A Comparison of Teacher’s and Senior Students’ Feedback : Student Attitudes and Their Writing Improvement

Abstract

Based on the concepts of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), this study compared the effects of feedback given from teacher and senior students on Thai EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students' writing. The research participants were 33 students majoring in English who were undertaking an English Essay Writing Course and 22 senior students who have already passed the course. The data were collected from a questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, a group discussion, and the students' writing drafts. The results showed that students found the senior feedback helpful to improve their writing drafts, and they felt comfortable to receive feedback from senior students; however, they had low confidence towards the comments. With regards to teacher comments, students found them helpful to raise their awareness in terms of tenses, grammar, and structure. However, the limitations of teacher feedback were pointed out in terms of confusing comments, stress, and timing. Finally, the analysis of the effects of feedback types on students' improvements showed that metalinguistic corrective feedback (CF) made by both teacher and senior students led to most of the effective corrections. Based on the findings, the implications and directions for future research will be discussed.

Online Collaborative Writing Technique Using Wiki : How Effective is It to Enhance Learners’ Essay Writing?

“…This confidence is important because it is a factor that determines the success of students in interacting and collaborating. The results also show that during the process of the collaborative writing, teacher intervention was still needed to polish or edit students' work before it was considered final" (Sritrakarn, 2018).…”

EFL university teachers’ perspectives in written corrective feedback and their actual applications

“…Besides that, teacher described the errors of the language use at the lower side of the text [1], [2]. Moreover, Sritrakarn [20] indicate that metalinguistic written corrective feedback hints to correct the students' writing errors effectively.…”

“…It is providing more learning on knowledge of high grammar in composition than direct feedback [17]. The research on teacher indirect written corrective feedback indicated that by providing underline of the writing's erroneous parts and suggesting the students to correct their own errors gave positive impacts for the improvement of the students' writing performance [5], [6], [18]- [20] and the structure as well as error-free writing draft [21]- [25]. In metalinguistic corrective feedback, the students are given feedback using some kinds of metalinguistic clues.…”

Prácticas letradas académicas más allá del <i>déficit</i>: una revisión crítica de literatura

“…También el apoyo académico involucra estudios relacionados con la importancia de la revisión entre pares (Vargas-Franco, 2014) como aporte a la autorregulación del aprendizaje, que incluye la apropiación de criterios de valoración de los textos y la relación simétrica entre tutores y escritores. Diferentes estudios han evidenciado el valor de la retroalimentación por parte de profesores, compañeros o tutores para estudiantes en el desarrollo de la escritura académica (Carless y Boud, 2018;Sritrakarn, 2018). Y, alineados con estos, se encuentran también estudios sobre multimodalidad (abordados más adelante), en los cuales los borradores de las tareas de los estudiantes reciben retroalimentación previamente a una presentación final (Bourelle et al, 2017;Schmerbeck y Lucht, 2017).…”