Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T15:24:07.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Section 1: - Situating Feedback: Sociocultural Dimensions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2019

Edited by
Ken Hyland  and
Fiona Hyland
Ken Hyland
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Fiona Hyland
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Feedback in Second Language Writing
Contexts and Issues
 , pp. 23 - 82
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Antón, M. & DiCamilla, F. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interactions in the L2 classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 314–42.Google Scholar
Carson, J. G. (1992). Becoming biliterate: First language influences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 37–60.Google Scholar
Carson, J. G. & Nelson, G. L. (1994). Writing groups: Cross-cultural issues. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, J. G. & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 1–19.Google Scholar
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In Lantolf, J. P. & Appel, G. (Eds.), Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Grabe, W. (2001). Notes toward a theory of second language writing. In Silva, T. & Matsuda, P. K. (Eds.), On Second Language Writing (pp. 39–57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory and Practice of Writing. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Guerrero, M. C. M. de & Villamil, O. S. (1994). Social-cognitive dimensions of interaction in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 484–96.Google Scholar
Guerrero, M. C. M. de & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84, 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerrero, M. C. M. de & Villamil, O. S. (2002). Metaphorical conceptualizations of ESL teaching and learning. Language Teaching Research, 6, 95–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
John-Steiner, V., Panofsky, C. P., & Smith, L. W. (1994). Introduction. In John-Steiner, V., Panofsky, C. P., & Smith, L. W. (Eds.), Sociocultural Approaches to Language and Literacy: An Interactionist Perspective (pp. 1–33). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Second language learning as a mediated process. Language Teaching, 33, 79–96.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P. & Pavlenko, A. (2001). Second language activity theory: Understanding second language learners as people. In Breen, M. P. (Ed.), Learner Contributions to Language Learning: New Directions in Research (pp. 141–58). New York: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Leontiev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.), The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology (pp. 37–71). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.Google Scholar
Lidz, C. S. (1991). Practitioner’s Guide to Dynamic Assessment. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. L. & Carson, J. G. (1998). ESL students’ perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 113–31.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. L. & Murphy, J. M. (1992). An L2 writing group: Task and social dimensions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 171–93.Google Scholar
Nine-Curt, C. J. (1993). Intercultural interaction in the Hispanic-Anglo classroom from a nonverbal perspective. In Fayer, J. (Ed.), Puerto Rican Communication Studies (pp. 99–109). San Juan, Puerto Rico: Fundación Arqueológica, Antropológica e Histórica.Google Scholar
Ohta, A. (1995). Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of learner discourse: Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 93–121.Google Scholar
Stone, C. A. (1993). What is missing in the metaphor of scaffolding. In Forman, E. A., Minick, N., & Stone, C. A. (Eds.), Contexts for Learning: Sociocultural Dynamics in Children’s Development (pp. 169–83). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rommetveit, R. (1985). Language acquisition as increasing linguistic structuring of experience and symbolic behavior control. In Wertsch, J. (Ed.), Culture, Communication, and Cognition: Vygotskyan Perspectives (pp. 183–204). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Villamil, O. S. & Guerrero, M. C. M. de (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 51–75.Google Scholar
Villamil, O. S. & Guerrero, M. C. M. de (1998). Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 19, 491–514.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language (Kozulin, A., Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1934).Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1979a). From social interaction to higher psychological processes: A clarification and application of Vygotsky’s theory. Human Development, 22, 1–22.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1979b). The regulation of human action and the given-new organization of private speech. In Zivin, G. (Ed.), The Development of Self-Regulation through Private Speech (pp. 79–98). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.Google Scholar

References

Allaei, S. & Connor, U. (1990). Exploring the dynamics of cross-cultural collaboration. The Writing Instructor, 10, 19–28.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D. (1999). TESOL and culture. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 625–54.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D. (2016). Second language writing and culture. In Manchón, R. M. & Matsuda, P. K. (Eds.), Handbook of Second and Foreign Language Writing (pp. 545–65). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D & Sohn, J. (2013). Culture from the bottom up. TESOL Quarterly, 47, 669–93.Google Scholar
Belz, J. A. (2003). Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7, 68–99.Google Scholar
Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 215–41.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2010). The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, L. (2014). Peer-reviewing in an intercultural wiki environment – Student interaction and reflections. Computers and Composition, 34, 80–95.Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. S. (2013). From intercultural rhetoric to cosmopolitan practice: Addressing new challenges in lingua franca English. In Belcher, D. & Nelson, G. (Eds.), Critical and Corpus-Based Approaches to Intercultural Rhetoric (pp. 203–26). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Carson, J. G. & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiPardo, A. & Freedman, S.W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretic foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58, 119–49.Google Scholar
Gere, A. R. (1987). Writing Groups: History, Theory and Implications. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Guardado, M. & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback. Computers and Composition, 24, 443–61.Google Scholar
Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.Google Scholar
Holliday, A. (2013). Understanding Intercultural Communication: Negotiating a Grammar of Culture. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hu, G. (2005). Using peer review with Chinese ESL student writers. Language Teaching Research, 9, 321–42.Google Scholar
Hu, G. & Choo, L. (2016). The impact of disciplinary background and teaching experience on the use of evaluative language in teacher feedback. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 22, 329–49.Google Scholar
Hu, G. & Lam, S. T. E. (2010). Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy: Exploring peer review in a second language writing class. Instructional Science, 38, 371–94.Google Scholar
Hu, G. & Ren, H. (2012). The impact of experience and beliefs on Chinese EFL student writers’ feedback preferences. In Tang, R. (Ed.), Academic Writing in a Second or Foreign Language (pp. 67–87). London, UK: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4, 33–54.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (2006a). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing: An introduction. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp. 1–19). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (2006b). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39, 83–101.Google Scholar
Jin, L. & Cortazzi, M. (2017). Practising cultures of learning in internationalising universities. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38, 237–50.Google Scholar
Jones, R. H., Garralda, A., Li, D. C .S., & Lock, G. (2006). Interactional dynamics in on-line and face-to-face peer-tutoring sessions for second language writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 1–23.Google Scholar
Kubota, R. (1999). Japanese culture constructed by discourses: Implications for applied linguistics research and ELT. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 9–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kubota, R. & Lehner, A. (2004). Toward critical contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, X. (2014). Are ‘cultural differences a mere fiction?’: Reflections and arguments on contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing, 25, 104–13.Google Scholar
Markus, H. & Kitayama, S. (2010). Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 420–30.Google Scholar
Mistry, J., Li, J., Yoshikawa, H., Tseng, V., Tirrell, J., Kiang, L., … Wang, Y. (2016). An integrated conceptual framework for the development of Asian American children and youth. Child Development, 87, 1014–32.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. L & Carson, J. G. (1995). Social dimensions of second-language writing instruction: Peer response groups as cultural context. In Rubin, D. L. (Ed.), Composing Social Identity in Written Communication (pp. 89–109). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. L. & Carson, J. G. (1998). ESL students’ perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 113–31.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. L. & Carson, J. G. (2006). Cultural issues in peer response: Revisiting ‘culture’. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp.42–59). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M. (2008). Modifying L2 criticisms: How learners do it? Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 768–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Rogoff, B. (2003). The Cultural Nature of Human Development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruecker, T. (2011). The potential of dual-language cross-cultural peer review. ELT Journal, 65, 398–407.Google Scholar
Scollon, R. & Scollon, S. W. (2004). Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Spack, R. (1997). The rhetorical construction of multilingual students. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 765–74.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. B. M. & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 147–70.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. B. M. & Ng, M. M. Y. (2010). Cultural contexts and situated possibilities in the teaching of second language writing. Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 364–75.Google Scholar
Villamil, O. S. & Guerrero, M. C. M. de (2006). Sociocultural theory: A framework for understanding the social-cognitive dimensions of peer feedback. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp. 23–41). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Webster, L. & Mertova, P. (2007). Using Narrative Inquiry as a Research Method. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weisner, T. S. (2009). Culture, development, and diversity: Expectable pluralism, conflict, and similarity. Ethos, 37, 181–96.Google Scholar
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200.Google Scholar
Yu, S. & Hu, G. (2017a). Can higher-proficiency L2 learners benefit from working with lower-proficiency partners in peer feedback? Teaching in Higher Education, 22, 178–92.Google Scholar
Yu, S. & Hu, G. (2017b). Understanding university students’ peer feedback practices in EFL writing: Insights from a case study. Assessing Writing, 33, 25–35.Google Scholar
Yu, S. & Lee, I. (2016). Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014). Language Teaching, 49, 461–93.Google Scholar
Yu, S., Lee, I., & Mak, P. (2016). Revisiting Chinese cultural issues in peer feedback in EFL writing: Insights from a multiple case study. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25, 295–304.Google Scholar
Zamel, V. (1997). Towards a model of transculturation. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 341–52Google Scholar
Zhao, H. (2014). Investigating teacher-supported peer assessment for EFL writing. ELT Journal, 68, 155–68.Google Scholar

References

Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M. M. Bakhtin. (Emerson, C. & Holquist, M., Trans.; Holquist, M., Ed.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. (McGee, V. W., Trans.; Emerson, C. & Holquist, M., Eds.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Belcher, D. (1994). The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy: Graduate students and their mentors. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 23–34.Google Scholar
Belcher, D. & Connor, U. (Eds.) (2001) Reflections on Multiliterate Lives. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Benesch, S. (2001). Critical English for Academic Purposes: Theory, Politics, and Practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Blakeslee, A. (1997). Activity, context, interaction, and authority: Learning to write scientific papers in situ. Written Communication, 11, 125–69.Google Scholar
Braine, G. (Ed.) (1999). Non-Native Educators in English Language Teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Brannon, L. & Knoblauch, C. H. (1982). On students’ rights to their own texts: A model of teacher response. College Composition and Communication, 33, 157–66.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. S. (2002). Critical Academic Writing and Multilingual Students. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. S. (2013). Translingual Practice: Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. S. (2015). “Blessed in my own way”: Pedagogical affordances for dialogical voice construction in multilingual student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 122–39.Google Scholar
Conrad, S. & Goldstein, L. (1999). ESL student revision after teacher written comments: Text, contexts, and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 147–79.Google Scholar
Ferris, D. (2007). Preparing teachers to respond to student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 165–93.Google Scholar
Goldstein, L. M. (2004). Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: Teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 63–80.Google Scholar
Goldstein, L. M. (2016). Making use of teacher feedback. In Manchón, R. M. & Matsuda, P. K. (Eds.), Handbook of Second and Foreign Language Writing (pp. 407–30). Boston/Berlin: DeGruyter.Google Scholar
Howard, R. M. (1999). Standing in the Shadow of Giants: Plagiarists, Authors, Collaborators. Stamford, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher-written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 255–86.Google Scholar
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The Discoursal Construction of Identity in Academic Writing. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jacoby, S. (1991). The constitution of expert-novice in scientific discourse. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 2, 149–81.Google Scholar
Johnston, B. (2003). Values in English Language Teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kamberelis, G. & Scott, K. D. (1992). Other people’s voices: The coarticulation of texts and subjectivities. Linguistics and Education, 4, 359–403.Google Scholar
Merkel, W. (2018). Role reversals: A case study of dialogic interactions and feedback on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 39, 16–28.Google Scholar
Nishino, T. & Atkinson, D. (2015). Second language writing as sociocognitive alignment. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 37–54.Google Scholar
Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 9–31.Google Scholar
Onore, C. (1989). The student, the teacher, and the text: Negotiating meanings through response and revision. In Anson, C. (Ed.), Writing and Response: Theory, Practice and Research (pp. 231–60). Urbana, IL: NCTE.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing others’ words: Text, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 201–30.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A. (1997). Vulgar pragmatism, critical pragmatism, and EAP. English for Specific Purposes, 19, 253–69.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A. (2000). The social politics and the cultural politics of language classrooms. In Hall, J. K. & Eggington, W. G. (Eds.), The Sociopolitics of English Language Teaching (pp. 89–103). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Prior, P. A. (1998). Writing/Disciplinarity: A Sociohistoric Account of Literate Activity in the Academy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Prior, P. A. (2001). Voices in text, mind, and society: Sociohistoric accounts of discourse acquisition and use. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 55–81.Google Scholar
Reid, J. (1994). Responding to ESL students’ texts: The myths of appropriation. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 273–92.Google Scholar
Russell, D. R. (1997). Rethinking genre in school and society: An activity theory analysis. Written Communication, 14, 504–54.Google Scholar
Scollon, R. (1995). Plagiarism and ideology: Identity in intercultural discourse. Language in Society, 24, 1–28.Google Scholar
Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 148–56.Google Scholar
Tardy, C. M. (2009). Building Genre Knowledge. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Villanueva, V. (1993). Bootstraps: From an American Academic of Color. Urbana, IL: NCTE.Google Scholar
Voloshinov, V. N. (1973). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. (Matejka, L. & Titunik, I. R., Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×