Published April 29, 2022 | Version v1
Journal article Open

EFFECTIVENESS OF WRITTEN FEEDBACK STRATEGIES

Authors/Creators

  • 1. Baguio Central University

Description

Abstract: Writing is one of the most important macro skills. Unfortunately, it is also one of the hardest. One suggested way for teachers to improve the writing skills of their students is through written feedback. Feedback has been proven to be effective in improving the performance of students. To probe deeper into the strategies in feedback processing is one of the aims of this study. This study also aims to identify strategies in feedback processing and its effectiveness in improving the writing skills of students. This study aimed to determine the different written feedback strategies used by teachers in improving the writing skills of students. It also aimed to measure the effectiveness of written feedback strategies. The perception of the students and teachers was compared to determine if there is a significant difference. It employed a quantitative research design and made use of a questionnaire as its main tool. Results show that. The students perceived Delayed Marking, Direct Correctional Feedback, and Indirect Correctional Feedback as the feedback strategies commonly used by their teachers. Teachers perceive that they are commonly using Delayed Marking, Direct Correctional Feedback, and Indirect Correctional Feedback as strategies to improve the writing skills of students. The perception of teachers and students of the feedback strategies are similar. Students find Delayed Marking, Indirect Corrective Feedback, and Direct Correctional Feedback as very effective. On the other hand, they find Color Highlighting as slightly effective while the rest of the strategies are effective.

Keywords: Effectiveness, Improving, Students, Teachers, Writing Skills, Written Feedback.

Title: EFFECTIVENESS OF WRITTEN FEEDBACK STRATEGIES

Author: KHUNAKENE FESWAY FACULLO

International Journal of Recent Research in Interdisciplinary Sciences (IJRRIS)

ISSN 2350-1049

Vol. 9, Issue 2, April 2022 - June 2022

Page No: 23-36

Paper Publications (Publisher)

Website: www.paperpublications.org

Published date: 29-April-2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6505479

Paper Download Link (Source): https://www.paperpublications.org/upload/book/EFFECTIVENESS%20OF%20WRITTEN-29042022-2.pdf

Notes

Paper Publications (Publisher), Website: www.paperpublications.org, International Journal of Recent Research in Interdisciplinary Sciences (IJRRIS), ISSN 2350-1049

Files

EFFECTIVENESS OF WRITTEN-29042022-2.pdf

Files (772.2 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:6cb85befa862b0d1b54b27de2df5e16a
772.2 kB Preview Download

Additional details

Related works

Is derived from
Journal article: https://www.paperpublications.org/upload/book/EFFECTIVENESS%20OF%20WRITTEN-29042022-2.pdf (URL)
Is published in
Journal article: 2350-1049 (ISSN)
Other: https://www.paperpublications.org/ (URL)

References

  • [1] Bookhart, S. M. (2006). Formative assessment strategies for every classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • [2] Brown, H. (2001). Teaching by principle: an interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York. Adisson-Wisley Longman. Cambridge University Press.
  • [3] Byrne, D. (1988). Teaching writing skills. London. Longman Press
  • [4] Daiute, C. (2000). Writing and communication technologies. Perspective on writing: research and practice. Newark,D.E. International reading Association
  • [5] Ferris, D. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Michigan. The Michigan Press
  • [6] Deane, P., Odendahl, N., Quinlan, T., Fowles, M., Welsg C., & Tatum, J. (2008). Cognitive models of writing: writing proficiency as a complex integrated skill.Princeton; NJ,Educational Testing Service.
  • [7] Flower, L. (1994). The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale, IL:Southern Illinois University Press.
  • [8] Harmer, J. (2000). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.
  • [9] Magno, C., & Ouano, J. (2010). Designing written assessment for student learning. Manila. Phoenix Publishing
  • [10] McEwen, M., & Wills, E.M. (2014). Theoretical basis for nursing. Philadelphia. Wolters
  • [11] Prior, P. (2006). A sociocultural theory of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 54–66). New York, NY: The GuilfordPress.
  • [12] Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback individual differences and the acquisition of articles by second language learners. Unpublished PDH Thesis, University of Nottingham.
  • [13] Sperling, M., & Freedman, S.W. (2001). Review of writing research. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of researchteaching (4th ed., 370-389) Washington DC. American Educational Research Association.
  • [14] Sutton, R., Hornsey, M., & Douglas, K. (2011). Feedback thecommunication of praise, criticism and advice. Peter Lang Publishing. New York.
  • [15] White, E. M. (2007). Assigning, Responding, Evaluating: A Writing Teacher's Guide (4th ed.). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's.
  • [16] Agbayahoun, J. P. (2016). Teacher written feedback on student writing: teachers' and learners' perspective. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 6 (10) 1895-1904 DOI 10.175071/tpls.0610.01
  • [17] Alfaki, I. (May 2015). University students' english writingproblems: diagnosis and remedy. International Journal of English Language Teaching (Vol. 3, No. 3 pp 40-52)
  • [18] Al-Gharabally, M. (August 2015). The writing difficulties faced by L2 learners and how to minimize them. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research (Vol. 3, No. 5, pp 42-49)
  • [19] Ali, S., Haider, Z., Munir, F., Khan, H., & Ahmed, A. (2013). Factors contributing to the students'academic performance: a case study of Islamia University ub-Camous. American Journal of Educational Research 1.8 pp 283-289
  • [20] Amrhein, H. R., Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: what students and teachers think is right and why. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13 (2) 95-127
  • [21] Bacha, N. (2002). Developing learner's academic writing skills in higher education: a study for educational reform. Language and Education, 16(3), 163-173
  • [22] Bitchner, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language teaching Reasearch,12 409 DOI 10117711362168808809924
  • [23] Bitchner, J., Young, S., & Cameron, N., (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 191-205. DOI 10.101115.5slw2005.08.001
  • [24] Black, P., & William, D. (2010). Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Phil Delta Kappan (92 (1), 81-90)

Subjects

Paper Download Link (Source)
https://www.paperpublications.org/upload/book/EFFECTIVENESS%20OF%20WRITTEN-29042022-2.pdf