The Role and Importance of Effective Written Teacher Feedback

By Fruzsina Berke

Although responding to student writing is an important and meaningful area of teacher’s work, it is often described in negative terms, referred to as tedious and unrewarding. Usually, current literature and traditional pedagogy provide little guidance for motivating student writers to look beyond their surface errors. Effective written teacher feedback, therefore, is of profound importance to develop and to refine students’ communicative intentions. The main purpose of this essay is to present the major problems of current feedback practice through shedding light on the mismatches between teachers’ beliefs and practice related to written feedback; furthermore, this essay introduces two feedback types, evaluative and formative, and explains why formative feedback is effective in empowering students as self-regulated learners.

Studying the mismatches between teacher’s beliefs and written feedback practice, it becomes evident that the common error-focused approach—inevitably drawing teachers’ attention to weaknesses rather than strengths—is the source most of the problematic issues related to feedback practice. As Lee (2009) states, teachers pay most attention to language form when giving feedback, even though they believe that there is more to good writing than accuracy. When interviewed, all the teachers claimed that good writing does not only depend on accuracy but also on the development of ideas and organization. Nevertheless, the feedback analysis shows that they highly focus on language form in their response to student writing due to the public examination culture in schools. In effect, teachers place the emphasis on accuracy, fluency and vocabulary to prepare their students for exams.

Another important point that Lee (2009) makes is that students are not given enough room to improve their writing. In spite of teachers’ belief that students should take greater responsibility for learning as well as for locating and correcting their own mistakes, the feedback analysis shows that about 70% of the feedback is direct, including teachers locating and correcting errors for students. When asked about it, most of the teachers stated that since students are unable to locate errors for themselves, they have to help them. The problem with this is that without peer or self-evaluation, students are not provided with opportunities to develop responsibility for learning.

Taking all of this into consideration, it can be seen that there are a number of gaps between teachers’ beliefs and practice in written feedback. Thus, the type of feedback needed is one that can effectively help close this gap and change the common error-focused attitude: formative feedback.

According to McGarrell and Verbeem (2007), the two extremes of the teacher feedback are evaluative and formative feedback. Evaluative feedback is the one discussed in great detail above; it is the kind of feedback that expresses to a writer how well the instructor’s instructional priorities have been met, reflects a preoccupation with sentence-level errors (Hyland, 2003), and takes the form of directives for improvement on present or future assignments.

In contrast, formative feedback is rooted in the assumption that writers create their own communicative purpose (McGarrel & Verbeem, 2007). It encourages students to take a closer look at the text, so it often consists of questions intended to raise awareness of the reader’s understanding of the meaning of the writing. Most importantly, it prioritizes content and organization over form. This seems logical, as in the real world, texts are also primarily read for the ideas they offer and not for their representation of the writer’s knowledge of grammar rules; not to mention the fact that attention directed to form at this stage denies the developing writer the learning opportunity in reconsidering the content. Moreover, formative feedback is highly personalized, directly addressing not only the content of the composition but also the person who wrote it, relating the ideas expressed in the text to the interests and abilities of the individual writer.

Considerable research evidence shows that effective feedback results in learning benefits (Black & William, 1998). Formative feedback helps students improve their own performance: that is, to take action to reduce the confutation between their intentions and the resulting effect. This is crucial in empowering students as self-regulated learners. According to Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006), formative feedback provides valuable information about how the student’s current state relates to their own objectives and standards, which leads students to actively interpret external feedback in relation to their internal goals – and that is a skill typical of the self-regulated learner. Therefore, self-assessment can lead to significant achievements in learning; learners who are self-regulated demonstrate a higher level of persistence, resourcefulness, and confidence (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001).

In conclusion, by providing formative feedback that seeks to discover and clarify intended meanings, teachers exploit developing writer’s basic need to communicate. Thus motivated to refine their intended messages and to consider alternative ways of expressing their ideas, students experience potentially valuable learning opportunities.

References

Black, P., &Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.

Lee, I. (2009). Ten mismatches between teachers’ beliefs and written feedback practice. ELT journal, 63(1), 13–19.

McGarrell, H., & Verbeem, J. (2007). Motivating revision of drafts through formative feedback. ELT journal, 61(3), 228–236.

Nicol, D. J, &Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self‐regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.