EFL SECONDARY AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF ADVANTAGES AND DIFFICULTIES OF WRITTEN FEEDBACK BY QUESTIONING IN WRITING

Kha Manh Nguyen, Mai Xuan Le

Abstract


This paper reports a descriptive study to enquire into English as a Foreign Language (EFL) secondary and high school (K-12) students’ perceptions about the advantages and difficulties of written feedback by questioning in writing. This paper draws on the data collected as part of a larger project including questionnaires and focus-group interviews. The findings reveal that students held positive perceptions about the impact of written feedback by questioning in writing, particularly on motivation, writing skills, and attitudes and preferences.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


EFL K-12 students, perceptions, written feedback by questioning, writing, Vietnam

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ajideh, P. (2006). Schema-theory based considerations on pre-reading activities in ESP textbooks. The Asian EFL Journal, (16).

Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to give effective feedback to your students. Instructional Supervision & Evaluation: The Teaching Process, 10-18.

Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267–96.

Chen et al. (2009). Effects of high level prompts and peer assessment on online learners' reflection levels. Computers & Education, 52(2), 283-291.

Cooper, N. J. (2000). Facilitating learning from formative feedback in level 3 assessment, assessment and evaluation in higher education, 25(3), 279–91.

Durkin, D. (1978/1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction? Reading Research Quarterly, 14(4), 481-533.

Ferris, D. & B. Roberts (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing 10(3), 161–184.

Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to Students Writing: Implication for Second-Language Students. (Second Edition). Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Freeman, S. W. (1987). Response to student writing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Ge. S. & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, S1(1), 21-38.

Gatz, M. (2004). Prewriting Strategies. Retrieved from http://litl.ilstu.edu/rlbraod/teaching/studentpubs/writewhere/gtz.pdf.

Harmer, J. ((2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd ed.). London: Longman

Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of written teacher feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing 7, 255-286.

Hyland, K. &. Hyland F. (2006). Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Sources. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hyland, F. and Hyland, K. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Lang. Tech., 39: 83-101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hyland, K. (2008). Genre and academic writing in the disciplines. Language Teaching, 41(4), 543-562

King A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children’s problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 307-317.

King A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 338-368.

Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. Modern Language.

Leki, I. (1990). Potential problems with peer responding in ESL writing classes. Canada TESOL,3, 5-19.

Liu, N. & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290.

Linse T. C. (2005). Practical English Language Teaching: Young Learners. New York: McGraw- Hill, 98

Lindsay, P., & Norman, D. A. (1977). Human information processing: An introduction to psychology. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

McDaniel, M. A., & Donnelly, C. M. (1996). Learning with analogy and elaborative interrogation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 508-519.

Miceli, T. (2006). Foreign Language Students’ Perceptions of a Reflective Approach to Text Correction. Flinders University Languages Group Online Review, 3(1), 25-36

Nazario, L., Borchers, D., & Lewis, W. (2012). Bridges to Better Writing.

Nunan, D. (2001). Language Teaching Methodology (A Textbook For Teachers). Sydney: Prentice Hall

Peterson, S. S. (2010). How can feedback be used as a teaching tool to support students’ writing development?

Srichanyachon, N. (2012). Teacher written feedback for L2 learners’ writing development. Silpakorn University Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts, 12(1), 7-17.

Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wang Y. (2007). On the cognitive processes of human perception with emotions, motivation and attitudes.

Walsh, K. (2010). The importance of writing skills: Online tools to encourage success.

White, R. & Arndt, V. (1991). Process writing. Longman.

Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven Keys to Effective Feedback. Educational Leadership, 70, 10-16.

Y. Yang, Feedback on College EFL Students’ Compositions accessed on June 18th 2008

Zamel, V. (1995). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (1), 79-97.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v9i8.4408

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Kha Manh Nguyen, Mai Xuan Le

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2022. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.


This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).