Abstract
Effective, timely feedback is a fundamental aspect of formative assessment. The core of formative assessment has been defined as comprising two actions: The student must recognize that a gap exists between the current performance and the desired one; and the student must engage in effective action to close the gap. Student knowledge and action in being aware of and attempting to close the performance gap are seen as pivotal in the feedback process. This chapter, based on a third-year EFL Academic Writing class at a university in Japan, focuses on how students respond to feedback provided on the first draft of a research essay, and also how they feel about the feedback process itself. The report compliments an initial research study (White, 2017) comprised of a teacher self-assessment of the types of feedback provided on 21 essay first drafts. This related report looks at how students responded to the feedback provided in their subsequent final draft. The report com pares the first and final drafts of student essays to make some determination of whether the feedback fed forward into a better final draft. The report also includes a student survey to ascertain student views on the effectiveness of the teacher feedback provided in helping them produce a better final draft for summative assessment. Examples of student writing, the feedback provided, and subsequent changes made are included in the report. The report concludes that, on the whole, student final drafts were stronger, better and more clearly written due to student response to the feedback provided. The feedback survey, completed by 23 students, also showed an overall high level of satisfaction with the feedback framework used in this EFL Academic Writing class.
Teachers need to view feedback from the perspective of the individuals engaged in the learning.
(Hattie & Temperley, 2007, p. 101).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7–74.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assess ment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.
Brown, E., & Glover, C. (2006). Evaluating written feedback. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 81–91). New York: Routledge.
Carless, D. (2006) Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31 (2):219–233
Carless, D., Joughin, G., Ngar-Fun, L., & Associates. (2006). How assessment supports learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Cumming, A. (2004). Broadening, deepening, and consolidating. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(1), 5–18.
Duff, P. (2001). Research approaches in applied linguistics. In R. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford hand book of applied linguistics (pp. 14–23). London: Oxford University Press.
Ellery, K. (2008). Assessment for learning: A case study using feedback effectively in an essay-style test. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(4), 421–429.
Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 315–339.
Ferris, D. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short-and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81–104). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gareis, C. R., & Grant, L. W. (2015). Teacher-made assessments: How to connect curriculum, instruction, and student learning. New York: Routledge.
Gibbs, G. (2006). How assessment frames learning. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assess ment in higher education (pp. 23–36). London: Routledge.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004–2005). Conditions under which assessment supports learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–29.
Green, A. (2014). Exploring language assessment and testing: Language in action. New York: Routledge.
Grotjahn, R. (1987). On the methodological basis of introspective methods. In C. Faerch & G. Kapser (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 230–250). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Hattie, J., & Timperly, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Hidri, S. (2015). Conceptions of assessment: Investigating what assessment means to secondary and university teachers. Arab Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 19–43.
Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (Eds.). (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kroll, B. (2001). Considerations for teaching and ESL/EFL writing course. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 219–223). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Lantolf, J., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). (S)econd (L)anguage (A)ctivity theory: Understanding second language learners as people. In M. Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language learning (pp. 172–182). London: Longman.
Lea, M., & Stierer, B. (2000). (Eds.) Student writing in higher education. Buckingham, U.K.: Open University Press
Lee, I. (2007). Feedback in Hong Kong secondary writing classrooms: Assessment for learning or assessment of learning. Assessing Writing, 12, 180–198.
Lee, I. (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3), 144–164.
Lee, G., & Schallert, D. (2008). Meeting in the margins: Effects of the teacher student relationship on revision processes of EFL college students taking a composition course. Journal of Second Lan guage Writing, 17, 165–182.
Norton, L., & Norton, J. (2001). Essay feedback: How can it help students improve their academic writing? Paper presented at First International Conference of the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing across Europe (EATAW). Gronigen, 18–20 June.
Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.
Polos, A., & Mahoney, M. (2008). Effectiveness of feedback: The students’ perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(2), 143–154.
Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4–13.
Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144.
Scott, V. (1996). Rethinking foreign language writing. Boston: Newbury House.
Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.
Stobart, G. (2006). The validity of formative assessment. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 133–147). London: Sage Publications.
Taras, M. (2002). Using assessment for learning and learning from assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 501–510.
Weaver, R. (2006). Do students value feedback? Students perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 379–394.
White, E. (2017). Teacher self-assessment of feedback practices in an EFL academic writing class – A reflective case study. In E. Cano & G. Ion (Eds.), Innovative practices for higher education assessment and measurement (pp. 162–187). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Wojtas, O. (1998, September 25) Feedback? No, just give us the answers. Times Higher Education Supplement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix: Closed Gaps: Additional Global Errors Successfully Revised (NÂ =Â 15)
Appendix: Closed Gaps: Additional Global Errors Successfully Revised (NÂ =Â 15)
| Â | First draft | Feedback intervention | Final draft (response to feedback) |
|---|---|---|---|
1. | To show the authority of the word is to show how the word is prosperous | ? | Deleted from final draft [Oral class feedback included my teaching point that deleting something can sometimes be a better writer decision that attempting revision] |
2. | Therefore slang is a good means to express their thinking, feeling, and insistence freely | ? | Therefore … thinking, feeling and emotion freely |
3. | In other words, the attraction of slang and the inseparable connection between people … | What is this connection? | As stated in this essay, the attraction of slang and its capacity to strengthen the solidarity among group members … |
4. | Because of slang’s fertility, people … | What does this mean? | Slang has a large amount of words, so it is possible to express one subject in several ways. People … |
5. | Slang has mainly four characteristics which cannot see in the Standard one [thesis statement] | R | There are mainly four characteristics for slang that shows its essence |
6. | Finally, slang is made up of many purposes of usages | R | Finally, slang has some important characteristics |
7. | Slang is over flowed in the world | R | Generally, slang is widely used by many people |
8. | The second one is that it is informal, alive, and rebellious. [Paragraph topic sentence] | Second what? + Meaning? (alive) | The second characteristic is that it is informal and rebellious [‘Characteristic’ has been inserted. ‘Alive’ deleted] |
9. | Therefore, the use of slang may give interest to our communication | R | That is to say, it makes communication more interesting |
10. | In this way, slang is a kind of trending … | ? Is this a word? | In this way, slang is a kind of popularity that people use … |
11. | In conclusion, slang is flourished by people. People use it for many reasons | ? | In conclusion, people use slang for many reasons |
12. | As has been mentioned, it was marijuana smoker who use the slang word ‘weed’ | Why mention this again here? | [Deleted] |
13. | The most important reason is that the use of slang can give people the opportunity to maintain their belongings | Meaning what? | The most … slang can give people the opportunity to enter a group and make a bond between their group members stronger |
14. | There are some reasons why the use of slang … [thesis statement] | How many will you discuss? Tell the reader | There are three main reasons why the … |
15. | By understanding the meanings of slang members can make their community easy and deepen familiarity | ? | By understanding the meanings of slang, members can make their communication easy and… |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
White, E. (2018). Does the Feedback Feed Forward? Student Response to and Views of Teacher Feedback in an EFL Academic Writing Class. In: Hidri, S. (eds) Revisiting the Assessment of Second Language Abilities: From Theory to Practice. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62884-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62884-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62883-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62884-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)