VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES LÊ HẢI ĐOÀN THE STUDENTS’ATTITUDES TOWARDS TEACHERS’WRITTEN FEEDBACK STRATEGIES O[.]
INTRODUCTION
Rationale of the study
The shortest word in the English language containing the letters "abcdef" is "feedback." Feedback is a crucial component of effective communication, helping to improve understanding and performance Incorporating feedback into your interactions fosters better relationships and supports continuous growth Recognizing the importance of feedback can enhance overall communication skills and promote positive outcomes.
English writing has become an essential skill for students to access better career opportunities in a globally developing world While traditional assessments like advice, evaluation, and grades may not fully capture students’ progress in writing, effective feedback plays a crucial role in enhancing their skills Correcting errors, rearranging sentence structures, and providing comments are vital, yet challenging tasks for teachers, as highlighted by researchers like Leki (1991) and Raimes (1983), who emphasize the importance of feedback in supporting student writers Despite ongoing debates about its effectiveness, feedback remains a fundamental component of teaching and learning in writing, with students seeking it and teachers feeling responsible to provide it Numerous studies, including those by Lee (2005) and Noora (2006), focus on the significance of feedback, its delivery methods, and impact on writing development, yet, as Katayama (2007) notes, the preferences and attitudes of learners and teachers towards error correction are often overlooked.
Differences in learners' learning styles significantly impact the learning environment by either supporting or hindering their intentional cognition and active engagement Matching students' learning styles with the teacher's instructional approach can enhance their learning outcomes, improve attitudes, promote positive behavior, and boost motivation (Ferris, 2003).
Although numerous studies have explored various types of feedback, few focus on how students address their errors after receiving teacher feedback Prior research has primarily examined the impact of different feedback methods on students' grammatical improvement in writing (Fathman & Walley, 1990; Padgate, 1999; Hyland, 2003) or surveyed students’ preferences for error correction strategies (Cohen, 1987; Leki, 1991; Ferris, 2006).
Understanding students' preferences for receiving teacher-written feedback, their attitudes towards it, and their comprehension and attention to different feedback types are essential for effective teaching This study aims to identify those preferences and perceptions to help teachers enhance their feedback strategies Ultimately, the findings will enable educators to improve their teaching effectiveness in English language instruction.
Aims of the study
This study aims to explore students' attitudes towards teachers' written feedback strategies, providing insights into their perceptions and preferences It also investigates whether students accurately understand the feedback as intended by their teachers, ensuring effective communication Additionally, the research examines students' strategies for processing and responding to feedback after reviewing their written work, highlighting ways to enhance feedback effectiveness and student engagement.
Research questions
To achieve the purposes of the study, the following questions were developed:
1 What are the students’ attitudes towards teacher’ written feedback strategies?
2 To what extent do the students understand teacher written feedback?
3 How do the students handle the feedback they receive?
Significance of the study
Effective feedback is a vital element of English language writing courses, as second language students rely on it throughout their learning process However, a gap often exists between teacher-provided written feedback and students' expectations, potentially diminishing its effectiveness Addressing this mismatch is crucial to enhance the practical impact of feedback on students' writing development.
Effective student writing development relies on iterative drafts, where teachers provide constructive feedback to correct errors before final submission It's essential for both educators and students to align their understanding of feedback and work towards enhancing students' writing strategies to maximize learning benefits This study explores students’ perceptions of various teacher-written feedback types, aiming to shed light on how students interpret and value these feedback strategies Insights from this research can significantly inform English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers, improving their feedback methods and supporting better language learning outcomes.
Scope of the study
This study, conducted in 2015 at the Vocational College of Posts and Telecommunications with 80 non-English major freshmen, examines four distinct types of teacher written feedback strategies: direct feedback, coded feedback, uncoded feedback, and content feedback The research aims to analyze how these feedback methods influence student learning and engagement, providing insights into effective instructional practices Understanding these feedback strategies can help educators enhance their teaching effectiveness and promote better language development among students.
Method of the study
Both quantitative and qualitative research methods were used in this survey research in order to get a more detailed and comprehensive picture about what is investigated
A survey questionnaire was administered to 80 non-English major freshmen at Vocational college of Posts and Telecommunications to collect their opinions towards teacher written feedback
An interview conducted with the participation of 12 non-English major freshmen selected from survey population to explore further issues being investigated.
Design of the study
This study is composed of three following parts:
Part 1: Introduction presents the background, aims, research questions, the significance, the scope, and the design of the study
Part 2: Development is organized around three chapters as follows:
Chapter 1- Literature review, conceptualizes the framework of the study through the discussion of issues and ideas on theories of writing in second language, types of grammatical errors and feedback
Chapter 2 - Methodology, presents the context, the methodology used in this study including the subject, the data collection instruments, data collection procedure, and data analysis
Chapter 3 – Findings and Discussions consists of a comprehensive analysis of the data and a discussion on the findings of this study
Part 3: Conclusion, offers a summary of the findings, recommendations, limitations, and future directions for further study.
DEVELOPMENT
This research is organized into four key sections The first section explores the theoretical foundations of second language writing, providing essential background for understanding the topic The second section examines various types of feedback on student writing, highlighting effective feedback strategies The third section reviews studies on the theoretical basis of teacher-written feedback and its impact on language learning The final section explores students’ perceptions of teacher-written feedback, offering insights into student responses and attitudes toward feedback practices.
Second language writing emerged as an interdisciplinary field of inquiry in the late twentieth century According to Zamel (1982), it is considered a product of a person's search for meaning, where writers often begin the process without knowing exactly what they want to say, eventually going through a process to create meaning Harris, Muriel, and Tony Silva (1993) describe second language writing as a complex activity within the second language context, highlighting its multifaceted nature Grabe and Kaplan (1997) emphasize the importance of the roles of the reader, the writer, and the text in the journey toward meaningful communication in L2 writing.
Writing is one of the most challenging skills for second-language learners, requiring mastery of linguistic, cognitive, and sociocultural competencies Teachers often find teaching second-language writing to be a complex and demanding task According to research (Cumming, 2001), the main types of written assignments include text-focused, process-focused, and sociocultural orientations, which are widely discussed in language learning studies.
According to text-focused orientations, L2 learners must learn to write proficiently in a second language to produce effective written work Their texts tend to exhibit more sophisticated and complex syntax and morphology, reflecting improved language mastery.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical background of L2 writing
Second language writing emerged in the late twentieth century as an interdisciplinary field of inquiry According to Zamel (1982), it is considered a product of a person's search for meaning, where writers often begin the process without knowing exactly what they want to express, gradually developing their ideas to create meaningful content Harris, Muriel, and Tony Silva (1993) view second language writing as a complex activity within a second language context, highlighting its intricate nature Grabe and Kaplan (1997) further explore L2 writing by emphasizing the roles of the reader, the writer, and the text in the journey towards achieving meaning.
Writing is one of the most challenging skills for second-language learners, requiring mastery of linguistic, cognitive, and sociocultural competencies Many teachers agree that teaching second-language writing presents significant difficulties Research highlights three main orientations in second-language writing instruction: text-focused, process-focused, and sociocultural approaches, which are widely discussed in academic studies (Cumming, 2001).
According to text-focused orientations, L2 learners must learn to write effectively in a second language to produce high-quality written texts Skilled second language writers demonstrate more sophisticated syntax and morphology, along with a broader and more precise vocabulary They also show an improved command of conventional rhetorical structures and the ability to signal relationships within their texts, especially when engaging in reading and writing tasks (Cumming, 2001)
The process-oriented approach to teaching writing emphasizes mastering mechanical aspects such as grammar, syntax, and modeling, viewing second language writing as the acquisition of effective strategies It highlights the importance of developing skills in planning, revising, and editing simultaneously while focusing on both content and form This approach prioritizes correctness and the quality of the final product, encouraging learners to write extensively without undue concern for accuracy or formality By fostering this free and creative writing environment, students can enhance their spontaneous language use and improve overall writing proficiency.
Vygotsky (1978) emphasized that human learning is inherently connected to social and cultural influences, highlighting the critical role of sociocultural interactions in the learning process Sociocultural research views writing development as the acquisition of community-specific genres, values, and practices, with a strong emphasis on the importance of context and audience in learning a second language This perspective underscores the causal relationship between social interaction and cognitive development, including language acquisition Hyland (2002) supports this view, stating that proficient second language writers are capable of effectively functioning in new cultural settings, demonstrating the significance of sociocultural factors in language learning and writing proficiency.
Learning to write in a second language (L2) involves multiple interconnected aspects, including understanding text forms, composing processes, and the socio-cultural functions that writing serves (Cumming, 1995) Effective instructional modeling should encompass not only examples of written texts but also demonstrate the underlying composing strategies and the cultural purposes behind L2 writing These orientations provide a comprehensive framework for conceptualizing what it means to develop writing skills in a second language, emphasizing the importance of interdependent instructional approaches that address linguistic, cognitive, and cultural dimensions.
Feedback on student‘s writings
Students’ self-editing efforts are crucial for minimizing errors and producing well-written texts, as they enable writers to respond to every detail—from punctuation to sentence structure and overall coherence (Kasule and Lunga, 2010) Developing effective self-editing skills is essential for students’ success in language learning, yet many struggle to identify various writing issues due to limited psychological distance from their work Techniques such as self-grade drafts can assist students in recognizing strengths and weaknesses by requiring them to evaluate different aspects of their writing, promoting independent improvement (Beazley, 1997) However, this method may not be suitable for students with low English proficiency, as independent editing can be challenging without adequate language skills.
2.2 Teachers’ feedback versus peers ‘feedback
Effective EFL writing feedback is provided through multiple sources, including teachers, peers, writers themselves, and automated computer programs Among these, teacher and student feedback are the most influential in significantly enhancing students' writing skills Incorporating diverse feedback methods can lead to substantial improvements in EFL students' written work.
Connor and Asenavage (1994) studied the influence of peer and teacher feedback on eight ESL students from diverse countries at a U.S university Their research revealed that teacher feedback significantly outperformed peer feedback, leading to meaningful improvements in student work Notably, only 5% of peer feedback resulted in any changes, highlighting the greater effectiveness of teacher input in language learning This study underscores the importance of instructor guidance in enhancing ESL students’ writing and communication skills.
Zhang (1995) carried out a controversial study of ESL students at two universities in the USA A very high figure of 94% of students preferred teacher feedback to peer feedback
A 2006 study by Yang Miaoa, Richard Badger, and Yu Zhen compared peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class The findings revealed that students utilized significantly more teacher feedback than peer feedback, with 90% of usable teacher feedback points incorporated compared to 67% from peer feedback Students also perceived the teacher as more professional and experienced, which influenced their preference for teacher-led feedback.
‗‗trustworthy‘‘ than their peers The usefulness of teacher feedback was confirmed absolutely while the usefulness of peer feedback was expressed with reservations
A study by Srichanyachon (2012) exploring university EFL students’ attitudes towards peer feedback and teacher feedback revealed that students prefer receiving teacher feedback, as it ensures their writing mistakes are thoroughly and accurately corrected EFL students often feel frustrated when they lack effective feedback that aids their improvement, highlighting the importance of comprehensive teacher input in the revision process.
Research by Lee (2009) revealed that only 17% of students offered praise to their peers' writing, compared to 5% who provided criticism This disparity is attributed to the negative perception associated with feedback and the limited written feedback provided by teachers in the classroom As a result, students lacked confidence in delivering positive praise and consequently produced fewer overall comments.
In conclusion, teacher written feedback plays an important role on students
‘acquisition; however, peer feedback also leads to improvements and appears to encourage student autonomy as a useful adjunct to teacher feedback.
Theoretical background of teacher written feedback
Feedback in language teaching is a crucial element that motivates learners and enhances their performance by providing valuable advice, grammatical corrections, and assessment of their progress According to Ur (1996), feedback is "information given to the learner about their performance of a learning task, usually with the goal of improvement." Ferris (1999) views feedback as "any response a teacher offers to students," emphasizing its role in guiding learners toward better understanding and skills Keh (1990) highlights that feedback is fundamental in a process approach to writing, serving as input from readers to writers to facilitate revision and improve reader-based prose Additionally, Kepner (1991) describes feedback as procedures used to inform learners whether their responses are correct or incorrect, reinforcing the importance of feedback in effective instruction.
Teacher-written feedback or handwritten commentary is a vital method for supporting students' writing development, providing guidance and constructive input Such feedback primarily focuses on highlighting grammatical errors and addressing the content of students' drafts, helping learners improve their writing skills effectively.
Grammatical errors are defined in various ways across different studies, with multiple classification systems based on grammatical aspects According to Ferris & Roberts (2001, p.169), grammatical errors can be categorized into five distinct groups One key category is verb errors, which encompass mistakes related to verb tense, form, and subject-verb agreement Understanding these classifications helps in identifying and addressing common grammatical issues in language learning and editing.
Plural or possessive ending incorrect, omitted, or unnecessary; includes relevant subject-verb agreement errors
Article errors Article or other determiner incorrect, omitted, or unnecessary
All specific lexical errors in word choice or word form including preposition and pronoun errors Spelling errors only included if the (apparent) misspelling resulted in an actual English word
Errors in sentence/clause boundaries (run-on, fragments, comma splices), word order, omitted words, or phrases, unnecessary words or phrases, other unidiomatic sentence construction
Table 1: Types of grammatical error
Chaney (1999) proposed a comprehensive classification of grammatical errors, identifying five main categories:verb errors, noun ending errors, article errors, wrong word usage, and sentence structure mistakes These categories help in systematically analyzing and addressing common grammatical issues in language learning and writing Understanding these error types is essential for improving grammatical accuracy and overall communication effectiveness.
Batstone (1994) states, ―Language without grammar would be chaotic and cause the same communication problem, such as grammatical errors in writing and speaking‖
Therefore, grammatical errors are in need of correcting to help students improve their proficiency
Many articles have explored the impact of feedback on grammatical errors and its role in knowledge acquisition However, there is ongoing debate among researchers regarding the usefulness of teachers' feedback, with varying opinions on its effectiveness in enhancing student learning outcomes.
Truscott's influential article highlights two key perspectives on the importance of feedback in second language writing He presents compelling evidence from previous research (Semke, 1984; Robb, Ross, and Shortreed, 1986; Kepner, 1991) demonstrating that grammar correction in writing courses is generally ineffective Truscott emphasizes the specific challenges associated with grammar correction and concludes that feedback on students' errors not only lacks effectiveness but can also be harmful, suggesting it should be discontinued He emphasizes that there is minimal benefit to the positive effects of written feedback provided by language teachers aimed at improving student writing.
Many researchers refuted Truscott's arguments by conducting numerous studies on student progress in written accuracy over time Findings consistently showed that providing feedback on grammatical errors led to improved writing performance Ferris (1999) argued that Truscott’s claims were premature, noting that his selective use of previous studies did not adequately establish whether grammar feedback contributes to students’ long-term development of accuracy.
Research indicates that students perceive teacher feedback as highly beneficial for improving their writing skills, with 93.5% of students in Ferris (1995) reporting that feedback helps identify mistakes, clarify ideas, and guide future improvements Garmi (2005) found that most ESL students value teacher corrections and comments, believing that such feedback plays a crucial role in enhancing their writing competence Supporting this, Zhang (1995) and Lee (2008) both concluded that students prefer teacher written feedback over peer or oral feedback, considering it the most effective form for developing their writing Additionally, Ibrahim (2002) emphasized that grammar feedback from teachers is vital as it not only highlights errors but also increases students’ awareness of their mistakes, contributing significantly to their language development.
Most students agree that teacher feedback influences their writing development Although Truscott claimed that grammar correction is both harmful and ineffective, subsequent research has highlighted the positive impact of various types of teacher feedback on student composition While grammar correction may have a lesser effect compared to other feedback forms, it still plays a meaningful role in improving writing Ferris (1996) emphasized that there are always more or less effective approaches to responding to students' writing, underscoring the importance of selecting appropriate feedback strategies for optimal learning outcomes.
There are two types of written feedback that teachers responded to students‘ written work on their grammatical error : direct and indirect feedback
Direct feedback The teacher provides the student with the correct form her
(Indicating and locating the error)
This takes the form of underlining and use of cursors to show omissions in the student‘s text
She eat too much cheese
This takes the form of an indication in the margin that an error or errors have taken place in a line of text
They go to hospital now
Table 2:Types of written feedback
The term "direct feedback" has been referred to by various researchers using different terms, including corrective feedback, form-focused feedback, direct correction, and overt correction These terms all describe the technique of correcting students’ errors through explicit written corrections According to Ferris (2002), direct error correction involves providing learners with correct linguistic forms—such as words, morphemes, phrases, or complete sentences—by the teacher, making the processes of error detection and correction clearly the responsibility of educators.
Ferris (2006) defines indirect feedback as the teacher indicating an error has occurred without providing the correct form, encouraging students to identify and resolve the mistake themselves Bitchener (2008) emphasizes that indirect feedback signals errors without correction, prompting learners to discover and correct the issues independently This type of feedback often involves simply underlining or circling mistakes without specifying the correct form or noting error counts, as explained by Bitchener and Knoch (2008) Indirect feedback is categorized into coded and uncoded types; coded feedback involves error identification with specific location and error type annotations, while uncoded feedback highlights errors, leaving students to self-correct using their existing knowledge (Lee, 2004).
Research on the effectiveness of direct versus indirect feedback has garnered significant interest among linguistic scholars Ferris and Roberts (2001) highlight that both teachers and students favor direct feedback, as it helps writers reduce confusion by providing clear guidance and simplifies complex errors Ferris (2002) further emphasizes that direct feedback offers correct answers, making learners—especially those with lower proficiency—feel less threatened and more confident Studies comparing revision strategies indicate that direct feedback leads to more accurate revisions in both existing texts and new writing However, Hedge (2000) cautions that relying solely on direct feedback may cause learners to become passive, neglecting their active role in error correction.
Research indicates that indirect feedback is highly effective in enhancing students' writing accuracy over time Lalande (1982) found that students who received indirect feedback demonstrated greater improvement in writing accuracy after a six-month course compared to those receiving direct feedback Additionally, Ferris (2002) in "Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing" explains that indirect feedback clarifies students' responsibility for error correction and supports long-term accuracy development Implementing indirect feedback in language learning can significantly improve learners' writing skills and error awareness.
Feedback on student writing primarily involves teachers’ comments on drafts, which highlight areas for improvement and offer guidance for future rewrites Teachers provide constructive feedback through praise, such as "You are doing great!" or "I know you can do it," to encourage students, as well as criticism, like "Not enough words!" or "Please submit a second draft next Monday," to identify specific deficiencies They also suggest ways to enhance writing quality, such as advising students to add more detail about a character’s appearance to improve creativity and coherence Content feedback emphasizes overall content quality and organizational structure, with teachers engaging in a dialogic process through comments and questions to guide students Notably, this feedback typically does not focus explicitly on grammatical errors, but rather on improving the flow, organization, and effectiveness of students' writing.
Research indicates that feedback on the content of students' writing significantly enhances their skill development, whereas focusing solely on grammatical corrections yields limited improvement Semke (1984) found that students who received comments on their writing content showed greater progress compared to those who received error corrections, suggesting that grammar correction alone does not improve overall writing proficiency The main goal of writing is effective idea expression rather than grammatical perfection, emphasizing the importance of content-focused feedback for skill advancement.
Students‘ perceptions of teacher written feedback
"Attitude" is a psychological construct that explains the direction and persistence of human behavior (Backer, 1992) Operationally, Child (1973) describes it as an individual's overall inclination towards an object, idea, or institution, based on their opinions In practical terms, attitudes are derived from individuals' responses to questions about a specific object or concept, serving as a measurable indicator of their perceptions and preferences Understanding attitudes is essential for analyzing human behavior and designing effective communication strategies.
As a concept, attitude is subject to all the normal worries of the validity of instrument used and of the honesty of the subjects‘ answers to the questions
4.2 Students’ attitudes towards teacher written feedback
Previous studies indicate that teachers’ feedback can distort students’ understanding, as teachers often misunderstand students’ content and provide irrelevant comments Zamel (1985) found that students rarely read teachers’ feedback because the comments are biased and do not accurately reflect their original ideas Similarly, Zacharias (2007) identified that teachers' feedback often diverges from students’ original thoughts, causing confusion and hindering effective revision processes.
Students often struggle to interpret teacher's feedback due to complex wording and unclear instructions, hindering their writing improvement Sommers (1982) highlighted that ambiguous feedback can lead to students making revisions that worsen their original sentences, as unclear guidance causes confusion Zacharias (2007) found that unreadable or confusing feedback reduces students’ likelihood of accepting and applying corrections Additionally, Zamel (1985) noted that vague feedback can mislead students and diminish their motivation to engage with teacher comments Consequently, despite being able to read feedback, students remain confused and may ignore or avoid it altogether, negatively impacting their learning process.
Students consider teacher feedback a valuable tool for improving their writing skills, as it helps them identify and correct errors Empirical studies consistently show that students hold high expectations and assign significant value to written feedback from teachers For instance, a study of 47 EFL students found that the majority endorsed the instructional usefulness of various types of teacher feedback (Enginarlar, 1993) Additionally, Ferris (2003) concluded that students generally appreciate teacher commentary in almost any form, based on a review of 11 studies Both empirical evidence and teachers' experiences highlight that providing written feedback is essential and indispensable for effective writing instruction This has sparked research into the best practices for delivering written feedback, focusing on what to provide and how to maximize its effectiveness Consequently, the questions of ‘what’ and ‘how’ to give written feedback have become central topics in L2 writing research.
This chapter provides a comprehensive theoretical background on second language writing, exploring various types of feedback on students' writings It discusses the importance of teacher-written feedback and examines students' perceptions of this feedback These insights lay the foundation for understanding effective feedback strategies to improve second language writing skills.
METHODOLOGY
Context of the study
This study was conducted at the Vocational College of Posts and Telecommunications in Thanh Xuan District, Hanoi, Vietnam, a leading institution affiliated with the Posts and Telecommunications Institute of Technology The college specializes in high-quality training programs in two primary fields: website management and website design, equipping students with essential skills for the digital industry.
At the Vocational College of Posts and Telecommunications, English is regarded as a vital subject that directly relates to students' specialties Therefore, all students are required to study English for two years, preparing them thoroughly for their graduation examinations at the end of the third year.
To enhance English language learning and improve all four communicative skills, the official course book "New English File" was selected, featuring nine themes focused on listening, speaking, reading, and writing Complementing the main textbook, freshmen use a workbook with Unit Reviews covering vocabulary, grammar, reading, and pronunciation, as well as writing practice for sentence and paragraph development These activities are completed after finishing each unit in the course book Additionally, students participate in two weekly periods of E-learning with an online English program, guided and supported by teachers, serving as a self-teaching tool Overall, students have ample classroom time and access to supplementary materials to support their English language development effectively.
The writing section in the curriculum typically starts with a model example to guide students effectively It includes activities that support the writing process, such as practicing verb forms, analyzing texts, and engaging in writing exercises Students are expected to produce different types of texts, including personal and formal letters, postcards, and descriptions of charts, graphs, and tables Clear general and specific learning objectives are outlined in the textbooks to ensure focused skill development.
In the writing cycle, students were required to produce three drafts for each selected topic to improve their writing skills After submitting their first draft, they received detailed content feedback from their teacher, focusing on the key components of effective writing Upon presenting the second draft, students obtained feedback specifically addressing grammatical errors to enhance their language accuracy.
Participants
This study involved 80 first-year non-English majors at the Vocational College of Posts and Telecommunications These students had completed a semester of practicing comprehensive communication skills in English, including writing As a result, they were able to understand and effectively utilize teacher feedback to improve their rewriting skills, demonstrating their progress in language proficiency.
Based on the students' background information gathered from the questionnaire, their ages range from 19 to 21 years old, with an average of 12 years of English study in Vietnam They come from various regions across northern and central provinces, including rural, urban, and mountainous areas Most students have limited English backgrounds, although a few demonstrate strong English skills Table 1 presents their self-reported opportunities to practice writing in English during high school and college.
Table 3: Student’ frequency of writing in High school and College
Frequency Writing in school Writing in college
Most students (75%) reported that they never practiced writing in English during high school, with a small group (18.75%) indicating they seldom did, and only 6.25% stating they often practiced Similarly, at the university level, the majority (66.25%) said they never engaged in English writing practice, while 21.25% reported rarely practicing and just 12.25% sometimes practiced writing in English.
Methods of data collection
This research employed a mixed-method approach, combining quantitative questionnaires and qualitative interviews to collect comprehensive data Utilizing diverse methods enables the integration of various theories, providing a more holistic understanding of the research problem This approach also allows for the critical testing of competing theories, enhancing the overall validity and depth of the study (Todd D Jick, 1979).
The study’s quantitative analysis provided insights into students' attitudes toward different types of teacher feedback, highlighting their perceptions and preferences Meanwhile, the qualitative data offered a deep understanding of students' strategies for managing and responding to feedback, as well as the underlying reasons behind these approaches This combined approach enhances our knowledge of effective feedback methods and student engagement in language learning.
A questionnaire is employed to gather students' data regarding their attitudes towards various teacher-written feedback strategies It consists of two main sections: the first collects demographic information such as age, gender, and learning background, providing essential context for analyzing students' perceptions and preferences related to feedback methods.
English experience, etc The second part collects the data with regard to their attitudes towards teachers‘ written feedback strategies
This study adapted the questionnaire from Padgate (1999) to explore students' attitudes towards teachers' written feedback strategies in a college setting To ensure relevance and appropriateness for participants, some questions were omitted, and the questionnaire was carefully translated into Vietnamese to prevent misunderstandings The survey focused on four key variables: students’ attitudes toward feedback strategies, their comprehension of feedback, and their attention to feedback, with specific questions assigned to each area Most questions offered four response options to gather comprehensive insights into students’ perceptions and experiences.
Researchers commonly use questionnaires to collect quantitative data from participants, while structured interviews conducted in Vietnamese provide valuable qualitative insights These interviews aimed to explore how students respond to and manage their teachers' written feedback, offering a deeper understanding of their coping strategies and learning processes.
Interviewing serves as a key method for collecting data and gaining insights from individuals According to Kvale (1996), interviews are "an interchange of views between two or more people on a topic of mutual interest," highlighting the importance of human interaction and social context in knowledge production Face-to-face discussions enable in-depth exploration of topics, such as how students respond to feedback In this study, 12 randomly selected students were interviewed—limited in number to focus on the quality of information, as supported by Huberman & Miles (2002) All interviews were tape-recorded and translated by the researcher to ensure accurate data collection, with designed questions aimed at extracting rich qualitative insights.
1 Do you think direct feedback is useful for your writing? Why?
2 Do you think coded feedback is useful for your writing? Why?
3 Do you think uncoded feedback is useful for your writing? Why?
4 Do you think content feedback is useful for your writing? Why
5 Do you have any problems in understanding your teacher’ written feedback? If yes, can you specify them?
6 What do you usually do after you read your teacher’s written feedback on your writings? Can you explain your choice?
Teacher written feedback used in this study
This study examines students' attitudes toward various types of teacher written feedback, presenting four distinct response strategies tailored to different feedback functions The feedback methods are categorized based on their focus on content and form, providing insights into how students perceive and respond to different teacher response approaches.
In process approach writing classes, providing targeted content feedback on students’ initial drafts is essential for their development According to Bates, Lane, and Lange (1993), effective feedback should include personalized comments that foster a dialogue between the reader and writer, ensuring students feel engaged and motivated It is important to offer guidance when needed while avoiding overly directive or prescriptive advice that may hinder creative expression Additionally, making text-specific comments that relate directly to the student’s work helps improve clarity and relevance Finally, a balanced approach of positive and constructive criticism prevents discouragement, encouraging continuous improvement in student writing.
Personalized content feedback effectively addresses individual student needs, enhancing learning outcomes After receiving initial feedback, students revised their writing and submitted a second draft for further review The feedback process included three types—direct, coded, and uncoded—targeting five specific error categories identified by Ferris and Roberts (2001) This structured approach ensures comprehensive guidance, improving students’ writing accuracy and overall language proficiency.
Data Collection Procedure
All students were informed that the survey was not an assessment but aimed to gather their opinions to improve writing instruction After collecting all the questionnaires, the researcher carefully checked, sorted, and numbered the responses to analyze the data effectively.
The study involved twelve student interviews conducted in Vietnamese to ensure clear understanding and unbiased responses Students were divided into high, moderate, and low English proficiency groups based on their end-of-term scores Interview responses were transcribed, and only the most insightful and relevant answers were translated into English for analysis The researcher carefully reviewed each student's responses to identify how they managed feedback and the challenges they faced with teachers' written comments.
Chapter 2 outlines the research methodology, including the study's context, detailed methods, and data analysis techniques The study investigates students' attitudes toward teacher-written feedback strategies, with Chapter 3 presenting the key research results related to these perceptions.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Findings
The first seven questions focuses on the students‘ attitudes towards teacher‘s written feedback strategies
Question 7: How important is it for your teacher to give you written feedback? Not important Not very important Okay Very important
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.1: The students’ attitudes towards the importance of teacher written feedback
502 Bad GatewayUnable to reach the origin service The service may be down or it may not be responding to traffic from cloudflared
Question 8: To what extent were you satisfied with how the following feedback was given by your teacher? Put a tick in the box
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.2: The students’ satisfaction with teacher written feedback
502 Bad GatewayUnable to reach the origin service The service may be down or it may not be responding to traffic from cloudflared
Question 9: How helpful are the following types of teacher‘ written feedback to your subsequent assignments?
Not very helpful Rather helpful Very helpful
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.3: The students’ perception with regard to the helpfulness of teacher written feedback
502 Bad GatewayUnable to reach the origin service The service may be down or it may not be responding to traffic from cloudflared
Question 10: When you read each type of the following feedback, to what extent did you think that the feedback that you received was clear?
Not clear at all Not very clear Quite clear Totally clear
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.4:The students’ perceptions with regard to the clarity of teacher written feedback
According to Table 4.4, 97.5% of students found the teacher’s direct feedback to be clear, indicating high satisfaction with its clarity Similarly, 70% of students reported that coded feedback was completely clear, demonstrating its effectiveness For uncoded feedback, 70% of students also considered it quite clear However, in contrast to these positive perceptions, the majority of students (51.25%) felt that content feedback was not very clear, highlighting a significant area for improvement in clarity.
Question 11: To what extent did you think the teacher provided feedback was suitable?
Not suitable at all Not very suitable Rather suitable Very suitable
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.5: The students’ perceptions towards the suitability of teacher written feedback
According to Table 4.5, the majority of students (62.5%) found the feedback provided by their teachers to be quite suitable, highlighting positive perceptions of instructional feedback Additionally, 8.75% of students considered the feedback very suitable, while 18.75% felt it was not very suitable A smaller percentage, 10%, believed the feedback was entirely unsuitable, indicating varying levels of satisfaction with teacher feedback among students.
Question 12: Which of the following type of feedback would you like your teacher to give more in future? (Please tick only ONE answer)
Direct feedback Coded feedback Uncoded feedback Content feedback
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.6: The students’ preference towards teacher written feedback
According to Table 4.6, direct feedback was the most preferred method among students, with 56.25% expressing their preference Content feedback was also popular, selected by 23.75% of students Less favored feedback strategies included coded feedback, chosen by 13.75%, and uncoded feedback, preferred by only 5% Overall, direct feedback emerged as the most favored approach among students based on the survey results.
The interview results highlight students' attitudes toward teacher-written feedback, indicating that they find it the most reliable form of feedback for improving their writing skills Students consistently regard teacher feedback as more effective than self-editing efforts and peer feedback However, their attitudes vary depending on the type of teacher feedback, reflecting differing perceptions of its usefulness in their writing development.
Concerning direct feedback, most of the students joining the interview felt satisfied with it For example, the idea from a student in the low group:
“This type of feedback was very good, sir because the teacher corrected directly the errors that sometimes I did not find out and know how to correct it.“
Students in the high proficiency group prefer the teacher to focus on identifying their errors rather than correcting them directly One student remarked that direct feedback was helpful, stating, "The direct feedback given by the teacher was very useful for my writing because he corrected directly the errors," but also expressed a desire for more autonomy, suggesting, "I want the teacher to give codes on the errors so that I myself can correct them." This indicates that high proficiency students value targeted feedback that encourages self-correction and active engagement with their mistakes.
Most interviewees agreed that coded feedback is very helpful for improving their writing A high-proficiency student remarked that teacher-written feedback allowed them to identify and correct errors effectively Similarly, a moderate-proficiency participant found coded feedback useful for understanding their mistakes and applying appropriate corrections, highlighting its role in enhancing writing skills.
The twelve students interviewed held diverse opinions on uncoded feedback, with those in the high proficiency group indicating that it not only helped them identify their errors but also boosted their motivation to correct mistakes independently.
Identifying and correcting my own errors enhances my understanding and helps me remember key lessons When my teacher underlined my mistakes, I took time to analyze why they were wrong and discovered effective ways to fix them Self-correcting promotes long-term learning and reduces the likelihood of repeating similar errors in the future.
However, the students in moderate and low proficiency group showed their anxious about uncoded feedback A student in the low proficiency group shared his view:
Struggling with English writing can be frustrating, especially when teachers only underline or circle errors without explaining why they are wrong or how to correct them This approach leaves students confused and stuck, preventing them from understanding their mistakes and improving their skills Effective feedback that clarifies errors and offers guidance is essential for helping learners develop confidence and proficiency in English writing.
Most students found the content feedback highly useful for improving their writing skills They agreed that targeted feedback helps them revise their work easily in line with teacher guidelines, with a student from the moderate proficiency group stating, "This kind of feedback helps me improve my writing and revise content based on the teacher’s instructions." Similarly, a student from the low proficiency group mentioned, "The detailed comments from the teacher provide a clear guideline, making it easier for me to enhance my writing." Overall, students recognize that constructive feedback plays a crucial role in their writing development and helps them achieve better academic outcomes.
To answer this research question, the results from the questions 13-15 in the questionnaire were collected These ones refer to the students‘ comprehension of their teacher written feedback
Question 13: When you read each of the following feedback, to what extent did you understand it?
Mostly understood Tải bản FULL (80 trang): https://bit.ly/3dfotk8
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.7: The students’ comprehension of the teacher written feedback
According to Table 4.7, most students (43.75%) relatively understand direct feedback, highlighting its clarity Similarly, a majority (53.75%) reported that they relatively comprehend coded feedback, suggesting it is somewhat effective In contrast, uncoded feedback was largely misunderstood, with 43.75% of students indicating they do not understand it at all, underscoring the need for clearer communication When it comes to content feedback, most students (58.75%) only weakly understand it, pointing to potential areas for improvement in feedback delivery.
Question 14: When you found some troubles with the feedback that you did not understand, how often did you make an attempt at understanding it?
No Percent No Percent No Percent No Percent
Table 4.8: The students’ attempt to understand the teacher written feedback
According to Table 4.8, 46.25% of students often attempt to understand feedback from their teachers when facing difficulties, indicating a proactive engagement with feedback Additionally, 8.75% of students always strive to comprehend feedback, while 18.75% do so occasionally Conversely, 26.25% of students admit they never try to understand feedback when encountering issues, highlighting varied levels of feedback engagement among learners.
Question 15: When you read each of the following feedback, how often did you have problems in understanding it?
Tải bản FULL (80 trang): https://bit.ly/3dfotk8
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net