No abstract

IntroductionFeedback can support students’ writing and has the potential to enhance writing motivation and reduce writing anxiety. However, for feedback to fulfill its potential, it has to be accepted by students and perceived as motivating.MethodsIn this study, we investigate changes in less proficient English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ (N = 53) writing motivation and affect, as well as their perceptions of teacher feedback and how these relate to students’ argumentative text quality. Measurements were taken before EFL teachers attended a professional learning intervention on feedback (T1) and 8 months later (T2).ResultsFrom T1 to T2, students felt that general feedback quality improved, their writing self-efficacy increased, and their writing anxiety decreased. However, no significant changes in text quality could be observed between T1 and T2, and students continued to struggle with creating structure and coherence in their texts. Regression analyses revealed that feedback perceptions and affective-motivational variables did not predict students’ text quality at T1. Yet at T2, students’ perception of general feedback quality and the effect of feedback on writing motivation were significant predictors of text quality; self-efficacy and writing anxiety were not.DiscussionOur results suggest that more attention needs to be paid to feedback’s motivational impact, especially among less proficient EFL writers.

Although curricular analyses are of crucial importance for curricular development, documents for teaching writing in English as a foreign language [EFL] in Germany have not yet received much attention. Our study explores what beliefs about writing guide educational policy documents for teaching EFL in Germany. Using Ivanič’s (2004) discourses of writing [DoW] as a theoretical lens, we conduct a curricular analysis of 11 curricula for lower secondary school (Year 9/10) and their guiding superordinate documents. Our data suggest that none of the documents offers a comprehensive conceptualization of writing. The skills and the genre discourses are predominant; the process, the creativity, and the social practices discourses receive little attention, while the sociopolitical discourse of writing is missing. Differences in discourse frequency in curricula among school types and federal states may hinder transitions between educational tracks. The relative neglect of the procedural character of writing and the lack of acknowledgment of the social dimension of learning to write further suggest a misalignment between curricula and current research into (foreign language) writing pedagogy. This may be particularly detrimental for less proficient or socially disadvantaged learners. Implications for curricular development are outlined, suggesting that a more comprehensive approach to writing that covers all six DoW is important. In particular, we highlight the potential of process-oriented writing and also refer to the need to address digital literacy in writing.