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-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T06:07:25.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Contexts and Issues in Feedback on L2 Writing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2019

By
Ken Hyland  and
Fiona Hyland
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. 1 - 22
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

Atkinson, D. (1999). TESOL and culture. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 625–54.Google Scholar
Bartholomae, D. (1986). Inventing the university. Journal of Basic Writing, 5(1), 4–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beach, R., Anson, C., Kastman Breuch, L.-A., & Reynolds, T. (2014). Understanding and Creating Digital Texts. Washington: Rowman and Littlefield.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
Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31, 193–214.Google Scholar
Bitchener, J. & Storch, N. (2016). Written Corrective Feedback for L2 Development. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Bloch, J. (2008). Technology in the Second Language Composition Classroom. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219–33.Google Scholar
Carson, J. & Nelson, G. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 1–19.Google Scholar
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error correction for improvement of the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267–96.Google Scholar
Chen, T. (2016). Technology-supported peer feedback in ESL/EFL writing classes: A research synthesis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 365–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christenson, S., Reschly, A., & Wylie, C. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Consalvo, A. L. (2011). Writing conferences and relationships: Talking, teaching, and learning in high school English classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Deane, P. (2013). On the relation between automated essay scoring and modern views of the writing construct. Assessing Writing, 18, 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diab, N. M. (2011). Assessing the relationship between different types of student feedback and the quality of revised writing. Assessing Writing, 16, 274–92.Google Scholar
Dudeney, G. & Hockly, N. (2012) ICT in ELT: How did we get here and where are we going? English Language Teaching Journal, 66(4), 533–42.Google Scholar
Eckstein, G. (2013). Implementing and evaluating a writing conference program for international L2 writers across language proficiency levels. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 231–9.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2010). A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 335–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36, 353–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, P. & Haswell, R. (2006). Machine Scoring of Student Essays: Truth and Consequences. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.Google Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. Ann Arbour, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp. 81–104). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 307–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, D. R. & Kurzer, K. (2018). Does error feedback help L2 writers? Latest evidence on the efficacy of written corrective feedback. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fredricks, J. (2013). Behavior engagement in learning. In Hattie, J. & Anderman, E. M. (Eds.), International Guide to Student Achievement (pp. 42–4). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedman, S. W. (Ed.) (1985). The Acquisition of Written Knowledge. Response and Revision. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Freedman, S. W. & Sperling, M. (1985). Written language acquisition: The role of response and the writing conference. In S. W. Freedman (Ed.), (pp. 106–30).Google Scholar
Gilliland, B. (2014). Academic language socialization in high school writing conferences Canadian Modern Language Review, 70, 303–30Google Scholar
Goldstein, L. M. (2005). Teacher Written Commentary in Second Language Writing Classrooms. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, L. M. (2006). Feedback and revision in second language writing: Contextual, teacher, and student variables. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds.), Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp. 185–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.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.Google Scholar
Han, Y. (2017). Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and learner engagement with written corrective feedback. System, 69, 133–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Y. & Hyland, F. (2015). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Y. & Hyland, F. (2016). Oral corrective feedback on L2 writing from a sociocultural perspective: A case study on two writing conferences in a Chinese university. Writing and Pedagogy, 8(3), 433–59.Google Scholar
Hedgcock, J. & Lefkowitz, N. (1992). Collaborative oral/aural revision in foreign language writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 255–76.Google Scholar
Hu, G. (2005). Using peer review with Chinese ESL student writers. Language Teaching Research, 9, 321–42.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
Hyland, F (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3) 255–86.Google Scholar
Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and Feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4, 33–54.Google Scholar
Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System, 31, 217–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (2016). Teaching and Researching Writing (3rd edition). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hyland, F & Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill; Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3) 185–212.Google Scholar
Kepner, C. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of writing skills. Modern Language Journal, 75, 305–13.Google Scholar
Kerssen-Griep, J. & Witt, P. (2012). Instructional feedback II: How do instructor immediacy cues and facework tactics interact to predict student motivation and fairness perceptions? Communication Studies, 63, 498–517Google Scholar
Lam, R. (2013). The relationship between assessment types and text revision. ELT Journal, 67, 446–58.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P. (1999). Second culture acquisition: Cognitive considerations. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.), Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 28–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, I. (2008). Understanding teachers’ written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 69–85.Google Scholar
Lee, G. & Schallert, D. (2008). Constructing trust between teacher and students through feedback and revision cycles in an EFL writing classroom. Written Communication. 25, 506–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed), (pp. 57–68).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24 (3), 203–18.Google Scholar
Liou, H. -C. & Peng, Z. -Y. (2009). Training effects on computer-mediated peer review. System, 37, 514–25.Google Scholar
Liu, J. & Sadler, R. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2, 193–227.Google Scholar
Liu, Y. (2009). ESL students in the college writing conferences: Perception and participation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Lundstrom, K. & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. 18(1), 30–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, L. & Mottet, T. (2011) The effect of instructor nonverbal immediacy behaviors and feedback sensitivity on Hispanic students’ affective learning outcomes in ninth-grade writing conferences. Communication Education, 60, 1–19.Google Scholar
Mendonca, C. O. & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly 28(4), 745–68.Google Scholar
Milton, J. (2006) Resource-rich web-based feedback: Helping learners become independent writers. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds.) Feedback in Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 123–39.Google Scholar
Min, H. -T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33, 293–308.Google Scholar
Min, H. -T. (2006). The effects of training peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118–41.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. & Carson, J. (1995). Social dimensions of second-language writing instruction: Peer response groups as cultural context. In Rubin, D. (Ed.), Composing Social Identity in Written Communication (pp. 89–109). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. & Carson, J. (1998). ESL students’ perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 113–31.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. & Carson, J. (2006) Cultural issues in peer Response: Revisiting “culture.” In Hyland, K., K. & Hyland, F., (Eds.) Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. New York: Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 42–59Google Scholar
Nelson, G. & Murphy, J. M. (1993a). An L2 writing group: Task and social dimensions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), 171–93.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. & Murphy, J. M. (1993b). Peer response groups: Do L2 writers use peer comments in revising their drafts? TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 135–41.Google Scholar
Newkirk, T. (1995). The writing conference as performance. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 193–215Google Scholar
Patthey-Chavez, G. G., & Ferris, D. (1997). Writing conferences and the weaving of multi-voiced texts in college composition. Research in the Teaching of English 31, 51–90.Google Scholar
Paulus, T. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 265–89.Google Scholar
Probst, R. E. (1989). Transactional theory and response to student writing. In Anson, C. (Ed.) (1989). Writing and Response. Urbana, IL: NCTE. (pp. 68–79).Google Scholar
Qi, D. S. & Lapkin, S. (2001). Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second language writing task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 277–303.Google Scholar
Rahimi, M. (2013). Is training students’ reviewers worth its while? A study of how training influences the quality of students’ feedback and writing. Language Teaching Research, 17, 67–89.Google Scholar
Ren, H. & Hu, G. (2012). Peer review and Chinese EFL/ESL student writers. English Australia Journal, 27(2), 3–16.Google Scholar
Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 83–91.Google Scholar
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59, 23–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sachs, R. & Polio, C. (2007). Learners’ uses of two types of written feedback on a L2 writing revision task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(1), 67–100.Google Scholar
Schachter, J. (1991). Corrective feedback in historical perspective. Second Language Research, 7 (2), 89–102.Google Scholar
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shvidko, E. (2018). Writing conference feedback as moment-to-moment affiliative relationship building. Journal of Pragmatics. 127, 20–35.Google Scholar
Skinner, E. A. & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 21–44). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3): 217–33.Google Scholar
Stevenson, M. (2016). A critical interpretative synthesis: The integration of automated writing evaluation into classroom writing instruction. Computers and Composition, 42, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, N. & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners’ processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 303–34.Google Scholar
Sullivan, N. & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 24, 491–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, M. (2008). Japanese learners’ self revisions and peer revisions of their written compositions in English. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 209–33.Google Scholar
Teo, A. K. (2006). Social-interactive writing for English language learners. The CATESOL Journal, 18, 160–78.Google Scholar
Trees, A., Kerssen-Griep, E., & Hess, J. (2009). Earning influence by communicating respect: Facework’s contributions to effective instructional feedback. Communication Education, 58, 397–416.Google Scholar
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 46, 327–69.Google Scholar
Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “the case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111–22.Google Scholar
Truscott, J. & Hsu, A. Y. -p. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292–305.CrossRefGoogle 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
Värlander, S. (2008) The role of students’ emotions in formal feedback situations. Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 145–56.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 behaviour. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 51–75.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
Wang, Y. -J., Shang, H. -F., & Briody, P. (2013). Exploring the impact of using automated writing evaluation in English as a foreign language university students’ writing, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 234–57.Google Scholar
Ware, P. & Warschauer, M. (2006) Electronic feedback. In Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (Eds). Feedback in Second Language Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 105–22.Google Scholar
Warschauer, M. (2002). Networking into academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 45–58.Google Scholar
Williams, J. (2002). Undergraduate second language writers in the writing center. Journal of Basic Writing, 21(2), 73–91.Google Scholar
Willms, J. (2003). Student Engagement at School a Sense of Belonging and Participation Results From PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Yang, Y. -F. & Meng, W. -T. (2013). The effects of online feedback training on students’ text revision. Language Learning & Technology, 17, 220–38.Google Scholar
Yu, S. & Hu, G. (2017). 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., & 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
Yubing, Q. (2016). Pigai smart essay scoring system and its implications for teaching English writing, Journal of Applied Science and Engineering Innovation, 3(6), 217–19.Google Scholar
Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly 19(1), 79–101.Google Scholar
Zhang, S. (1995). Re-examining the affective advantages of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 209–22.Google Scholar
Zhang, S. (1985). The Differential Effects of Sources of Corrective Feedback on ESL Writing Proficiency. Occasional Paper series no 9. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii at Manoa: Department of English as a Second Language.Google Scholar
Zhang, Z. & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102.CrossRefGoogle 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
×