American University of Sharjah, UAE

John Raven, Higher Colleges of Technology, UAE

Cindy Gunn, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Languages, and John Raven, Ph.D., is Faculty at Sharjah Women's College.