Training Korean EFL Teachers to Respond to Student Writing

Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 113, 701723. The purpose of the present study is to investigate the effects of teacher feedback training on the type of the written feedback Korean EFL teachers give on student writing. A feedback training program was designed for inservice and preservice Korean EFL teachers based on the training sequence of Approach, Response, and Followup suggested in Ferris and Hedgcock (2005) and Ferris (2007). The study analyzed the strategies employed in providing error correction and the types of teacher commentary given before and after training by 20 Korean secondary EFL teachers. The study also investigated the effects of training on the teachers selfefficacy in providing written feedback on student writing. The results indicate that before the training Korean EFL teachers viewed their role mainly as providing error correction. The changes in posttraining feedback suggest that the training program helped teachers become more aware of the different roles of teacher feedback. Additionally, an increase in teachers confidence in providing feedback was found posttraining.

Student Writing

Sukyung Chin (Ewha Womans University)

Chin, Sukyung 2011 Training Korean EFL teachers to respond to

student writing Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics,

11-3, 701-723 The purpose of the present study is to investigate the effects of teacher feedback training on the type of the written feedback Korean EFL teachers give on student writing A feedback training program was designed for in-service and pre-service Korean EFL teachers based on the training sequence of "Approach, Response, and Follow-up" suggested in Ferris and Hedgcock (2005) and Ferris (2007) The study analyzed the strategies employed in providing error correction and the types of teacher commentary given before and after training by 20 Korean secondary EFL teachers The study also investigated the effects of training on the teachers' self-efficacy in providing written feedback on student writing The results indicate that before the training Korean EFL teachers viewed their role mainly as providing error correction The changes in post-training feedback suggest that the training program helped teachers become more aware of the different roles of teacher feedback Additionally, an increase in teachers' confidence in providing feedback was found post-training

Key Words: writing, teacher feedback, teacher education

1 Introduction

The process approach has brought to attention the importance

of teacher feedback to guide and support students through the writing process (Hyland & Hyland, 2006) Teacher feedback fills

a number of roles in helping students improve their writing Hyland (2003) states that teacher feedback is essential in developing ESL/EFL learners' writing ability by providing "a

sense of audience and sensitize them to the need of readers, but

it offers an additional layer of scaffolding to extend writing skills, promote accuracy and clear ideas, and develop an understanding of written genre" (p.207)

Early ESL studies in teacher feedback have criticised that teacher feedback provided little help in improving students' writing ability They argued that teacher feedback is vague and can lead to misunderstanding and frustration for the students (Leki, 1990; Truscott, 1996; Zamel, 1985) These arguments have mostly been discredited due to the changes in teacher feedback and teachers' awareness (Ferris, 2003; Hyland & Hyland, 2006) Evidence of positive influence of teacher feedback on student writing can be found in a number of studies (Ashwell, 2000; Bitchener, 2008; Fathman & Whalley 1990; Ferris, 1997, 2006; Ferris, Pezone, Tade, & Tinti, 1997) Unfortunately, studies that have investigated teacher feedback practice in EFL writing classrooms have found evidence of earlier feedback practices focusing heavily on surface level errors with little or no expectation of students' revision (Kim, 2003; Lee, 2008, 2009, 2011; Montgomery & Baker, 2007) They also found a mismatch between provided guidelines for giving feedback and the actual feedback EFL teacher give on students’ writing Interview and questionnaire results reveal that this may be due to nonnative English teachers’ lack of experience in receiving and giving feedback, lack of confidence in their own ability in writing, and lack of training in providing feedback on students’ writing (Kim, 2003; Lee, 2008, 2011) Studies that have investigated teachers' feedback practice in EFL classrooms stress the importance of teacher training for EFL writing teachers in order to change such feedback practices A few books on teacher feedback have suggested training programs for ESL/EFL writing teachers (Ferris, 2003, 2007; Goldstein, 2005); however, so far no study has been reported to have investigated the effect of such training

on teachers’ feedback practices Thus, the purpose of the present study is to exam whether the feedback training influences the type of the written feedback Korean EFL teachers give on student writing It will further investigate the effects of training

on the teachers' self-efficacy in providing written feedback on student writing The research questions for this study include:

(1) How does the teacher feedback training affect the frequency and types of feedback L2 writing teachers provide on student writing?

(2) How does the teacher feedback training affect the L2 writing teachers’ self-efficacy for providing written feedback?

2 Literature Review

2.1 Teacher Feedback

Studies in teacher feedback in L2 writing have examined the effects of different types of feedback (Ashwell, 2000; Bitchener, 2008; Fathman & Whalley, 1990; Ferris, 2006; Ferris et al., 1997; Hyland & Hyland, 2001; Lalande, 1982; Robb, Ross, and Shortreed, 1986; Ryoo, 2006) and its effect on students' revision and use These studies can be further divided into research in error correction which focuses on students' writing accuracy and studies in the characteristics of teacher commentary

Error correction

Previous studies investigating the effect of teacher feedback on developing students’ accuracy in writing have compared the effects of different strategies used in providing error corrections (Chandler, 2003; Ferris, 2006; Lalande, 1982; Ryoo, 2006) Direct feedback refers to teachers providing the correct form to students’ error This can include crossing out words, phrases;

inserting words or morphemes; or writing the correct form in the margin or near the error Indirect feedback is using different techniques such as highlighting, underlining, circling, or use of codes to indicate the error without providing the correct form and requires the students to correct the error Those advocating indirect feedback claim that because indirect error correction pushes the students to engage in problem solving it may be more beneficial in developing students' writing accuracy (Ferris, 2003, 2006; Lalande, 1982) However, the same studies stress the importance of considering the students' proficiency level and the error type when giving error correction especially when giving indirect correction to students with lower-level of language proficiency A few studies in the EFL context have found little or no difference between direct and indirect error correction on improving students’ accuracy in writing (Robb et al., 1986; Ryoo, 2006) The question of whether teachers should provide direct or indirect error correction is inconclusive and researchers recommend teachers to use both depending on the type of error and the students’ proficiency level (Ferris, 1997, 2003, 2006; Hyland, 2003)

Teacher commentary

Teacher commentary are teachers' response to all aspect of the written text including accuracy, content, or organization It is the teacher responding as a reader on what was successful and how

it could be improved rather than evaluating the students’ work (Harmer, 2004; Hyland, 2003) Studies in teacher commentary have investigated different characteristics of teachers’ comments and how it affects students’ revision In a detailed analysis study

on the effects of teacher commentary, Ferris (1997) reports that making requests and comments on grammar/mechanics were mostly likely to lead to substantive positive change in students’ revision While most researchers suggest teachers to provide feedback on all areas of writing (Ferris, 2003; Ferris & Hedgcock,

2005; Hyland, 2003; Zamel, 1985), studies in EFL context have found that teachers tend to focus more on grammar or vocabulary Studies also recommend that teachers should give clear text-specific comments and include praise and suggestions when giving criticism (Goldstein, 2004, 2005; Ferris, 2003; Ferris

& Hedgcock, 2005; Hyland, 2003) In Ferris’ (1997) study, the researcher found that text-specific comments led to more positive substantive changes than generic comments Goldstein (2004) also argues that text-specific comments can show the writer that the reader is engaged in what is written and can also indicate exactly where the reader has a problem with the text

2.2 Teacher Feedback Practices in EFL Classes

Though the studies in teacher feedback have found and recommend certain types of feedback to be more beneficial for students, studies that have investigated nonnative writing teachers’ feedback practice in EFL writing classrooms all indicate

a discrepancy between what is recommended and the actual feedback given on student writing (Kim, 2003; Lee, 2008, 2009, 2011; Montgomery & Baker, 2007) Specifically, in EFL classes where many of the teachers themselves are nonnative English speakers and lack experience in writing and receiving feedback, writing teachers have reported to be having difficulty providing feedback for their students (Kim, 2003; Lee, 2008, 2009, 2011) These studies stress the importance of teacher training that can provide a chance for teachers to share their beliefs and experience regarding teacher feedback and more importantly to learn and practice different ways in providing feedback on student writing Currently, no study has been reported to have investigated the effect of teacher feedback training on teachers' feedback practice

The present study proposes a training program for EFL writing teachers on how to provide effective feedback on student

writing The study further investigates the effect of the training

on the EFL teachers’ feedback practice and their self-efficacy in providing written feedback

3 Methodology

3.1 Participants

The participants of the study were 20 in-service Korean EFL secondary school teachers taking a 4-month English teachers training program at a university in Gyeonggi-do, Korea Most participants were in their 30-40s with one participant in her 20’s and one in her 50’s Most of the participants have teaching experience between 6-15 years, with eight participants having more than 15 years of teaching experience in Korean public schools The majority of the participants (90%) have participated in a teacher training program previous to the present program and half of the participants have participated

in an overseas English program or teacher training program The teacher feedback training was part of a mandatory course "How to Teach Reading and Writing," included in the 4-month English teachers training program This course covered current issues, new methods and techniques in teaching reading and writing The class met once or twice a week for a ninety-minute class The course was

a 2-month course of 12 classes The feedback training sessions were conducted for two classes over a two-week period

3.2 Teacher Feedback Training Program

The teacher feedback training program used in the study was developed by adapting and modifying Ferris and Hedgcock (2005) and Ferris’ (2007) "Approach, Response, and Follow-up" training sequence Following Ferris and Hedgcock’s (2005) guideline in constructing effective teacher written feedback, three stages have been designed for the training program: approach

Approach

- Discussion

Experience with teacher feedback

NNS English writing teachers

Role and effect of teacher feedback

- Principles for providing written feedback

Helping students incorporate teachers’

feedback in their revision

(From Ferris & Hedgcock, 2005, p.190)

(knowing what to look for and prioritizing), response (providing the commentary), and follow-up (helping students maximize feedback and holding them accountable for considering it) The program content for each stage is presented in Figure 1 The training was conducted in two sessions over a two week period

Approach

In the first stage, the participants were introduced to issues in teacher feedback, sharing their experience in providing and receiving teacher feedback, and discussed the purpose of teacher feedback Further they shared their thought on what they as nonnative English writing teachers can provide for their students

FIGURE 1 Teacher Feedback Training Program Procedure

First, the teachers participated in a discussion sharing previous

experiences in receiving feedback as EFL students They reflected

on their good and bad experiences with written feedbacks they have received as a language learner and which feedback they have found to be helpful Next, they shared their experiences giving feedback to student writing and discuss what they found most difficult and shared their own questions in providing feedback Previous research have found that the successful writing teachers were those who found their own way to contribute as a nonnative English writing teacher (Kim, 2003) The question of what nonnative teachers can provide in helping students become better writers was discussed and examples of some of the feedback activities other teachers have implemented

in their writing classes were shared

In the second part of the "approach stage," the guiding principles of written teacher feedback in Ferris and Hedgcock (2005) was presented and used as a frame for discussion

Response

In the "response" stage, the EFL writing teachers were presented with techniques and strategies they can employ to give teacher feedback Power point, handouts, and course books were used to show examples of teacher feedback In the first part of this stage, the teachers were presented with different types of techniques in giving feedback The participants read materials and discuss the differences between error correction and teacher commentary Next, techniques in providing error correction such as coding and minimal marking were shown and activities to help students become more self-reliant in correcting their errors were suggested Other forms in providing teacher feedback such as audio taped feedback, electronic comments (email, word-process programs), response sheet, rubric, and checklist were also viewed For teacher commentary, participants looked at examples of end comments and marginal comments, and discuss the importance of providing praise and

constructive criticism Lastly, they looked at examples of teacher feedback and discuss which ones they found more helpful for the students and why The sample feedback examples have been retrieved from Ferris (2003, 2007), Ferris and Hedgcock (2005), Harmer (2004), and Hyland (2003) They varied in length, type (end comments, marginal comments), and different functions (praise, criticism, suggestions, and combinations)

In the second part of the "response" stage, participants worked

in pairs and apply what they have learned in giving feedback

on a sample essay written by a Korean university student using the guidance worksheet designed for this study The steps in responding to student's text in the guidance sheet was adapted from Ferris (2007)

Follow-up

In the "follow-up" stage, the teachers reviewed and shared the feedback they have given during the feedback activity with the class This was followed by a discussion on how to help students use teacher feedback in their own revision Ideas and tips suggested in course books (Ferris, 2003; Ferris & Hedgcock, 2005; Harmer, 2004) were presented

3.3 Materials

Student writing sample

A sample student essay was used to collect teacher feedback before and after the training The sample text was written by a Korean EFL student in a college English course The given task was: “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement You must include ideas to support your opinion Television is the opium of the masses."

Questionnaire

In order to investigate the participants’ confidence in providing

Pre-questionnaire

↓ (Pre-training)

Feedback given on sample student writing

↓ Teacher feedback training sessions

↓ (Post-training)

Feedback given on sample student writing

↓ Post-questionnaire

feedback and their belief in teacher feedback a questionnaire was developed The participants were asked to score between 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) Questions for self-efficacy was adapted and modified based on the guiding principles of written commentary suggested in Ferris and Hedgcock (2005) and Hyland (2003)

3.4 Data Collection Procedure

Two types of data were collected in this study: the EFL writing teacher participants’ pre- and post-training written feedback, and the teachers’ questionnaire responses before and after the feedback training program The research procedure is presented in Figure 2

One week before the feedback training, the participants were paired and were asked to read and give feedback on the sample student text The feedbacks given on the sample essay were collected as pre-training data

FIGURE 2 Research Procedure

Two teacher feedback training sessions were held over two weeks and in the last session participants were given the same sample student text given before the training and was asked to give feedback with their partner as homework The feedbacks

were collected the following week as post-training data With 20 participants in pairs, data from 10 groups were collected Each group submitted pre- and post-training feedback on the same sample essay and a total of 20 feedback samples were analyzed for the study Questionnaire on participants' personal back ground, self-efficacy as a writer and in giving feedback was given at the beginning of the course Post-questionnaire was given at the end of the course, two weeks after the second training session Questionnaire responses from all 20 participants were collected

3.5 Data Analysis

In order to investigate the effect of teacher response training

on teachers’ feedback practice, feedback given on a sample student writing before and after the training program by the participants were collected and analyzed by feedback types The categories used for analysis are shown in Figure 3

Error corrections were coded by the strategy the teacher employed to provide error correction The categories include direct correction, indirect correction by indicating location of error, indicating type of error, and indicating location and type (Chandler, 2003; Ferris, 2003) The categories used to analyze the teacher commentary were developed based on the framework of Ferris (1997), Ferris et al (1997), Hyland and Hyland (2001) and course books in teaching ESL/EFL writing (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2005; Harmer, 2004; Hyland, 2003) and was adjusted by coding the teachers’ feedback on the sample student text For teacher commentary, feedback points were identified and analyzed Feedback points were recognized "as single written interventions that focused on a particular aspect of the text" (Hyland & Hyland, 2001) In some cases two or three sentences were counted as one feedback point, and in others one sentence included more than one feedback point