Perceptions and Practices of Teachers’ Written Feedback Provision Strategies on Students' written Composition
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20372/star.v6i3.409Keywords:
feedback, text analysis, composition, perceptionAbstract
The main objective of this study was to investigate teachers perceptions and practices of their written feedback provision strategies on the students' written composition of grade eleven students in four selected preparatory schools in East and west Wollega zones. In this study, descriptive survey design was used. The four preparatory schools were randomly selected from the two Wollega zones. The total population of grade 11 students at the specified preparatory schools was 2000. As a sample, 20% of the total number of students was used which accounts 400. These sample students were selected using random sampling technique as it gives an equal opportunity for all respondents to be part of the study. Since the total number of teachers is very few, all of them (21) were included with availability sampling technique. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from both the teachers and students respondents found in the two zones. To get the quantitative and the qualitative data on the teachers’ perceptions and practices, questionnaires and text analysis were used. The data collected through questionnaire was computed with descriptive statistics such as percentages, mean values and standard deviation and that of the text analysis was qualitatively analyzed in thematic form. Hence, the finding showed students and teachers perceived written feedback provision is highly significant for enhancing students’ composition. The data further revealed that teachers did not practice variety of written feedback strategies as frequently as possible. According to the finding, the reasons for the infrequent written feedback practice were the time consuming nature of feedback, large class size and the students’ low performance in producing good compositions. Besides, the finding showed that when written feedback is appropriately provided, students get insights into writing effective compositions. Furthermore, it was reported that feedback helps students to improve their writing, keeps them active and enhances their writing fluency. Therefore, it can be concluded that teachers did not make the required efforts of practicing varieties of written feedback provision strategies that could enhance students’ composition. Thus, it is recommended that teachers have to provide varieties of written feedback strategies thereby students come to write an effective compositions.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Al Shamsi, S. (2013). English Language Teachers' Perceptions Regarding Corrective Feedback on Students' Writing (M.A. Thesis). UAEU, Abu Dhabi.
Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 227-257.
Carnicelli, T. A. (1980). The writing conference: A one to one conversation. In, Timothy, R. Donovan, Ben, W. McClell &. Urbana (Eds.). Eight Approaches to Teaching Composition (pp. 101-132). IL: NCTE.
Drown, R. (2009).Feedback in Learning. In, Eric M. Anderman (Ed). Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Ensyclopedia. USA: Macmilan reference.
Edge, J. (1989). Mistakes and Correction. London: Longman.
Elashiri, A. (2013).The Impact of the Direct Teacher Feedback Strategy on the EFL Secondary Stage Students' Writing performance (M.A. Thesis).Mansura University, Egypt.
Grami, M. (2005). The Effect of Teachers Written Feedback on ESL Students Perception. Annual Review of Education, communication and Language Sciences, 2, 4-5).
Hattie, J. &Timperley, H. (2007).The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hedge, T. (1998).Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, F. (2001). Providing effective support: investigating feedback to distance language learners. Open Learning, 16(3),.233–47.
Hyland, k. & F. Hyland. (2006). Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing .Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jacobs, S. & Karliner, A. (1977). Helping writers to think: The effect of speech rules in individual conferences on the quality of thought in student writing. College English, 38,489-491.
Jamalinesari, A. (2014).The Effects of Teacher-Written Direct vs. Indirect Feedback on students’ Writing. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 116 – 123.
Keh, C.L. (1990). Feedback in the Writing Process: A Model and Methods for Implementation. ELT Journal, 44(4), 294 - 304.
Kelly, W. J. & Lawton, D. L. (1998). Odyssey: A guide to better writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ko, K. & Hirvela, A. (2010). Perceptions of ESL teachers in North America regarding feedback on college students’ writing (Doctoral Dissertation). Ohio State University, USA.
Lounis, M. (2010). Students’ Response to Teachers’ Feedback on Writing: The Case of Third Year L.M.D Students of English. Algeria: MoHE and Scientific Research.
Lucy, L.(2001). The Effect of corrections and commentaries on Journal Writing accuracy of udents. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 235-245.
Moser, M & Jasmine, J. (2010).Using Peer Feedback with High School Students to Improve the Use of Analogies and Symbolism within Creative Writing. (pp.65-68).
Murray, D. (1985). A writer teaches writing (2nd edition). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Purnawarman, P. (2011). Impacts of Teacher Feedback on ESL/EFL Students’ Writing (Doctoral Dissertation, Ver. State University, USA
Schwartz, F., & White, K. (2000). Making sense of it all: Giving and getting online course feedback (M.A. Thesis). Boston, USA.
Sharma, R. (2000). Fundamentals of educational research. Mcerut: Inter Publishing House.
Simmons, J.(1984). The one-to-one method of teaching composition. College Composition and Communication, 35(2), 222-230.
Singh, K. (2006). Fundamentals of Research Methodology and Statistics. New Delhi: New Age International.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Widdowson, H.G. (1983) Learning purpose and language Use. Oxford: Oxford University press
Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(1), 79-101.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Journal of Science, Technology and Arts Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
STAR © 2023 Copyright; All rights reserved
Accepted 2023-05-26
Published 2017-09-25