Chapter One: Introduction

1. Introduction
In education, feedback is viewed as crucial for both encouraging and consolidating learning and this
significance has also been recognised in the area of second language writing. Indeed, feedback is a
key component of second language writing programs around the world, with product, process and
genre approaches all employing it as a central part of their instructional repertoires (Hyland &
Hyland, 200b! "#$.
%eachers certainly see responding to their students& written work as an inherent and important part of
their 'ob ((asanave, 200)* +erris, ",,,* Hyland. -, 200.* %ruscott, ",,$. (asanave (200)! ,$
suggests that writing teachers are /genetically endowed with a paper0marking refle1& and that it is
difficult for teachers /to read their students& papers without a pen in hand&. 2hile this may be a slight
e1aggeration, a great deal of time and energy is devoted to providing feedback on students& written
work by teachers like me, indeed the act of responding may well represent the largest investment of
time we make as writing instructors (+erris, 200.$. 3tudents also recogni4e the importance of written
feedback and value it highly (Hyland. +, ",,5$.
6ut while it may be a fundamental part of 72 writing instruction, the research literature has not been
overwhelmingly positive about its role in writing development. 8ver the last .0 years countless
studies have e1amined a wide range of issues including the focus of written feedback, the different
techni9ues employed, the timing of the feedback and even who provides it. :nfortunately, most of the
findings of this research have been ambiguous and contradictory. +urthermore, much of the research
published often fails to find its way to teachers (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$.
;iven this general lack of information and the obvious lack of consensus, teachers are often forced to
use their e1perience and intuition, as well as their students& wishes to guide them through the
minefield that is written feedback. However, it has been suggested that there may be a mismatch
between the written feedback teachers provide and the feedback learners would like to receive ((ohen
& (avalcanti, ",,0* Hyland. +, ",,5$. In addition, it has also been suggested that even if students and
teachers are in agreement, feedback still has great potential for miscommunication and
misunderstanding (Hyland. +, ",,5$.
<roviding feedback on students& writing is an important yet time0consuming and painstaking task
carried out by me and thousands of other =+7>=37 practitioners like me around the world on a daily
basis. It is therefore essential to investigate both teacher and student attitudes and preferences on
written feedback to ensure that teachers are using the most effective and efficient methods and
1
students& needs are being met. %eachers would certainly not wish to waste their time providing
feedback that was unhelpful or unwanted by their students.
3tudies linking student reactions to actual teacher feedback in specific conte1ts would help to clarify
this matter, however as 7ee (2005$ points out, to date there have been relatively few. %he research to
date has also tended to focus on either student preferences and perceptions or those of the teacher.
+ew studies have attempted to compare the two despite recent calls advocating research which
compares students& perceptions with teachers& perceptions and actual teacher feedback (;oldstein,
200"$. +urthermore, much of this valuable but limited research has been conducted in university
settings in the :nited 3tates and ?ew @ealand (=.g. Hyland. +, ",,5* Hyland & Hyland, 200c*
Aontgomery & 6aker, 200B$. :- university settings have thus far received relatively little attention.
%his study aims to fill this gap and shed light on the type of feedback teachers in a :- university
setting give, why they opt for this form of feedback, if the feedback is understood by students and if
students are getting the type of feedback they actually want. It is hoped that by e1amining what
teachers do and why, and the impact these decisions have on their students, teachers, like me, will be
able to assess our feedback practices and hopefully give more effective feedback in the future.
2ith this aim in mind this study will be guided by the following research 9uestions!
1. What methods do teachers use to give feedback on written compositions in a pre-sessional
university course setting? Why are such methods employed?
2. How is this feedback received? What are students attitudes towards this feedback? What
preferences might they have?

2
Chapter Two: Literature Review
2. Introduction
+eedback is a central aspect of =nglish as a second language (=37$ and =nglish as a foreign language
(=+7$ writing programs around the world (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$. It is a significant concern of
students and teachers alike and both feel it is an important part of the writing process ((ohen &
(avalcanti, ",,0* +erris 2002$. It is therefore not surprising that much has been written about the
issue both in teacher education and second language research literature. %his chapter will survey this
literature and provide an overview of the ma'or themes and developments that have arisen over the
years in order to frame the central issues of this study.
2.1. The role of feedback in second language writing instruction
2ritten feedback is a significant feature of second language (72$ writing, however, the type of
feedback, how it is delivered and when it is delivered has altered over the years. :p until the ",B0s,
written feedback was traditionally provided by teachers at the end of the writing process. It was
largely concerned with linguistic accuracy and a great deal of attention was paid to error correction so
that no /bad& habits would be formed (+erris, 2002$. However, changes in writing pedagogy and
findings from research studies led to a shift in the ",B0s and ",50s and emphasis was placed not on a
finished product but on the writing process itself.
%his process0based writing pedagogy focussed on discovering ideas, drafting, revising and working
collaboratively. %he shift also had a significant effect on feedback practices. %eachers now sought to
support writers through multiple drafts and provided feedback and suggested revisions during the
writing process rather than at the end. (rucial to this view was the belief that teacher feedback was
most effective when it is delivered at the intermediate stages of the writing process when students had
the opportunity to incorporate it into their te1ts (7eki, ",,2$. +urthermore, accuracy was no longer the
main priority, in fact, relatively little attention was paid to grammatical accuracy in process0based
classrooms. Instead, teacher feedback primarily addressed content and organisation and feedback on
surface0level errors was generally only given at the end of the process, during the /editing& phase
(+erris, 2002$.
%he process0approach was not however without its critics. Aany writing teachers, especially those in
the field of =nglish for Ccademic purposes (=C<$, believed the approach created false impressions
and bore little resemblance to the real situations in which the students& writing would be e1ercised
(Horowit4, ",5$. %he alternative was a genre0oriented approach which focussed on academic
3
discourse genres and the range and nature of academic writing tasks (3ilva, ",,0$. Cccording to this
approach the writing teacher is responsible for helping to initiate students into the new academic or
professional discourse communities and feedback plays a crucial role in this. It is used to /scaffold&
learning* building learner confidence and the literacy resources necessary to participate in their target
communities (Hyland & Hyland 200a!5.$. %his includes feedback on formal features such as
grammar, as accuracy is important for those writing in academic settings (+erris, 200* Hyland. -,
200.$.
2.2. Different forms of feedback
+eedback, be it at the end of the writing process or during the process writing itself, can take many
forms. Despite the pedagogical changes and the findings of various studies, linguistic accuracy and
error correction remain central aspects of written feedback. %here are several strategies teachers can
employ to correct their students& surface0level errors. =llis (200,$ recently surveyed teacher
handbooks and empirical studies on written feedback and produced a /typology of options for
correcting linguistic errors&. Cccording to =llis (200,$ teachers can provide direct, indirect or
metalinguistic corrective feedback. %he first involves the teacher identifying linguistic errors and
providing students with the correct form. Indirect feedback, on the other hand, simply entails
indicating that an error e1ists. 3tudents& attention can be drawn to such errors by indicating and
locating the errors in the te1t using techni9ues such as underlining or circling, or by indicating in the
margin that an error has been made in that line of the te1t. %he latter strategy, metalinguistic feedback,
involves the teacher providing the learner with some form of e1plicit comment on the nature of the
errors they have made. Cgain there is more than one way to do this. %eachers may opt to number the
linguistic errors in the te1t and provide brief grammatical descriptions for each error at the end of the
te1t. However, this strategy is time0consuming and teachers have generally favoured the faster option*
the use of an error correction code. %his involves placing an abbreviated label or symbol, which
shows the nature of the error and the type of correction needed, ne1t to the error or in the margin.
%here are certainly numerous ways to address students& linguistic errors and it is not being suggested
that teachers have to select one strategy and use this and only this method to correct all grammatical
errors. Indeed, teachers mi1 and match error correction strategies. +or e1ample, teachers may opt to
use indirect error correction methods for more local issues such as morphological errors. However,
students may be less capable of self0correcting various le1ical errors and more comple1, global
problems with sentence structure as there is /no handbook or set of rules students can consult to avoid
or fi1 those types of errors& (+erris, ",,,!$. %hese /untreatable& errors may re9uire more direct
corrective feedback (+erris, 200)$.
4
2hile the correction of grammatical inaccuracies has received significant attention, teacher feedback
is not only concerned with correcting linguistic errors. %eacher response can also include more
lengthy commentary and this can address structure, organisation, style, content and presentation, as
well as grammatical or mechanical issues (Hyland. -, 200.$. +erris et al (",,B$ investigated teacher
commentary and found that teachers fre9uently asked for further information, made suggestions or
re9uests and gave information. %he study also highlighted the fact that teacher commentary can also
include elements of both praise and criticism.
2.3. How feedback is delivered
It is common practice for teachers to correct linguistic errors and make comments in the margins
and>or at the end of a students& composition before returning it to the student. However, feedback
practices have transformed over the past 20 years and teacher written feedback is now often combined
or supplemented with peer feedback, oral conferences and even computer0delivered feedback (Hyland
& Hyland, 200a$.
Aany writing teachers now use peer response or peer editing in the =37>=+7 writing classrooms
(7eki, ",,2$. %he idea being that development takes place through interaction with others as peer
review gives writers the opportunities to discuss their te1ts and discover other students& interpretations
of them (Hyland & Hyland, 200a$. %he pedagogical practice of peer response originated in 7"
writing classrooms and was subse9uently adopted in 72 classrooms (?elson & (arson, 200$. It was
assumed that its successes in 7" conte1ts would be emulated in 72 conte1ts. However, while there
have been some positive findings (=.g. Aendonca & Eohnson, ",,)* <aulus, ",,,$, overall the
research has produced mi1ed results (?elson & (arson, 200$. C ma'or problem with peer response is
that students find it hard to identify problem areas and may even offer inaccurate or misleading advice
(Horowit4, ",5$. 72 students also find it difficult to 'udge the validity of their peers& comments
(7eki, ",,0$. Cspects such as cultural and educational backgrounds as well as a lack of training are
significant factors that can contribute to the success or failure of peer feedback (7eki, ",,2* <aulus,
",,,* ?elson & (arson, 200$.
Cnother widely employed alternative to teacher written response is the writing conference. %his
involves the teacher discussing a piece of writing with the individual student during and>or after the
writing process (3aito, ",,)$. %his /conversational dialogue& between the teacher and the student,
which is based on the Fygotskian principle of /scaffolding& (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$, can be the
sole method for providing feedback or it can be used in con'unction with other forms of feedback,
such as teacher written feedback. %here are many advantages to this type of feedback method. +irstly,
conferences allow teachers to respond to the diverse cultural, educational and writing needs of
5
specific students. Cccording to 2eissberg (200$, they constitute an /unparalleled opportunity& to
provide targeted, individuali4ed feedback. %hey also allow students to ask 9uestions, clarify meaning
and resolve ambiguities (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$. It is also suggested that they give students a
clearer idea of their strengths and weaknesses and learners typically receive more focussed and useful
comments than through written feedback alone (Hyland, +, 2000* @amel, ",5#$. However,
conferences are e1tremely time0consuming and can be ineffective as students are not always willing
or able to actively participate (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$. +urthermore, studies (=.g. 2eissberg, 200$
have failed to determine how effective oral feedback is in practical terms. Indeed, little is known
about the relationship between teacher feedback in conferences and student revision and there is a
lack of direct evidence showing it is effective and helps students improve their writing (;oldstein &
(onrad, ",,0* ;oldstein, 200$.
Aore recently computers have played a part in the delivering and mediating of feedback. It is now
possible for students to e1change written work with peers and with the teacher and to receive
feedback without the need for any face0to0face interaction (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$. (omputers are
also influencing feedback through the use of electronic corpora. Ailton (",,,, 200$ for e1ample has
highlighted how teachers can hyperlink errors in electronically submitted work enabling students to
click on the link and investigate their errors by referring to /copious, authentic and comprehensible
resources& (Ailton, 200!"2#$. 3ome (=.g. 6raine, ",,B* 2arschauer, 2002$ believe these
technological advances have positive effects and can even lead to better writing and more focussed
and better 9uality feedback. %here are however, some concerns, which is perhaps not surprising given
that the benefits of computer0mediated feedback have not yet been clearly established by research.
Indeed, Ailton (200$ himself only provides anecdotal evidence that this type of feedback is effective.
%here are also concerns that it may disadvantage those who are technically challenged or lack access
to good computer facilities (6elcher, ",,,$.
2.4. Teacher written feedback
2hile there are numerous ways to provide feedback today, teacher written feedback still plays a
central role in most =37 and =+7 writing classes (Hyland & Hyland, 200a$. Indeed many teachers
do not feel satisfied unless they have written substantial feedback on their students& written work
(Hyland. -, 200.$. %eacher written feedback is also highly valued by students (Hyland. +, ",,5$ and
surveys of students& feedback preferences indicate that learners consistently rate it more highly than
peer feedback and writing conferences (7eki, ",,"* 3aito, ",,)$.
6
However, while it remains a common and popular practice, research in the ",50s and ",,0s began to
9uestion the efficacy of teacher written feedback. %he results of such studies have not been
une9uivocally positive* in fact they have been notoriously inconclusive ((asanave, 200)$.

2.4.1. Error correction
8ne of the most significant and most contentious themes in the feedback literature is the issue of error
correction. Initial research on corrective feedback was conducted during the heyday of behaviourist
learning theories and called for the correction of all student errors in order to prevent fossili4ation.
However, 72 research influenced by the process approach, claimed that feedback focussing on
linguistic errors was discouraging and unhelpful (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$. 8ther studies have also
painted a negative picture, concluding that error correction is ineffective and does not generally lead
to improvements in students& written work (=.g. -epner, ",,"* Gobb et al ",5* 3emke, ",5)*
3heppard, ",,2$. %his anti0correction view has however, been articulated most prominently in
published literature by %ruscott (=.g. ",,, ",,,, 200)$.
In his controversial and fre9uently cited summary paper, he !ase "gainst #rammar !orrection in
$2 Writing !lasses% %ruscott (",,$ reviewed previous studies and concluded the practice of
correcting students& grammatical errors should be abandoned. He claimed the research
overwhelmingly pointed to it being an ineffective practice and argued studies which produced positive
results (=.g. +athman & 2halley, ",,0* 7alande, ",52$ showed merely /pseudo0learning&.
%ruscott (",,$ also claimed that such findings were to be e1pected given the nature of the correction
process and the nature of language learning. %ruscott emphasised the gradual nature of language
ac9uisition, referring to the work on developmental se9uences by the likes of Dulay & 6urt (",B)$
and -rashen (",BB$, and stated that learners ac9uire certain forms, and therefore cease making errors,
only when they are ready. %herefore, according to %ruscott, error correction, most of which will be on
forms beyond the learner&s current stage of development, is of little value. Indeed from an 37C
standpoint it does seem rather naive to assume that a target form will be ac9uired immediately (and
permanently$ simply because it has been highlighted through teacher feedback.
%ruscott&s arguments are certainly powerful, however, they have been heavily criticised. It has been
pointed out for e1ample that his strong mentalist perspective has been contradicted by other language
learning theories such as 3chmidt&s /noticing& hypothesis. Cccording to 3chmidt (",,0, ",,., cited in
=llis, ",,B$ error correction is important as learners must consciously notice input in order for it to
become intake, therefore if students do not /notice the gap& between their own production and the
7
correct form, learning cannot take place. However, %ruscott fails to give this and other views of
language learning any real consideration.
2hile %ruscott&s article has been attacked by many, the most prominent anti0%ruscott, pro0error
correction arguments have been put forward by +erris (",,,, 2002, 200)$. +erris (",,,$ e1amined
%ruscott&s claims and found his arguments to be /premature and overly strong&. 3he claimed corrective
feedback should not be abandoned as it is /necessary for 72 writers&. %eachers certainly seem to agree
more with +erris and have been reluctant to abandon the practice of error correction. Indeed,
numerous studies have shown that it remains a common practice in 72 classrooms (=.g. 7eki, ",,"*
7ee, 2005* Aontgomery & 6aker, 200B$ and this is probably wise given the mounting research
suggesting it can be beneficial (=.g. 6itchener, 2005* (handler, 200.* +athman & 2halley, ",,0*
7alande, ",52* 3heen 200B$. %ruscott himself even acknowledges that research has not proven that
error correction can never be beneficial and talks of further research to see if Hspecific cases can be
found in which it might not be a totally misguided practiceI (%ruscott, ",,,!"2"$.
;rammar errors are without doubt an obvious problem for 72 writers and it is not surprising that
teachers often feel the need to respond to them (Hyland. -, 200.$. Indeed, there is certainly less talk
of adopting a /correction0free approach& in the current literature on feedback and more recent studies
have moved away from the /error0correction debate&, focussing instead on e1amining the effects of
manipulating the type of feedback teachers give.
2.4.1.1. The efficac of different t!es of corrective feedback
Cn increasing number of studies have been investigating whether certain types of corrective feedback
are more likely than others to help students improve the accuracy of their writing (=.g. 6itchener et al
200#* (handler, 200.* +erris & Goberts, 200"* 7alande, ",52* Gobb et al, ",5$. %hese studies have
e1amined direct feedback, indirect feedback, metalinguistic feedback and various combinations of the
three, although it must be acknowledged that these terms, taken for =llis& (200,$ review article, are
not always used consistently in the literature. +or e1ample, metalinguistc is not always viewed as a
distinct category and more recently grammatical e1planations have been seen as a form of direct
feedback, while the use of a correction code is categorised as indirect feedback (6itchener & -noch,
20"0$.
8ver the years, direct (including metalinguistic e1planations$ and indirect correction (including error
correction codes$ methods have been compared and arguments have been advanced for both. 3ome
studies (=.g. +erris & Helt, 2000* 7alande, ",52$ have concluded that indirect feedback is more
effective. Indeed, researchers have suggested that indirect feedback is generally preferable (+erris,
8
200$. %his is because it re9uires students to engage in /guided learning and problem solving& and as a
result, promotes the type of reflection that is more likely to foster long0term ac9uisition (6itchener &
-noch, 2005* 7alande, ",52$. However, other studies (=.g. (handler, 200.$ have found direct error
correction methods to be more effective. %hose more in favour of such methods suggest it is more
helpful to students because it is clearer and can reduce the confusion e1perienced by learners who fail
to understand or do not remember the meaning of error codes (6itchener & -noch, 2005$. 3peed is
another advantage of direct error correction methods and it has been suggested that having errors
highlighted and corrected so soon after writing may allow learners to internali4e the correct form
better ((handler, 200.$.
%he issue is not clear0cut, indeed studies e1amining both direct and indirect feedback have found
there to be no statistically significant differences in long0term gains in accuracy between the two
methods (=.g. Gobb et al ",5$. %he findings have certainly been somewhat ambiguous and the
matter is further complicated when one e1amines the studies which have investigated the relative
effectiveness of different types of indirect feedback (=.g. +erris & Goberts, 200"$. 3uch studies have
failed to show any difference between indirect feedback options (coded and uncoded$. 3imilarly,
studies investigating direct feedback options (=.g. 6itchener et al% 200#$ have also produced rather
inconclusive findings.
2.4.1.2. "ocus on form vs. focus on content
=rror correction studies have also e1amined and compared different types and different combinations
of form0focussed and content0focussed feedback (=.g. Cshwell, 2000* +athman & 2halley, ",,0$.
%his issue came to light in the ",B0s and ",50s. %hose influenced by the process0approach to writing
tended to focus first and foremost on feedback related to content. 3tudies have, however, shown that
feedback primarily concerned with content may not always directly lead to improved content. C study
by +athman & 2halley (",,0$ for e1ample, found that all students significantly improved the content
of their rewrites irrespective of the kind of feedback given by the teacher, suggesting it was the
process of rewriting which lead to the improvements rather than the feedback provided.
+athman & 2halley (",,0$ also investigated whether providing content and form feedback separately
was beneficial. %hey found that a focus on grammar did not negatively affect the content of the
writing and concluded that providing simultaneous feedback on content and form did not overburden
the students and was 'ust as effective as giving form and content feedback separately. Cshwell (2000$
conducted a similar study, seeking primarily to discover if content focussed feedback followed by
form focussed feedback was superior to other patterns of teacher response. Cshwell (2000$ concluded
9
that the feedback pattern recommended by the process0approach was not superior and found providing
form0focussed feedback followed by content0focussed feedback to be e9ually effective. He also
corroborated +athman & 2halley&s (",,0$ conclusion, that giving form and content feedback
simultaneously does not have a detrimental effect on student writing.
Indeed, it is generally agreed now that feedback can and should address both issues (+erris, 200.*
Hyland. -, 200.$. However, it is suggested that the dichotomy still forms a conscience part of the way
many 72 writing teachers respond to their students& te1ts (Hyland & Hyland, 200c$.
2.4.1.3. Issues and ambiguities in error correction studies
Having surveyed the literature on error correction it is easy to see why some may believe we are /at
s9uare one&. %he findings are certainly far from clear and the research has failed to provide teachers
with concrete pedagogical guidelines (;oldstein, 200"$. Hyland and Hyland (200a$ and ;uenette
(200B$, suggest this is largely due to research design issues. Indeed, studies e1amining the effects of
error correction have investigated widely varying student populations, very different types of writing
and feedback practices and also employed diverse methodologies. +urthermore studies have not
always been methodologically sound, lacking control groups and pre0test measurements and>or using
different instruments during the course of the study. %his has certainly made it difficult to isolate the
effects of error correction and come to any definitive conclusions about its efficacy.

2.4.2. Teacher stances and feedback !ractices
=rror correction has attracted a great deal of attention* however other areas, such as the wider
feedback strategies teachers use and their stances and perspectives, have also received attention (=.g.
+erris, ",,B* +erris et al% ",,B& Hyland & Hyland, 200"$.
Hyland and Hyland&s studies (200", 200c$ have highlighted that fact that teachers do not simply
respond to grammar or content. Cccording to Hyland & Hyland (200c$, teachers adopt various
commenting strategies which include praise, criticism and suggestions. %heir work supports the
research carried out by +erris et al (",,B$, discussed earlier, which distinguished eight broad functions
of response.
It has also been suggested that teachers vary these comments according to conte1tual features (+erris,
",,B* +erris et al% ",,B$. +erris et al (",,B$, for e1ample, found that the point in the semester when
the feedback was given had an effect on teacher commentary. %hey discovered that as the course
progressed, the fre9uency of all teacher comments decreased. %eacher fatigue and an overwhelming
10
marking load are possible e1planations put forward by +erris et al (",,B$, however, there are other
reasons why this may be the case. +ewer comments could be the result of better writing. 8ne would
certainly hope that learners would improve as a course progressed and therefore re9uire less feedback.
+ewer comments are of course not an automatic cause for concern and can be viewed positively.
+erris (",,B$ certainly sees the reduction of teacher commentary as a good thing, suggesting it can
help students develop as self0editors and become more autonomous.
Cbility may be another factor affecting how teachers respond to their students& written work. (ohen &
(avalcanti (",,0$, for e1ample, found that intermediate level students received the most comments,
followed by low and then high level learners. In addition to the amount of feedback, they also found
that the nature of the comments differed according to proficiency. %o illustrate, what they refer to as
/teacher bias&, (ohan & (avalcanti (",,0$ highlight the case of lower level learners receiving few
comments on vocabulary or content. %he teacher instead opted to concentrate her comments on
grammar and mechanics. +erris et al (",,B$ reported similar findings.
%he way in which teachers& comments are phrased is another common issue in feedback literature. It
is often suggested that teachers should avoid being overly directive and critical in their feedback
(+erris et al% ",,B$. %his is primarily because negative feedback can have a detrimental effect on
writer confidence (Hyland & Hyland, 200"$. 3tudies indicate that teachers seem to be following this
advice, praising their students fre9uently and mitigating negative comments as a means of building
confidence (=.g. Hyland & Hyland, 200c$.
%eachers are also advised to avoid direct or negative comments as students may feel the teacher is
/appropriating& or /taking over& their te1t and that the teacher&s priorities are more important than what
the writer wants to say (+erris, 200.$. However, this issue is not accepted by all and it has been
suggested that the notion of appropriation may not be relevant in 72 conte1ts. It certainly did not
originate in 72 settings, in fact like many writing techni9ues and principles, it was first used in 7"
classrooms. +erris (",,B, 200.$ believes this as an issue and refers to the /uni9ue status& of 72
students. 3ilva (",,.$ and ;oldstein & (onrad (",,0$ have also claimed 72 writers are significantly
different from native speakers in their linguistic, rhetorical and cultural knowledge. %his /uni9ue
status& means the success e1perienced in 7" settings may not be replicated in 72 classrooms and the
notion of appropriation may well be irrelevant. Geid (",,)$ has been an even stronger critic of what
she refers to as the /myths of appropriation&* claiming teachers are failing to provide useful feedback
out of fear of being appropriative.
It has also been suggested that an indirect approach to feedback may lead students to miss the point of
the comment (Hyland & Hyland, 200c$. (onrad & ;oldstein&s (",,,$ study certainly points to it
being problematic for students. %hey found comments that did not directly state that a revision was
needed were often not revised or were revised unsuccessfully. 8ther studies have also shown that
11
students have difficulty understanding the intent of comments that are hedged in some way (Hyland &
Hyland, 200"* 200c$. %hey may also view the use of praise and 9uestions as an indication that there
is nothing wrong with their writing, therefore gaining a false impression of their writing ability (+erris
et al% ",,B$. %his aspect of written feedback clearly has the potential for miscommunication and
re9uires careful consideration.
Cnother aspect of teacher response being studied is the e1tent to which written feedback takes the
individual student into account. In their effort to be clear, consistent and avoid appropriative
behaviour, teachers may forget that /one si4e does not fit all& and that they are responding to an
individual (+erris, 200.$. However, studies by Hyland and Hyland (200c$ and +. Hyland (",,5$,
which emphasise the more socio0cultural aspect of feedback, have suggested that teachers do not
simply respond to a te1t in a vacuum. Cccording to Hyland & Hyland (200c$, teachers have been
shown to create a conte1t for their comments and use information about the student to tailor feedback
to their personality and specific needs. %hey believe that feedback can only be effective if it engages
with the writer and gives them the sense that it as a response to an individual rather than a script.
Hyland & Hyland (200c$ found that as well as taking the individual learner into account, feedback
also relates to the learning conte1t and observed a close relationship between feedback and
instruction. %hey found the points e1plicitly taught in the classroom were picked up and reinforced in
the written feedback. In addition they were also recycled in peer feedback and student0teacher oral
conferences. Hyland & Hyland (200c! 2"202".$ do not e1plicitly claim that feedback focussing on
issues covered in the classroom is more effective, in fact they highlight an e1ample where a teacher
commented on introductions because they had /dealt with that today& yet the student did not
understand the comment and was observed /canvassing different people on his table as to what it
could mean&. 8thers have however, been much more positive, suggesting effective feedback is
strongly linked to instruction (=.g. Hillocks, ",5$.
It is 9uite clear that providing feedback on students& written work is a comple1 process. %eachers are
re9uired to consider many factors and provide feedback on numerous issues. It certainly involves
much more than correcting all grammatical mistakes. However, research e1amining teacher practices
has found that a great deal of feedback does in fact focus on surface0level errors (=.g. (ohen &
(avalcanti, ",,0* 7ee, 2005* 7eki, ",,"* Aontgomery & 6aker 200B$. 7ee (2005$ for e1ample,
studied two classes and found B#.5J of one teacher&s feedback addressed grammatical issues, while
the other teacher focussed almost e1clusively on linguistic errors. However, not all studies have
found a focus on form. 3ome research has found that teacher feedback focuses on issues such as
ideational content (+erris et al% ",,B* Hyland & Hyland, 200c$. Clthough it must be noted that these
studies e1amined teacher comments and did not e1plicitly mention error correction. It is therefore
12
possible that teacher comments may not overwhelmingly address form but that does not necessarily
mean the feedback as a whole was not dominated by linguistic concerns.
3tudies have also hinted at the fact that teachers believe they should be focussing on global rather than
local issues* indicating a mismatch between the feedback teachers feel they should be giving and the
feedback they actually give (7ee, 2005* 7eki, ",,"* Aontgomery & 6aker 200B$. 8ne possible
e1planation for this (conscious or unconscious$ focus on linguistic errors is that teachers are
responding to the needs of their students. However, it may also be the case that a great deal of
feedback is provided on form because it is a relatively /safe& area and teachers are more likely to
consider themselves /e1perts& in this domain. In addition, issues such as content and academic
conventions can be problematic and teachers may be reluctant to provide feedback on such matters.
It has been suggested that teachers may be less likely to tackle genre or discourse0specific issues, for
e1ample, as they are more sub'ective and perhaps beyond the training and e1perience of many =C<
teachers. Kuite simply teachers may avoid these matters as they do not consider themselves /e1perts&
in such areas. Clso, teachers may avoid commenting on content>ideas as students are often committed
to the ideas they produce and invest something of themselves in them. It is therefore possible that by
commenting on content a students& confidence in what they believe may be weakened and the
relationship of trust with the teacher may be damaged (Hyland & Hyland, 200c! 2"B$. %eachers may
also be sensitive to appropriation issues and not comment on content in order to avoid /taking over& a
student&s te1t.
Ccademic conventions, particularly plagiarism, is another sensitive area. Hyland & Hyland&s (200c$
study illustrated that while writing teachers feel it is important to address such issues, they are
reluctant to do so, and on the occasions when they do comment on academic matters, they are
unwilling to do so directly.
:nfortunately, relatively few studies have sought to e1amine or systematically describe teacher
feedback (+erris et al% ",,B$. %he area is receiving more attention* however, studies on teacher
feedback practices to date have not been overly positive. Indeed research shows teacher feedback can
be arbitrary, inconsistent, vague, cryptic, authoritarian, generic, or a combination of these and often
fails to inform or motivate students (+erris* ",,#* Hyland & Hyland, 200c* %ruscott, ",,* @amel,
",5#$. %here are many reasons why this could be the case, time pressures being perhaps the most
obvious e1planation. %ruscott (",,! .#00.#.$ certainly believes busy teachers grading large numbers
of written assignments is Hdisturbingly commonI and he claims this can Hseriously affect the 9uality
of their commentsI. It may also be necessary to look to teacher education to e1plain why teachers are
failing to give clear, useable feedback. +erris et al (",,B$ certainly believe there is a gap in teacher
training. %hey are of the opinion that trainee teachers receive vague, prescriptive advice such as
/address content before form& and that the real issues of what to comment on or how to go about
13
writing comprehensible, useful feedback are not addressed. Ay e1perience certainly accords with
+erris et als view. %he issue was not discussed at all in my initial training and has only been briefly
touched on in subse9uent /in0house& training sessions.
2.4.3. #tudent !ers!ectives
%he research has been 9uite critical of teacher feedback and its effects remain unclear. 3tudies have
also suggested that students can find teacher written feedback confusing and think they understand the
feedback when in fact they do not (+erris, ",,#* ;oldstein & -ohls, 2002$. +urthermore, it has been
shown that even when students do understand the feedback, they may not know how to use it in a
revision ((onrad & ;oldstein, ",,,* ;oldstein & -hols, 2002$. However, despite this, studies have
revealed that students regard teacher feedback very highly (=nginarlar, ",,.* Hyland. +, ",,5* 7eki,
",,"$.
3tudies have also shown that while students do want feedback on content and ideas, they particularly
favour feedback on grammar. Indeed, research on student preferences has consistently found that they
e1pect teachers to comment on their errors and are frustrated if teachers do not ((ohen & (avalcanti,
",,0* Hedgcock & 7efkowit4, ",,)* Hyland. +, ",,5* +erris & Goberts, 200"$. %his may e1plain why
teachers provide so much feedback on grammar, even when there is a de0emphasis of error correction
within the educational institution (7eki, ",,"* Aontgomery & 6aker 200B$.
It is clear that most students want their grammatical errors to be corrected. :nfortunately, research on
students preferred methods of receiving corrective feedback has not come to any firm conclusions.
3ome studies have shown that students prefer direct error correction (=.g. 7ee, 200#, 2005$, while
others suggest a preference for more indirect methods. 3tudies by 3aito (",,)$ and +. Hyland (200"$,
for e1ample, found that students were positive about receiving clues rather than corrections as they
recognised that it encouraged them to be more active in their use of feedback. Cge and educational
culture may be significant factors affecting how students like their errors to be corrected. 7ee (2005$
for e1ample, studied secondary school pupils in Hong -ong, whereas 3aito&s (",,)$ study focussed
on adult learners in a %oronto university.
=1isting research has also shed little light on whether students prefer teacher comments to be direct or
not. It has been suggested that teachers& comments should be indirect and that they should avoid
criticism. 8n the other hand, research has also suggested that being indirect can cloud issues and
cause confusion and that students often simply fail to understand it. Hyland & Hyland (200c$ have
suggested that students appreciate teachers& use of mitigation strategies. %hey also suggest that some
students attach considerable importance to positive comments and find them to be motivating.
14
However, not all students view praise positively. 3ome students have been shown to find it unhelpful,
preferring instead to receive constructive criticism (Hyland. +, ",,5* 7eki, 200$. Hyland & Hyland&s
(200c! 22"$ study also highlights that students can have e1tremely negative views on the use of
praise. %heir case0study showed that students can see positive comments not 'ust as worthless, but as
insincere and even condescending as they know positive comments serve no function beyond
/removing the sting& from criticisms. +urthermore, students may view the use of hedged comments
and praise as signs of incompetence or the abdication of authority on the part of the teacher, especially
if this type of feedback is not fre9uently given in their own culture (Hyland. +, ",,5$.
Hyland & Hyland&s (200c$ study certainly highlights the difficult task teachers have. Indeed, while
students overwhelmingly have a positive view of written feedback, what students want from it and
how they use it varies considerably. 3ome students want praise, others see it as condescending* some
want direct corrective feedback, others prefer to receive clues.
2.4.4. #tudent and teacher !erce!tions
;iven the individualistic nature of student responses to teacher feedback and the very different
perceptions students have concerning what constitutes useful feedback it is not surprising that
researchers are stressing the need for a close and interactive relationship between teachers and
individual students (Hyland. +, ",,5$.
:nfortunately this close relationship is not mirrored in the research literature. Indeed, studies have
tended to focus on either student preferences and perceptions on written feedback or those of the
teacher. 3ome studies have of course included both teachers and students (=.g. Hyland. +, ",,5* 7ee,
2005* Aontgomery & 6aker, 200B$, but they have generally tended to focus slightly more on one
party.
%he studies which have included both the teacher and the student to some degree are certainly small in
number, however, they have yielded some interesting findings. +irstly, it has been suggested that the
feedback situation has great potential for miscommunication and misunderstanding (Hyland &
Hyland, 200c* Hyland. +, ",,5$. +urthermore, studies have suggested that teachers and pupils have
different perceptions and the feedback teachers give may not necessarily be the feedback students
want to receive ((ohen & (avalcanti, ",,0! Hyland. +, ",,5$. 8ne must however be cautious as the
studies mentioned were very small scale and they investigated 9uite different settings. +urther
research is certainly needed to see if there is a close relationship between teachers and individual
students and if teachers are providing students with the type of feedback they deem useful.
15
Chapter Three: Methodology
3. The stud
Cs mentioned earlier, this study aims to e1amine teachers& attitudes and preferences on written
feedback and those of their students and will be guided by the following research 9uestions!
1. What methods do teachers use to give feedback on written compositions in a pre-sessional
university course setting? Why are such methods employed?
2. How is this feedback received? What are students attitudes towards this feedback? What
preferences might they have?
3.1. #etting
%he study took place within the conte1t of a ten week intensive pre0sessional course held at the
:niversity of 3outhampton. %he course, referred to as /pre0sessional course C& consisted of 25
supervised sessions per week and included classes on reading, writing, listening and speaking as well
as independent study time and guest lectures. )2 teachers were responsible for delivering the course*
2) reading and writing tutors, "2 listening and speaking tutors and 5 resources tutors. %he course
aimed to develop all skills, however there was a particular emphasis on the academically important
skill of writing with " of the 25 supervised sessions (eight hours$ devoted to writing.
%here were a total of 2) classes on pre0sessional course C. 8f these classes, 2. were made up of
students planning to undertake postgraduate study at the :niversity of 3outhampton and one class
consisted of students planning to go on to study on foundation or undergraduate programmes. "" of
the classes were open to students from all sub'ect areas, while ". classes were solely for students
planning to study a course at the 3chool of Aanagement.
Cll the classes followed set syllabi which specified week0by0week what should be covered. %here was
a set te1t book for all classes, 'uccessful "cademic Writing ()nside rack 'eries*% which teachers were
actively encouraged to use. However, the teachers were also e1pected to supplement with other
materials.
Gegarding content, the first part of the course was a basic introduction to academic writing, while the
latter part of the course focussed on developing and refining those skills learned in earlier sessions. Cs
well as specific writing skills, grammar was also a feature of the writing classes. %he syllabi contained
a list of grammar points which /typically cause problems for students in their academic writing&.
%hese included dependent noun phrases and noun clauses, relative clauses, reported speech, articles
16
and passive constructions. %eachers were advised to teach the grammatical structures in class or
assign them individually for independent study as and when problems were identified.
2hen it came to the teaching of writing, a functional>process approach was recommended. Cccording
to the teachers& handbook this approach, which included elements of planning, drafting and editing,
was /the most useful approach to writing&. It was however, a suggestion rather than a rule and teachers
were free to teach writing as they saw fit. %here was also a degree of fle1ibility when it came to
feedback practices. 2hile teachers were e1pected to give feedback on students& written work, the type
and the issues to be addressed were not overtly specified. %he teachers& handbook did contain a
correction code, which teachers could use if they wished (see appendi1 C$. %here was also a more
formal marking scheme which teachers could use to provide feedback on later assignments and
assessments (see appendi1 C$. It was also strongly suggested that teachers refrain from giving
numerical scores. %eachers were essentially given guidance but overall they were largely free to give
the feedback they deemed appropriate.
%he fact that teachers had some degree of freedom with regards to feedback practices was one of the
main reasons for selecting this course. %his setting offered the possibility of interesting data in terms
of the approaches to feedback taken by teachers that courses with more fi1ed feedback policies may
not have provided. Cnother reason for choosing this particular setting was access to participants.
Dissertation pro'ects are undertaken during the e1tremely busy summer period and it was rather
unlikely that teaching centres would welcome a novice researcher. %he university in 9uestion, on the
other hand, was 9uite open and willing to accommodate my study even though it was their busiest
time of the year.
3.2 $artici!ants
%utors who were directly responsible for teaching writing and providing written feedback were asked
to participate in this study. 8ut of the 2) (" male, 5 female$ reading and writing tutors ",
participated. %he ma'ority had taught writing on pre0sessional courses at the university in previous
years* however several had not taught at this university before but had e1perience teaching pre0
sessional courses in other :- universities.
2hile I was able to access all writing tutors, I was only able to secure access to the "" mi1ed0
discipline classes. Initially I had planned to include all "" classes, however, it soon became apparent
that the foundation>undergraduate class was not strictly following the set syllabus and had not
completed any writing of significant length. %hus they had received relatively little feedback when
this study was conducted and were therefore not included in the study.
17
(onse9uently, ten mi1ed0discipline postgraduate classes were invited to participate in the study. 8f
the "") students enrolled in these classes, "0# participated. %he students came from a variety of
language backgrounds* "B Crabic speakers, %hai, 2 3panish, 2 +arsi, 2 -a4ak, 2 -orean, 2 %urkish,
" Eapanese speaker and "/other&. %he vast ma'ority, however, were (hinese speakers (B, students$.
%hese students ranged in age from 2) to .#, with the ma'ority in their mid0twenties.
Gegarding level, the entrance re9uirement for the course was an I=7%3 score of #.#. However, this
was an overall score and the students& writing scores varied. %he classes were therefore slightly
mi1ed in terms of writing ability.
3.3 Data collection methods
C two-phase design (Dornyei, 200.$ approach was used to answer the research 9uestions. %his two-
phase design was made up of separate 9ualitative and 9uantitative phases.
3.3.1 %uestionnaire
Kuestionnaires are the most common method of data collection in second language research (Dornyei,
200.$. %hey are typically used to gather data on attitudes and opinions from large groups of
participants (Aackey & ;ass, 200#$ and have therefore been widely employed by researchers
e1amining student and>or teacher attitudes and preferences towards teacher written feedback (=.g.
=nginarlar, ",,.* 7ee, 200#* 7eki, ",,0* Aontgomery & 6aker, 200B$.
<revious written feedback studies influenced my decision to use 9uestionnaires as did the fact that
they are practical and economical in terms of researcher time and effort. :sing a 9uestionnaire
allowed me to gather a relatively large amount of data from "2) participants in a short period of time.
%wo 9uestionnaires were in fact used in this study* an "50item teachers& 9uestionnaire and a 2"0 item
9uestionnaire for students (see appendi1 6$. 6oth 9uestionnaires contained three /introductory& items
designed to elicit information about academic writing. %he remainder related more directly to the
research 9uestions* eliciting information on the type of written feedback given>received, the
participants& attitudes and opinions on the feedback they give>receive on the course, and their thoughts
and feeling on written feedback in general.
%he 9uestionnaires were also similar in terms of 9uestion type* consisting mostly of closed, multiple0
choice type 9uestions. (losed 9uestions were deemed preferable primarily because they are relatively
easy and 9uick to complete. (losed 9uestions also make coding more straightforward and leave no
room for rater sub'ectivity ((ohen et al% 200B* Dornyei, 200.$. However, not all 9uestions were of
the multiple0choice variety. %here were also three rank order type 9uestions. %his type of 9uestion was
18
used as the participants were likely to select more than one and possibly all of the responses, so it was
deemed more appropriate to ask them to prioritise. In addition the 9uestionnaires included some open0
ended 9uestions, the students& 9uestionnaire in particular. 2hile this type of 9uestion is more time0
consuming for the respondent and can be difficult to analyse, it was necessary here as the list of
possible answers was endless.
3.3.2 $rom!ted Interviews
Aany feedback studies have relied solely on 9uestionnaire data (=.g. =nginarlar, ",,.* 7eki, ",,"*
3aito, ",,)$ and have been criticised. 7ee (2005$ for e1ample believes researchers need to avoid
/looking at the issue in a deconte1tualised and broad0brush fashion&. ;illham (2000$ also believes
9uestionnaire data should be accompanied by interview data in order to gain a better understanding of
what the numerical responses actually mean. ;aining a deeper understanding of the issues was
certainly one of my primary motivations for interviewing participants. %he interviews would also
allow me to clarify any issues which came to light during the analysis of the 9uestionnaire data.
%riangulation was another key reason for conducting interviews. It would certainly have been
problematic for me to make conclusions based on 9uestionnaire data alone as the data generated may
simply have been an artefact of that specific method of collection (7in, ",B,, cited in (ohen et al%
200#$. %he use of multiple methods allowed me to cross0reference the findings of the 9uestionnaires
and when similar results were found, I could be more confident they were valid and reliable.
+or the main study a total of four interviews were conducted* two teachers and two of their students
(see %able " for information$. Cll teachers who participated in the 9uestionnaire stage were invited to
participate in the interviews. However, only a handful e1pressed an interest and time pressures and
timetabling constraints meant only two could feasibly participate. 8nce the writing tutors had agreed
to take part, I then set about finding willing student participants. Cll students from the two writing
tutors& classes were invited to take part in the interview stage after they had completed the
9uestionnaires. 8ne volunteer from each class came forward.
%he interviews themselves were semi0structured, in that they had a structured overall framework
(AcDonough & AcDonough, ",,B$. %his was to ensure useful data was gathered and that the
research 9uestions were addressed, which may not occur with unstructured interviews (see appendi1
6 for interview protocols$. %he interviews were however, heavily directed by the participants&
responses.
Cs well as the /standard& semi0structured interview format, a large part of the interview centred upon a
stimulated recall, or a prompted interview as it is also known. It was hoped that the use of a prompt, in
19
this case a piece of the student&s writing containing teacher written feedback, would allow the
participants to recall the thoughts they had when giving>receiving the feedback. %he main advantage
of using a prompt is that it aids the recall of information and can produce greater 9uantities and more
accurate data (;ass & Aackey, 2000$. I certainly felt it was more appropriate to look at and discuss a
real piece of written feedback rather than relying on memory and perceptions, which can be very
unreliable. Indeed, previous research has hinted that the feedback teachers and students perceive
giving>receiving may differ from the feedback they actually give> receive (=.g. Aontgomery & 6aker,
200B$. Cs well as aiding the accurate recollection of information, I also believed the prompted
interviews would provide a deeper insight into the thoughts and feelings of the teachers and students
on the feedback they provided>received.
Table 1: Information on interview participants
Study Stage Student&teacher Name' Nationality
<ilot study %eacher -ate 6ritish
Aain study %eacher Cdam 6ritish
Aain study %eacher Eoe 6ritish
<ilot study 3tudent 7ewis -orean>Eapanese
<ilot study 3tudent 6ill (hinese
Aain study 3tudent Gayanna (hinese
Aain study 3tudent -ris (hinese
L +or the purpose of this study pseudonyms have been used
3.3.3 $ilot stud
Gesearch methodology literature strongly advises that a small0scale trial of the proposed procedures,
materials and methods be conducted to uncover any problems and allow revisions before the main
study is conducted (=.g. Aackey & ;ass, 200#$.
%herefore, three pilot prompted interviews were conducted. C teacher and two students from the
preparatory pre0sessional course, which takes place immediately before pre0sessional course C,
participated (see %able " for information$. %he pilot interviews were invaluable and several issues
came to light.
20
+irstly, the interviews were too long and too much time was spent gathering background data, which
while interesting, did not really help address my research 9uestions. Cs a result many 9uestions were
removed from the final interview schedule.
%he fact that students may have little or no awareness of feedback techni9ues also came to light. %he
solution to this problem was to create one sample piece of writing and use it to illustrate three very
different types of feedback for the students to look at and discuss during the interview. I had wanted
to use an authentic piece of student writing, however issues were raised over anonymity and it proved
problematic to gain both the teachers& and the students& permission, so I created a sample te1t based
on an I=7%3 academic writing paper 9uestion (see appendi1 6$.
%he teachers& 9uestionnaire was also piloted by several people with =C< teaching e1perience. %he
pilot study revealed no ma'or flaws but one or two minor revisions were made. :nfortunately, I was
unable to pilot the students& 9uestionnaire. Cttempts were made to contact students from earlier pre0
sessional courses, however, no willing participants came forward. I did however, attempt to eliminate
flaws in the 9uestionnaire by asking the teachers involved in the pilot testing to look at the students&
9uestionnaire and give me their views. %his proved useful and several 9uestions were rephrased to
make them clearer and one or two additional 9uestions were added. %he introductory information at
the top of the 9uestionnaire was also altered slightly to make it sound less formal and intimidating.
3.4 $rocedure
%he 9uestionnaires and interviews were conducted over a three week time period* weeks two, three
and four of the ten0week course. %he 9uestionnaires were administered first, followed shortly by the
prompted interviews.
3.4.1 %uestionniares
'tudents +uestionnaire
%he student 9uestionnaires were administered in a way (ohen et al (200B$ refer to as /self0
administered in the presence of the researcher&. %he data was collected over a si1 day period and
involved me personally going into timetabled writing classes. %he 9uestionnaires were actually
administered at the end of the classes when the writing tutors had left, so students would not be under
the impression that they were an obligatory, /official& part of their lesson. However, the purpose of the
study and the fact that participation was voluntary was clearly communicated to the students to avoid
any misunderstanding.
21
%his method of administration was primarily chosen as it allowed me to gather data from many
respondents simultaneously and it is acknowledged that this /captive audience& method typically
ensures a good response rate ((ohen et al% 200B* Dornyei, 200.$. %here are disadvantages to
administering 9uestionnaires this way, namely participants may feel threatened or coerced into
participating and may not answer honestly or at all in the presence of the researcher. However, I felt
my presence enabled any 9ueries or uncertainties to be addressed immediately and that this
outweighed the disadvantages.
8nce gathered all the 9uestionnaires were combined and coded. %he coding process involved
converting the closed0item responses into numerical scores. %he data was then analysed using the
statistical package, 3<33. 8pen0item responses were not analysed using 3<33, but were instead
sub'ected to content analysis. %he comments were initially sorted into three categories* focus of
feedback, type of feedback and method of feedback delivery. %hese broad groups were then further
divided into sub0categories as they emerged.
It was also necessary to carry out what Dornyei (200.$ refers to as /data cleaning&. 8ne or two
9uestionnaires contained mistakes which were corrected when entering the data into 3<33. +or
e1ample some students selected /other& and specified an answer that was in fact one of the available
choices. %he completed 9uestionnaires also contained incorrectly answered items which could not be
/cleaned& (i.e. respondents selected more than one answer$ as well as some unanswered items. 6oth
missing information and incorrectly answered 9uestions were entered into the data editor as /no
response&.
eachers +uestionnaire
%he teachers& 9uestionnaires were also self0administered* however, they were not administered in the
presence of the researcher. It was an e1tremely busy time for teachers so it was decided that the
9uestionnaires should be left in the teachers& communal area for teachers& to complete in their own
time. +ollowing Dornyei&s (200.$ suggestion, an advance notice in the form of an e0mail announcing
the 9uestionnaire and inviting participation was sent to all writing teachers. It was hoped that this
would make the survey feel more professional and promote positive participant attitudes, therefore
increasing the rate of response.
8nce the 9uestionnaires were collected, they were combined and analysed in the same way as the
students& 9uestionnaire. Data /cleaning& was also necessary, particularly when it came to /other&
responses. 7ike the students, some teachers selected /other& and specified an answer which was
already available to them. However, some new responses also emerged. +or e1ample in response to
22
item ten, more than one teacher responded that they gave a combination of both indirect feedback
types. In this instance and other similar situations, new categories were created as patterns became
apparent.
3.4.2 Interviews
Cll the interviews were conducted separately and were tape recorded. %hey lasted appro1imately one
hour. 6efore the interviews commenced participants were informed of the purpose of the study and
how the information they provided would be used. Cll participants were also asked to sign a formal
consent form (see appendi1 6 for sample of consent form$.
%he interviews themselves started with some general background 9uestions before moving on to
discuss the teaching of writing and written feedback. C document stimulated recall was then
conducted using a piece of writing completed by the student and marked by the teacher involved in
the interview stage (+or writing used see appendi1 ($. %herefore, each teacher0student pair used the
same prompt. %his allowed me to gain both the provider&s and the receiver&s perspective on the
written feedback and clarify and>or gain more detailed information to address my research 9uestions.
%he stimulated recall itself was not conducted immediately after the feedback process and was /non0
recent&. 2hile a stimulated recall should ideally be conducted immediately after the feedback has
been given>received to ensure the participants& memory doesn&t fade and become less accurate (;ass
& Aackey, 2000$, this was not realistic in this situation. %he interviews were originally scheduled to
take place .0)5 hours after the feedback process, however, due to issues outside my control they
actually took place one to four days after the feedback process. 2hile this gap is longer than I would
have liked, it is not considered detrimental. Indeed, studies have shown that even with a time lapse of
two days, recalls can still be as much as ,#J accurate (;ass & Aackey, 2000$.
%he prompts used in the interview were obtained by asking the teachers to make a copy of the most
recent writing completed by the student involved in the interview stage. 2hile this was not the ideal
method for sample selection, I had no access to the written work completed on the pre0sessional
course and was therefore totally reliant on the participants themselves to provide the prompt.
Cn additional /aid& was also used in the early part of the student interviews. Cs discussed earlier, it
was felt that students may be unaware of the different types of feedback, therefore an e1ample
composition illustrating three different types of feedback was used to accurately ascertain their
preferences and answer the final research 9uestion.
23
Cfter the interviews were conducted they were transcribed, coded and analysed (for transcription
samples see appendi1 D$. %he codes used were based largely on themes from the 9uestionnaires.
3.( )imitations
%ime constraints had a significant effect on the design of this study. +or e1ample the data was
collected 9uite early on in the pres0sessional course. Ideally the data would have been collected
further into the course, when students had received more significant amounts of written feedback.
However, the short nature of the pro'ect and a 3eptember deadline ruled this out. If more time was
available, I would also have conducted more interviews with both teachers and students on the course
in order to gain a deeper and more accurate understanding of the issues involved in the giving and
receiving of feedback in this setting and increase reliability.
Cccess to participants was another ma'or concern. Cs mentioned earlier, it was an e1tremely busy
time and gaining access to certain teachers and students from the sample population proved difficult
and even when access was secured it was always sub'ect to change. %he situation was further
e1acerbated by the fact that the course co0ordinator fell seriously ill 'ust before the course was due to
commence, which put increased pressure on staff and severely limited my access to participants.
%he language used to conduct the interviews and administer the 9uestionnaires is another weakness of
this research design. It is suggested that the participants& native language be used when collecting
data (Aackey & ;ass, 200#$ however, =nglish was the only language in this study. %his may well
have constrained the answers of some participants. Clso despite the fact that every effort was taken to
ensure the 9uestions were not beyond their =nglish level and did not contain too much /teacher talk&,
72 proficiency and lack of conte1t0specific language may have caused some students to
misunderstand or misinterpret 9uestions. :nfortunately, a lack of time and financial resources made it
impossible to conduct the research in the numerous languages spoken by the participants.
8ne final limitation of this, and many other small scale studies, is that the researcher and the analyst
are one and the same person. %his can lead to researcher bias, however, in this study every step was
taken to avoid this, including the use of two independent research methods as well as making the data
available for of respondent validation or /member checking& (7incoln & ;uba, ",5#$.
Chapter Four: Results and Findings
24
4. Introduction
%his chapter will present and analyse the 9uantitative and 9ualitative research data. %he results of the
teachers& 9uestionnaires will be presented first, followed by the students& 9uestionnaire data. %he
findings of the prompted interviews will then be presented* again the teachers& interview results will
be presented, before moving on to the students& interview results.
4.1 Teachers* +uestionnaire results
It is fre9uently stated that teachers see responding to their students& written work as an inherent and
important part of their 'ob ((asanave, 200)* +erris, ",,,* Hyland. -, 200.* %ruscott, ",,$ and the
results of this study appear to support this claim. Indeed, %able 2 and +igure " show that teachers in
this setting overwhelmingly believe providing feedback is very important and the vast ma'ority of
teachers (,..)J$ report giving feedback on all, or nearly all, of their students& written work.
2hile the participating teachers clearly believe feedback is vital, the research literature on teacher
feedback has not been overwhelmingly positive. Indeed, %ruscott (",,$ claimed there are /serious
problems& regarding the 9uality of teachers& written responses. 8thers have also been 9uite negative
claiming teacher feedback often fails to inform or motivate learners (=.g. @amel, ",5#$. However, the
teachers in this study appear to disagree. 2hen asked if providing feedback on their students& writing
was an effective practice, all teachers responded positively. %able . shows that the ma'ority of
teachers (5.)J$ believe feedback is effective, while .".J felt it was very effective.
Table 2: Importance of providing feedback
Response re!uency "ercent
Very important
Important
Quite important
Not really
important
Not important at
all
17
2
0
0
0
89.5%
10.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25
igure 1: re!uency of teacher feedback provision
Table #: $%ectiveness of teacher feedback
%he teachers were also asked how they normally provided feedback on their students& written work
and as %able ) illustrates, teacher written feedback was the most widely used, with )..J of teachers
ranking this as the method most fre9uently employed.
%he second most popular method was oral0conferencing, with 2".)J of respondents reporting it was
their primary method of proving feedback. +or the teachers& 9uestionnaire, oral conferencing was split
into /outside scheduled class time& and /during class&, and it was the former which proved more
popular. 8ral feedback discussions can be e1tremely time0consuming, however, given that they allow
26
Response re!uency "ercent
It is very ee!tive
It is ee!tive
Neutral
It is not ee!tive
It is a "aste o#
time
6
13
0
0
0
31.6%
68.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
teachers to respond to the diverse cultural, educational and writing needs of individual students
(Hyland & Hyland, 200b$ it is perhaps not surprising that they are favoured by a significant number
of teachers in this setting.
=lectronic feedback also appears to be popular to a certain e1tent, with ")..J of teachers ranking it as
their most fre9uently used feedback method. %his is a little surprising given that it is a relatively new
method of feedback delivery. However, all teachers and students had access to computers and their
own university e0mail address. ,lackboard% the software used to manage e0learning, was also
available and used by both teachers and students on the pre0sessional course.
<eer correction, however, does not seem to be particularly popular in this setting. <eer feedback
studies have produced e1tremely mi1ed results and indicated that students find it problematic (3ee
?elson & (arson, 200$ so it is perhaps not surprising that it is not widely employed in this university
setting. However, one must avoid 'umping to conclusions* simply because peer correction was ranked
low does not mean it is never used.
Table &: eedback method most fre!uently used by teachers
?.6. n-"). +ive incorrectly answered responses classified as /no response&
2hen asked about the focus of their feedback, teachers overwhelmingly stated that most of their
feedback addressed surface0level issues (see +igure 2$. Here, #...J of teachers reported providing
feedback mostly on form0related issues. %his contradicts Hyland & Hyland&s (200c$ study but
supports the findings of studies by (ohen & (avalcanti (",,0$, 7ee (2005$, 7eki (",,"$ and
Aontgomery & 6aker (200B$, which also found an emphasis on surface0level errors.
However, not all teachers in this setting focussed on language. Indeed, 20J of teachers reported
giving most feedback on content>ideas, while 20J prioritised organisation>structure. %his is
27
Response re!uency "ercent
$ea!%er &ritten 'ee()a!*
+ral !on#eren!es outsi(e
!lass time
+ral !on#eren!es (urin, !lass
-le!troni! #ee()a!*
.eer #ee()a!*
9
3
0
2
0
64.3%
21.4%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
significantly more than 7ee&s (2005$ study, where other aspects of writing were largely e1cluded, and
is more in line with (ohen & (avalcanti&s (",,0$ findings.
igure 2: ocus of most teacher feedback
Ccademic conventions, a category neglected by many feedback studies, appear to be less of a priority
in this setting. 8nly .BJ of teachers reported giving significant amounts of feedback on this aspect
of writing. It has been suggested that this is a /difficult& issue and teachers sometimes avoid
commenting on such matters, especially plagiarism. %his may be the case here, however, the fact that
the 9uestionnaire was conducted in the initial stages the course could also account for the lack of
feedback on academic conventions. %hese aspects were not overtly focussed on until the later stages
of the course and given that teachers have been shown to provide feedback on points they have
e1plicitly taught (Hyland & Hyland, 200c$, it follows that teachers would not focus their feedback
on such issues at that time.
%he findings of an open 9uestion aimed at discovering the challenges teachers face when it comes to
academic writing instruction certainly supports this notion. "#.5J of the comments stated that
helping students to understand academic conventions was particularly problematic, not a large
number, but higher than the "0.#J who felt organistion>structure was a ma'or concern. ;iven this, one
would e1pect academic conventions to be more of a priority with more feedback addressing the
28
matter. However, it might well become more of an issue in the later stages of the course, when the
conventions have been e1plicitly taught.
%he open0ended 9uestion also revealed that #..)J of teachers felt that language (grammar,
vocabulary, and sentence structure$ was the biggest challenge. %his is almost identical to the
percentage of teachers who provide feedback primarily on linguistic matters. %his suggests that
teachers are targeting students& weaknesses and providing most feedback on these issues.
Table ': orm of feedback generally given by teachers
Response re!uency "ercent
+nly ,ra(e/mar*s
+nly error !orre!tion
+nly "ritten !omments
0ra(e/mar* an( error
!orre!tion
0ra(e/mar* an( "ritten
!omments
-rror !orre!tion an( "ritten
!omments
1ll2 0ra(e/mar*3 error
!orre!tion an( "ritten
!omments
0
0
0
0
3
10
5
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
55.5%
27.8%
?.6. nM"5. 8ne incorrectly answered response classified as /no response&.

%he ne1t item on the teachers& 9uestionnaire asked about the type of feedback given (see %able $.
=rror correction combined with written comments seems to be the most popular form with more than
half claiming to provide feedback in this way. Eust over a 9uarter of all teachers also reported giving a
grade>mark as well as error correction and written comments, while ".BJ claimed to omit error
correction altogether and give a grade>mark and written comments. It is 9uite surprising that )).#J of
teachers gave some kind of mark>grade, especially as teachers were e1plicitly advised not to give
numerical scores. It is possible that teachers are ignoring this advice and giving global numerical, or
alphabetical scores. %his could be due to personal preference or the teachers in 9uestion could be
giving marks>grades because their students have e1plicitly asked for them.
It is perhaps less surprising that some teachers chose not to correct surface0level errors. %he literature
has been somewhat critical of this practice and the research has been inconclusive at best. 3o teachers
29
here may be opting not to waste time on an /ineffective practice&, or again they may be giving
students the type of feedback they want.
Table (: )ethod of error correction generally used by teachers
Cs mentioned earlier, whether to correct students& linguistic errors is a ma'or theme in the feedback
literature. Cnother key issue is how to address students& linguistic errors. 3ome have claimed direct
error correction is more effective (=.g. (handler, 200.$, while others have concluded that indirect
methods are the best option (=.g. 7alande, ",52$. Cccording to +erris (",,,,200$, most research
suggests that indirect feedback is generally preferable because it gives students the opportunity to
engage cognitively in editing.
%he teachers appear to agree with +erris (200$ as direct correction does not appear to be particularly
popular in this setting. Cs %able B illustrates, "#.5J of respondents reported giving a mi1ture of direct
and indirect feedback, but the overwhelming ma'ority, 5).2J, reported giving some form of indirect
error correction
%he 9uestionnaire also aimed to discover teacher opinions on the provision of positive and negative,
critical feedback. %he issue of how to phrase teachers& commentary has been widely discussed in
feedback literature and it is generally believed that teachers should praise students and avoid being
overly negative. %herefore, two 9uestions were included to gather their opinions on this matter.
+igures . and ) show the results of these multiple0choice items. %eachers in this setting appear to
believe it is important to provide both positive and negative feedback. However, the teachers appear
to have slightly stronger feelings towards the provision of positive feedback.
30
Response re!uency "ercent
4ire!t !orre!tion
In(ire!t !orre!tion2
un(erline/!ir!le
In(ire!t !orre!tion2!orre!tion
!o(e
4ire!t !orre!tion an( !orre!tion
!o(e
5n(erline/!ir!le an( !orre!tion
!o(e
+t%er
0
6
8
3
2
0
0.0%
31.6%
42.1%
15.8%
10.5%
0.0%
igure #: Importance of providing positive feedback
igure &: Importance of providing negative feedback

31
8ne of the final 9uestions aimed to discover the reasons behind the teachers& feedback choices. Cs
mentioned in the previous chapter, teachers were given guidance by the university but were largely
free to give the type of feedback they deemed appropriate. It appears that most teachers (B2."J$ are
relying on their own e1periences of what does and does not work when providing feedback (see %able
5$. It also suggests that teachers may not be selecting their feedback methods based on the
wants>needs of their students, as only #.J claimed to select their feedback based on individual
student or class re9uests.
Table *: Reasons for selecting feedback method+s,
Response re!uency "ercent
'ollo"in, institutional ,ui(elines
6ase( on past e7perien!e
8e!ommen(e( )y ot%ers
$ime pressures
8e9ueste( )y stu(ent/!lass
'rom tea!%er trainin,/e(u!ation
!ourses
+t%er
1
13
0
0
1
1
2
5.6%
72.1%
0.0%
0.0%
5.6%
5.6%
11.1%
?.6. n-"5. 8ne incorrectly answered response classified as /no response&
%he final 9uestion was open0ended and aimed to discover what teachers hoped their feedback would
achieve. %hree themes emerged. %he ma'ority of teachers hoped it would make students more aware
of their overall strengths and weaknesses and help them focus on specific areas. 7anguage was
another ma'or theme. Aany teachers commented that they hoped their feedback would highlight error
patterns so students would make fewer errors in the future. Cutonomy was the final theme, with some
teachers hoping their feedback would enable students to become independent learners capable of
criti9uing and proofreading their own work.

4.2 #tudents* +uestionnaire results
8verall, the "0# student participants had a very positive view of written feedback. %able , shows, all
participants believed it is either very important or important. In addition, the student participants
32
overwhelmingly felt teacher feedback was effective and helped them to become better writers (see
%able "0$.
%his positive view of feedback accords with the findings of other studies which investigated student
attitudes towards feedback (=.g. =nginarlar, ",,.* Hyland. +, ",,5* 7eki, ",,"$. +urthermore, these
results are almost identical to the teachers& responses and support (ohen & (avalcanti&s (",,0$ and
+erris&s (2002$ conclusions that both teachers and students feel feedback is an important part of the
writing process.
Table -: Importance of teacher feedback to students
Response re!uency "ercent
Very important
Important
Quite important
Not really important
Not important at all
90
15
0
0
0
85.7%
14.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Table 1.: $/cacy of written feedback
Response re!uenc
y
"ercent
'ee()a!* #rom t%e tea!%er %elps me
)e!ome a )etter "riter
'ee()a!* #rom t%e tea!%er (oes not
%elp me )e!ome a )etter "riter
5nsure
97
0
6
94.2%
0.0%
5.8%
?.6. n-"0.. %wo responses missing.
Gegarding the feedback method, the teachers reported using teacher written feedback most often in
their classes, and this certainly does appear to be the case as figure # illustrates B0.2J of student
respondents also reported that teacher written feedback was the normal method of feedback. 8ral
conferences also appear to be widely used to provide feedback, with 2.."J of student respondents
reporting that oral conferences were the normal method for delivering feedback. 8ral writing
conferences are a widely employed alternative to teacher written response. %hey can be the sole
33
method for providing feedback or they can be used in con'unction with other forms of feedback. %he
9uestionnaire0items, unfortunately do not tell us if they are used alone or in con'unction with other
methods of feedback.
In this setting peer feedback and electronic feedback were not fre9uently used methods for delivering
feedback, according to the students. %he low ranking for peer feedback accords with the teachers&
9uestionnaire results and therefore does appear to show that it is not particularly popular in this
setting. However, it is interesting to note that ")..J of teachers reported using electronic feedback
/most fre9uently& yet only ".,J of students claimed to receive this type of feedback most often.
igure 0: "rimary feedback delivery method
%he students were also asked what form of teacher written feedback they normally received, +igure
shows the results of this multiple0choice 9uestion. %he ma'ority of the students reported receiving
error correction and written comments (.#.J$ or a grade>mark, error correction and written
comments (.).J$. %he results also show that "0.J of participants reported that they received only
written comments and B.BJ of students responded that they normally receive only error correction.
3mall numbers also stated that they received a grade>mark and error correction or a grade>mark and
34
written comments. %hese results differ slightly from the teachers& responses and suggest that no one
form of feedback dominates. %he student responses certainly seem to indicate that the "0 classes
receive a variety of feedback forms. %here are many reasons why this may be the case, the feedback
form could vary from teacher to teacher, it could also vary according to the individual student or even
the particular writing task. However, while students report receiving different types of feedback* on
the whole they appear to receive 9uite thorough feedback. %he fact that nearly half of all respondents
receive two types of feedback and over a third of all respondents reported receiving feedback in three
forms suggests that teachers are not opting for the 9uick and easy alternatives.
igure ': orm of teacher written feedback usually received
I also aimed to establish what aspects of writing students received most feedback on. Cs with the
teachers& 9uestionnaire, the participants were given four choices and asked to rank them in order. %his
ranking item proved particularly difficult for students to complete and many did not answer in the
correct way and were therefore coded as /no response&. %his may have affected the results slightly,
however, overall the responses were 9uite clear. Cs +igure B shows, the students reported that the
ma'ority of the feedback they received concerned language (#".)J$. C significant proportion (2#J$
35
also reported receiving significant amounts of feedback on the organisation and structure of their
writing. (onversely, students ranked academic conventions and content lowest, indicating they did not
receive significant 9uantities of feedback on these aspects. 8verall, these findings are largely in line
with the teachers& responses.
%aking both 9uestionnaires into account it appears that there is an emphasis on language in this
setting. %his is surprising, especially when one takes into account the recommended teaching
approach* a /functional>process approach&. C process approach would normally prioritise feedback on
content over feedback on surface0level errors. However, it is perhaps less surprising when one takes
into account the problems students have with writing.
igure (: 1spect of writing most fre!uently addressed
%he teachers& 9uestionnaire revealed that teachers felt /language& was the biggest challenge and +igure
5 shows that the students in this setting do in fact find /language& particularly challenging with #..#J
of students claiming it was the most difficult aspect of academic writing. 2B.BJ of the students also
reported that /content& was problematic and a number of students ("B.5J$ also stated that they found
/organisation& particularly problematic. 3o it appears that the students are receiving the most feedback
on the aspect of writing they find most challenging. However, the students did report having difficulty
with content but seem to receive relatively little feedback on this area. %his suggests the connection
36
between difficulties and the issues addressed in teacher feedback may me coincidental. Clthough it is
also possible that teachers are avoiding this /delicate& matter. Indeed, it has been suggested that
teachers are adverse to commenting on ideas>content as students often have something of themselves
invested in their writing and that teachers do not want to offend or be seen to be /appropriating& a
students& te1t (Hyland & Hyland, 200c$.
igure *: )ost di/cult aspect of writing for students
C multiple0choice item was included in the students& 9uestionnaire to shed light on the main
method(s$ of error correction used in this university setting. +igure , illustrates the findings of this
9uestion. 2hile the research may be inconclusive, findings from student participants confirm that
indirect error correction is the favoured method of error correction in this setting. B.BJ of students
received some form of indirect corrective feedback while only 2".)J of students reported that they
received mostly direct error correction. 8f the indirect methods available to teachers, the use of a
correction code appears to be particularly popular with )5.#J of students claiming to receive this
form of feedback. %hese results are largely the same as the teachers& reported answers, however, the
students did report receiving significantly more direct feedback than the teachers reported giving.
37
%hey may of course have different perceptions, however, it is also possible that teachers may be
unwilling to admit giving direct error correction, seeing it as a /bad practice&.
igure -: Type of corrective feedback received
Cnother issue raised in the written feedback literature is the e1tent to which students can understand
and use the written feedback they are given by their teachers. %he view of teacher written feedback
has not always been overly positive and studies have shown that students can misunderstand the
feedback from their teachers (+erris, 200.* ;oldstein & -ohls, 2002* Hyland. +, ",,5* @amel, ",5#$.
However, the results of this 9uestionnaire suggest that overall students do comprehend the feedback
they are given. +igure "0 illustrates that 50.J of students /always& or /usually& understand the
feedback. C much smaller number, "5.)J, reported that they only /sometimes& comprehend the
feedback and only "J of the student participants reported having ma'or difficulties understanding the
feedback from their teacher. %his data does paint a positive picture of the teacher written feedback in
this particular setting. However, it may be the case that students are unwilling to admit that they do
not understand, seeing it as some kind of failing on their part. It is also possible that students think
they understand the comments and corrections when in fact they do not.
%he final multiple0choice item on the 9uestionnaire asked students if they were generally satisfied
with the feedback they had received so far on the course (see figure ""$. %he vast ma'ority of students,
5#J, reported they were satisfied with the feedback they received on their written work. 8nly J
responded that they were dissatisfied with the feedback, while ,J of respondents were /unsure&. %his
38
response is e1tremely positive and indicates that overall teachers are providing the type of feedback
students deem useful.
igure 1.: Student understanding of feedback
igure 11: Student satisfaction levels
%he
9uestionnaire also
contained some
open0ended items
which I hoped would
provide /richer&
data on what aspects
of the
feedback
students were
particularly
39
satisfied and dissatisfied with and reveal their preferences. %he response rate for these 9uestions was
9uite low, but given that the ma'ority of students were /satisfied& with the feedback they received,
perhaps they did not feel the need to comment further. However, many students did chose to comment
and some definite themes emerged. +irstly, despite the fact that students reported receiving large
amounts of feedback on language issues some students wish to receive even more feedback on this
aspect of their writing. %he ma'ority of these language related comments specifically concerned
grammar and academic vocabulary. C very small number did e1press a desire to receive less feedback
on linguistic matters and a handful of students also commented that they wanted the feedback to focus
more on content and organisation. However, like other studies (=.g. (ohen & (avalcanti, ",,0* +erris
& Goberts, 200"* Hedgcock & 7efkowit4, ",,)* Hyland. +, ",,5$ the results here lead one to
conclude that students prioritise feedback on grammar and want their surface0level errors to be
addressed.
%he comments also revealed some interesting findings with respects to the type of corrective feedback
students prefer to receive. <revious research (=.g. Hyland. +, 200"* 7ee, 2005* 3aito, ",,)$ has
proved inconclusive with some students favouring direct correction and others preferring indirect
correction. %he findings of the 9uestionnaire were also rather mi1ed. 3ome students reported that they
wanted their errors to be corrected directly while others stated that they liked the indirect, correction
code method. However not all indirect correction methods were positively received. C number of
students, for e1ample, e1pressed negative feelings towards the use of underlining>circling to highlight
errors stating they found it unhelpful. :nfortunately, the responses were too few and far too varied to
make any generalisations about the type of corrective feedback students in this university setting
wished to receive.
%he open0ended items also elicited comments on teacher commentary as well as corrective feedback.
Cgain, the responses were 9uite contradictory and no clear message emerged. +irstly, some students
claimed to like the use of comments, while other stated that they would like to receive fewer
comments on future written work. In addition, some students reported that they received negative
comments and were particularly satisfied with this type of feedback. 3ome also directly stated that
they wanted more constructive criticism. 8thers however, e1pressed a desire to receive more positive
feedback.
igure 12: Importance of positive feedback to students
40
igure 1#: Importance of negative feedback to students
Cs mentioned earlier, the use of praise and criticism is a ma'or issue in feedback studies. %wo closed,
multiple choice items were therefore, devoted to this issue. Cs with the open0ended responses, a
mi1ed picture emerged. +igures "2 and ". show the findings of these 9uestions. It appears that
41
overall students think it is important to receive both positive and negative feedback but they do seem
to value negative feedback slightly more than positive feedback. %hese results are similar to the
teachers& 9uestionnaire results, however, the teachers thought it was slightly more important to
provide positive feedback.
%he method of delivery was another key area students chose to comment on. 8ne student e1pressed a
desire to receive more peer feedback and a handful of students stated that they would like to receive
electronic feedback. However, many students e1pressed a desire to have their feedback given to them
via oral conferences and comments like /more time spent on face0to0face feedback& and /I want
individual time with the teacher& were typical. %his desire to receive face0to0face feedback is not
uncommon* Hyland & Hyland (200b$ for e1ample, have observed that students tend to have a
positive view of oral conferences. However, while there is a strong demand for this type of feedback,
it was not clear if the students wanted it to be used in con'unction with their current feedback method
or as the sole method of feedback.
4.3 Teachers* interview results
Cdam, Eoe and -ate all stated that feedback was important and revealed that it played a significant
role in their classes. Cdam had perhaps the strongest opinion of feedback, stating Hwithout feedback it
doesn&t really go anywhere. %here needs to be a feedback stage of some sort as a kind of conclusion to
any writing activityI.
%he interview data also shed light on the type of feedback employed by teachers in this setting. %he
9uestionnaire data showed that teacher written feedback was particularly popular, however, I was left
with the impression that it was not so clear cut. %he interviews revealed that teacher written feedback
was widely used, but it was used in con'unction with oral conferences which were delivered after the
written feedback, at the end of the writing process.
%he 9uestionnaire data also suggested that electronic feedback was 9uite popular in this setting. %here
was however, no mention of electronic feedback in the interviews. C response by Cdam could clarify
this issue. He indicated that teachers regarded e0mail submissions or word processed comments as
electronic feedback. =lectronic feedback may therefore be popular but with only a small number of
teachers or teachers may have misinterpreted the meaning of electronic feedback and responded
incorrectly.
%he interview data also clarified the role of peer feedback. 7eki (",,2$ suggested that peer feedback
was widely used yet the 9uestionnaire data hinted this was not the case in this university setting. %he
interview data does however support 7eki&s assertion and peer feedback was used fre9uently by all
42
three teachers. %he three teachers generally thought it was important for students to provide feedback
on each other&s work and overall they were 9uite positive about it. Eoe stated that he Hliked doingI
peer feedback and that it benefited students Hlinguistically and in terms of building relationshipsI.
-ate was also positive about peer feedback. 3he believed it was a useful addition to the feedback
process and particularly helped students with their language issues. Cccording to -ate, Hmaybe
someone else telling them, it will 'ust be ahhhN %hey&ll say it in a different way and they&ll 'ust get itI.
<eer feedback appears to be very popular among the teachers and they indicated that it was well
received by students. 8verall, it seemed the teachers would have liked to have given more peer
feedback, Eoe talks of an ideal Hcombination of bothI teacher and peer feedback, but nevertheless, it
remained a supplementary method largely because the students favoured teacher feedback. Cccording
to Cdam the students liked peer feedback but teacher feedback was Hmuch more importantI to them.
Eoe also revealed he felt Hpressure from studentsI and that if he replaced teacher feedback with peer
feedback he thought his students would think Hwho is this guyO Is he doing his 'obOI.
%he teachers were 9uite negative about teacher feedback, particularly teacher written feedback, unlike
the students, who appeared to have a much more positive view. 2ritten feedback in this setting was
given partly in response to student demands and also because it is a necessary Hpart of the feedback
processI. Cdam stated that written feedback was needed as it is Hsomething permanent to take awayI.
-ate echoed this view, suggesting students might HforgetI if they did not have a written form of
feedback. However, while they acknowledged that it was necessary they were rather critical. Eoe was
perhaps the most openly critical claiming he was Hnot a fanI. He also hinted at the fact that written
feedback can make students reliant on the teacher. He said Hthe student assumes teachers will mark,
annotate, comment on and correct all the issues in that piece of work. 3tudent need do nothing moreI.
Cdam was also 9uite aware of the negative side of written feedback and stated that Hwith written
feedback sometimes you will have things that you don&t understand, especially if it&s handwrittenI and
neither Eoe nor Cdam thought it should be used as the sole form of feedback.
%he teachers are not alone in that view and words such as /vague& /inconsistent& and /arbitrary& are
often used to describe written feedback (=.g. %ruscott, ",,* @amel, ",5#$. %he prompted interviews
certainly highlighted instances of inconsistent feedback. Eoe, for e1ample, was e1tremely surprised to
see not one but two ticks on his students work and claimed HI wouldn&t normally do thatI. -ate also
revealed inconsistencies in her feedback practices. +or e1ample, she reported early on in the interview
that she normally indicated the link between spelling errors and pronunciation, however, she had not
done so on the sample in 9uestion.
%he teachers were generally much more positive about the student0teacher writing conferences. Eoe
was particularly positive about them, claiming they were Hthe life and soul of the whole thingI. Eoe
found the oral feedback discussions particularly helpful as they allowed him to Hsee what Pthe
43
studentsQ need individuallyI and he claimed that issues had been resolved which Hwouldn&t have
occurred had we not chatted togetherI. Cdam was also positive revealing that he thought it was
Himportant to do the face0to0face PfeedbackQ because you have to have that individual contactI.
6oth teachers also indicated that this form of feedback was well received by the students. It has been
suggested that oral conferences are often ineffective as students are not always willing or able to
actively participate (Hyland & Hyland, 200b$. However, the teachers talked about students
approaching them eager to talk about their writing, and Eoe reported that his students often have
Hburning 9uestionsI to ask. -ate did not have 9uite the same e1perience as the other two teachers. 3he
revealed that many students did not take up her offer to discuss their work and did not ask 9uestions
about their writing or the feedback. However, -ate was teaching on the preparatory pre0sessional
course and the level of the students was slightly lower, which could account for their unwillingness to
discuss issues with the teacher.
Gegarding the type of written feedback, a 9uick look at the writing samples used in the prompted
section of the interview revealed that all three teachers gave a mi1ture of error correction and
comments (see Cppendi1 ($. %his largely supports the 9uestionnaire data. However, I saw no real
evidence of the use of marks>grades. 2hen asked about the use of grades>marks, Cdam reported that
he didn&t give marks because he had been Htold not toI but also because he Hdidn&t like giving marksI.
He also added that HI know the students want itI. %his revealing comment could e1plain why some
teachers gave global grades>marks. %he issue is however slightly more comple1. 2hile I saw no
evidence of marks>grades on the paper, both Eoe and Cdam had used the universities marking scheme
(see Cppendi1 C$ which contained a grading system of sorts by way of highlighting the /level&
students were at. %hese levels were similar to the I=7%3 marking system. 3o while marks may not
have been overtly given, they were implied and according to Cdam students could Hwork out what
their mark would beI from this key. %his /implied& mark could also account for the significant
number of participants who reported giving>receiving a grade or mark of some form.
%he issue of error correction was far clearer, and all three teachers reported using a correction code to
address students& surface0level errors. %he interviews also shed light on why teachers selected this
form of error correction. -ate thought that it was more beneficial because it re9uired a greater
cognitive effort on the part of the learner. 3he stated HI really do believe that they are more likely to
correct it if they work it out, than 'ust me telling them all the timeI. Eoe and Cdam also suggested they
thought direct correction was less /educational&.
However, while this corroborated the 9uestionnaire results, as the interviews progressed it became
apparent that it was not 9uite so clear0cut. -ate for e1ample did not always use the correction code.
3he reported using a mi1ture of a correction code and direct feedback stating Hif it is something that
they can&t correct for themselves I usually tell them what it is, that&s the way I always play itI. %his is
44
common practice and in line with +erris& (",,,* 200)$ suggestions. However she did add that HI don&t
want to 'ust tell them the right answer every timeI suggesting she was not very comfortable giving
this type of direct feedback.
Cdam also revealed a far more comple1 correction system. He reported using the correction code with
weaker students. 2ith Hstronger studentsI he preferred to use Ha more open styleI which involved
underlining HwrongI language points and using a Hs9uiggly lineI if the language is Hnot 9uite rightI.
He stated that the stronger students have Hmore of a sort of background of vocabulary and grammarI
and therefore they did not need to be told the nature of the error. Cdam also reported using direct error
correction on occasions Hwhen it is difficult to e1plain how to change itI. He also appeared to feel
9uite uncomfortable about doing this, making a 'oke about his pen H'ust slippingI. He also stated Hthe
rest of Phis feedbackQ is more kind of educationalI. I got the overall impression that direct error
correction occurs in this setting but that is viewed negatively and so not openly talked about.
%he interviews and the writing samples also showed that there were many instances of error
correction, confirming that a great deal of the written feedback did in fact centre on linguistic issues.
However, this was implied rather than overtly stated by the teachers themselves. +or e1ample when
Eoe was asked how he approached a te1t he reported HI tend to give a 9uick skim through 9uickly.
%hen I go through it sentence by sentence grammatically. %hen I go back and look for structureI.
Interestingly, the other two teachers reported focussing on other aspects of writing. Cdam for
e1ample, claimed to focus on Hthe big picture stuffI, particularly structure. However, there was a
slight contradiction as earlier on in the interview he had revealed!
I try to do things like point out a mistake that they are making over and over again for
e1ample something they can correct 9uite simply, especially that&s in terms of language
and also in terms of structural things and things like that as well.
%his comment gives the impression that language is his primary focus, not structure. %his
contradiction presented itself again at the end of the interview, however, this time Cdam was more
aware of it. He finished the interviews by restating HI go for the big picture stuff rather than... having
said that I&ve got all those little things, but not every little thingI.
It was also 9uite interesting to note that while structure and language were discussed a great deal,
there was little talk of content based feedback. Indeed, while Cdam did state that he was not Halways
so good at picking up on contentI, content did not really feature in the other two interviews. However,
I do not feel this aspect was avoided. Indeed remarks indicated that content did feature in the oral
feedback discussions. Cdam hints at this, stating he can clarify students& ideas face0to0face. Eoe also
refers to a section in the oral conference when they were Htalking about contentI. It is also possible
45
that they are not giving significant amounts of written feedback on content>ideas because their
students do not have ma'or issues with this aspect of their writing.
Ccademic conventions were also largely absent from the dialogue. Cdam and -ate had not provided
feedback at all on this matter. Eoe was the e1ception. :nfortunately, I was unable to ascertain why Eoe
chose to comment on academic conventions. %he other two teachers however, did not avoid the matter
out of fear of offending their students but rather because they had not e1plicitly taught academic
convention in class. Indeed, Cdam stated that the students!
would write up to #00 words for this first essay, then this week we&ll be looking at
sources and how to incorporate them in the te1ts and then they&ll be writing a longer
version which is up to "000 words.
;iven that they had not focussed on academic conventions in class, it is logical that their feedback
would avoid these issues.
%he focus of the feedback and the way errors were corrected highlights the fact that the teachers used
their knowledge of the students when responding to their written work and certainly did not respond
to te1ts in a /vacuum&. %he prompted section of the interview revealed many instances where the
feedback was individually tailored and based on the knowledge of the students& personality and needs,
their previous work as well as the wider learning conte1t. -ate directly stated that her feedback was
influenced by the individual student, stating!
In terms of what I put on here, it&s knowing the student and whether they&re capable of
working it out, whether they will make the effort to work it out, whether they&ll come and
ask me if they are not sure. Rou kind of have to get to know the students 9uite well.
Cdam also stated that he did Htry to tailor it to the student a bitI. Indeed, his knowledge of the student
and her previous work greatly influenced the feedback he gave. He stated that vocabulary was the
student&s strong point so when she made le1ical errors he felt Hwith her it was more a thing to point
outI. He also revealed that the student&s previous work reinforced his decision to highlight her
vocabulary issue. Eoe also used his knowledge of the student and her previous work when selecting
points to comment on. +or e1ample he decided to highlight some referencing issues because
Hcompared to her last essay, that&s not her voiceI.
%here was also a strong connection between what was taught in class and the written feedback, further
supporting Hyland & Hyland&s (200c$ findings. 2hen asked about the features she focussed her
feedback on -ate, for e1ample, revealed!
It depends on what we&ve been working on, you know if that week we&ve been
specifically looking at relative clauses then I say I&m e1pecting to see relative clauses.
46
Cnother key theme which emerged was the use of praise and criticism, and again this was strongly
based on knowledge of the writer. Cdam and -ate felt it was very important to provide both positive
and negative feedback. Cdam clearly stated HI like to make a point of balancing criticism and praiseI.
6oth however, felt it was particularly important to provide praise in order to increase student
confidence, and even reported giving praise when it was not truly deserved. Cdam talked of Hpraising
upI weaker students and acknowledged that his praise was sometimes Ha little bit e1aggeratedI. -ate
was similar stating!
I try not to have a huge long list of work on, which with one or two is a bit difficult so I
try to think of some more good things even if it&s not really that good because especially
at this stage in the course I want them to be feeling confident.
2hile praise was important, the prompted interview did reveal that Cdam gave less praise to stronger
students in order to Hmake sure they keep within the linesI and do not become Htoo confidentI.
8verall, the views of -ate and Cdam support the 9uestionnaire data. However, Eoe felt slightly
differently. He stated that he was a Hnegative markerI and believed Hit is not about being nice to
people, it is about improving their writingI. However, he was HhumanI and did hedge his comments a
great deal so as not to offend as well as to avoid appropriating students& work. +or e1ample he used a
9uestion mark to highlight a linguistic error yet when talking about the problem in the interview he
was more openly critical. He also discussed the lack of referencing and stated the student had clearly
Hlifted Pthe phraseQ from somewhereI. However, he clearly stated that he would not write Hyou&re a
plagiaristI but would instead be indirect and less critical writing H(an you please give the reference of
the source where you found this informationOI. -ate was also very careful in the way she phrased
negative feedback revealing!
I don&t put bad points because I think it sounds nicer to say work on, I put a little
e1clamation mark, I don&t want to put crosses because I think it looks too negative.
8ther studies (=.g. Hyland & Hyland, 200"$ have found that teachers praise their students fre9uently
and mitigate negative comments as a means of building confidence. %his certainly seems to be the
case here and all three teachers were very aware that overly negative feedback could have a
detrimental effect.
4.4. #tudents* interview results
Cll four of the students interviewed thought it was important to receive feedback on their written
work. %hey also confirmed that it was the norm for their teacher to provide feedback and that it was
usually a combination of teacher written feedback followed by oral conferences. %he students also
reported that peer feedback was used but to a slightly lesser degree.
47
8verall, the oral and written teacher feedback was well0received and students had a very positive
opinion of it. %hey particularly favoured the oral discussions and felt they were Hvery importantI.
Gayanna, for e1ample, stated!
2e need the discussion because sometimes I am a little confused about the PwrittenQ
feedback and I will ask him what&s the problem, why is this not right and he will tell me.
Cnd sometimes he will ask me why you write like this, what is your real ideaO
-ris felt the same way and believed the oral conferences allowed her to clarify points and He1plain her
thinkingI. %he students may have been slightly critical of the written feedback, however, they felt
written feedback was necessary and did not want to receive only oral feedback. 2hen asked directly
about this matter -ris stated HI think it&s better for him to write down on my paper or I won&t know
where the problem isI.
%he peer feedback>peer editing employed in this setting was also well0received in general and the
students felt it was /important& to receive feedback from their classmates. However, they seemed to
favour it as a supplementary form of feedback rather than as the sole source of feedback. Gayanna, for
e1ample, responded positively when asked about the importance of peer feedback. However, she
clearly stated that teacher feedback was /more important& than peer feedback. %his is not unusual,
indeed numerous studies have found that students value teacher feedback highly and favour it over
peer feedback (Hyland. +, ",,5* 7eki, ",,"* 3aito, ",,)$. +urthermore, it is often claimed that peer
feedback is problematic as students find it hard to identify problem areas, offer inaccurate or
misleading advice and find it difficult to 'udge the validity of their peers& comments (Horowit4, ",5*
7eki, ",,0$. %he students interviewed in this setting certainly found this to be the case. Cccording to
Gayanna Hmaybe a sentence is right and my classmates will make it terrible.I 6ill also acknowledged
the problems stating Hif I ask my students they, they are also students so sometimes they are very not
sure which is rightI. -ris, on the other hand, had a much more positive opinion of peer feedback. 3he
claimed that feedback from her peers was 'ust as important as feedback from her teacher. 2hen asked
directly which she valued more, -ris stated!
I don&t know because I think they are different ways to get the feedback. Aaybe our
teacher is more academic but my friends, they will give some more ideas about the topic
but not the =nglish itself.
Gegarding the focus of the teacher feedback, all students thought their teachers should address
structure>organisation. However, they also e1pressed a desire to receive feedback on linguistic
matters. Gayanna, for e1ample, stated that Hthe right grammar is importantI because Hif you have
language problems you will make the reader have some misunderstandingsI. 3he felt 9uite strongly
about having her language errors addressed, as did 6ill. %his is not unusual and research on student
preferences has consistently found that they e1pect teachers to comment on their errors and are
48
frustrated if teachers do not ((ohen & (avalcanti, ",,0* Hedgcock & 7efkowit4, ",,)* Hyland. +,
",,5* +erris & Goberts, 200"$.
-ris also felt that teacher feedback should focus on structure because academic writing is Hvery
differentI from other styles she was familiar with such as I=7%3 writing. 3he also felt it was
HimportantI to receive feedback on language, however, she did not feel as strongly about it as the
others. Cccording to -ris, feedback on language was not so important to her because Hsometimes we
can check that in the dictionary by ourselvesI whereas Hyou can&t find structures in PtheQ dictionaryI.
It was 9uite clear that the students wanted their teachers to comment on structure and language,
unfortunately, their feelings towards content and academic conventions were not so clear. %here was
no mention of receiving feedback on academic conventions in the four student interviews. 6ut this is
perhaps not surprising given that this aspect of writing had not yet featured in the course. %he students
did however, talk about feedback on content, although it did not feature in the discussion as much as
structure or language. 3o it appears they do want feedback from the teacher on content but prioritise
feedback on language and structure.
%he students were also clear about how their linguistic errors were corrected and how they wanted
their errors to be corrected. Cll students confirmed that a correction code was the norm and overall it
was well received. 2hen asked if they thought direct error correction would be more helpful most
students responded negatively. -ris, for e1ample, stated that direct correction was Hnot goodI because
if her teacher gave her the correct answer she Hwon&t check in the dictionariesI and therefore would
not improve. 7ewis also had 9uite negative opinions of direct error correction stating Hit&s easy but
maybe if I understand easily, maybe easy to forgetI. %he students also generally disliked the other
form of indirect feedback* the use of underlining or circling to highlight errors. %hey preferred instead
to receive Hmore specificI feedback. 7ewis for e1ample stated H/sp& is easy to understand, spelling
mistake, but if she put a 9uestion mark or like 'ust a line, maybe difficult to understandI.
6ill also liked the correction code but was not 9uite as negative about direct feedback. 8verall, he
wished to have his errors highlighted using the code but on the occasions when HI don&t know what&s
wrongI he wanted the teacher to Hgive the right answerI. Gayanna was different again* she strongly
disliked the correction code and talked openly about having issues remembering it. 3he e1pressed a
strong desire to have her errors corrected directly by the teacher because even when she did remember
the code she was often unable to use the clue to correct the errors herself. 3he stated HHow can I
change itO Aaybe ne1t time I will make the same mistake again. I usually write the same mistakeI.
2hen asked if there were any disadvantages to direct error correction, Gayanna did acknowledge the
benefits of indirect corrective feedback, however, she still wished to receive direct feedback stating
HAaybe I will forget Pdirect correctionsQ but maybe I won&t forget all of them. Aaybe I can remember
49
", 2 or . and I think that will improve my =nglishI. 3o the students had strong but 9uite different
opinions on how their errors should be corrected.
%hey had e9ually strong opinions about the comments but were largely in agreement. In general, all
four of the students appreciated the comments they received. %hey also appreciated that there was a
balance of praise and criticism and thought it was HimportantI to receive both positive and negative
feedback. %he students& 9uestionnaire results showed a slight preference for negative, critical
feedback* however the students interviewed e1pressed a desire to receive balanced feedback, stating
they found Hboth usefulI. -ris, for e1ample, stated that she liked to see positive feedback and that it
encouraged her, however, she also felt it was necessary to receive critical feedback Hbecause if I don&t
know where the problem is, I can&t improve myselfI. Hyland & Hyland (200c$ found that some
students really valued praise whereas others felt 9uit negatively about it, seeing it as /mere dressing&.
%he students interviewed in this study however, did not see praise as /mere dressing& and overall it
was very well received.
%he students were also largely in agreement over the use of grades. %he 9uestionnaire data and the
teachers& interview data suggested that teachers were providing grades>marks and that students wanted
to receive marks>grades for their writing. However, the students& interview data did not support this.
?one of the students interviewed e1pressed a desire to receive a mark>grade or stated that it would be
particularly helpful to them. 2hile most did not have strong opinions on the use of marks>grades, -ris
felt particularly strongly against the use of grades>marks. 3he reported that she Hdidn&t like marksI
and claimed that she would feel Hvery upsetI if she received Hbad marksI.
It has been suggested that students can find feedback confusing, that they misunderstand teacher
feedback, and even when they do fully comprehend it they may be unable to use the feedback in
subse9uent revisions (=.g. (onrad & ;olstein, ",,,* Hyland. +, ",,5$. %he 9uestionnaire data did not
support this assertion as nearly all students reported understanding all or most of the feedback they
received. %he interview data, however, told a slightly different story. In fact the prompted interviews
provided numerous e1amples where students failed to comprehend feedback points. 7ewis, for
e1ample, received a comment about his concluding sentence however he read it as /conducting
sentence& and was rather confused. %here were several misunderstandings in Gayanna&s prompted
interview as well. %he most obvious e1ample was when her teacher indicated a linguistic error by
writing /passive& but Gayanna took this to mean Hhe wants me to be more passive voice, to be more
ob'ectiveI. -ris also had instances where she /forgot& the meaning of comments.
%here were also numerous e1amples were students understood the feedback point but were unable to
correct it. Gayanna reported several times that she could not utilise the feedback and comments like
HI&m not sureI and HI don&t know how to change itI were fre9uent. %here were also times in 7ewis&
interview when he did not fully understand why a point had been highlighted and was unable to
50
correct it. %here were also instances when 7ewis thought he could correct a highlighted mistake but in
fact he could not. +or e1ample his teacher had indicated an article error and 7ewis claimed to be able
to self0correct it stating HI understand /the& is wrongI however, when asked what he would change it
to he said HPItQ is /I was university student&I. It was also interesting to note that Gayanna reported that
she generally understood and was able to utilise Hmaybe B0JI of the feedback despite fre9uently
stating that she did not understand and was unable to correct the errors. %his response is in line with
the 9uestionnaire results and suggests that while students are willing to admit they do not always
understand, the feedback they perceive understanding and what they actually understand may not be
the same.
-ris was slightly different, and while she did not comprehend all of the feedback, she understood the
vast ma'ority of it. It became apparent that she understood the feedback primarily because she had
discussed it in the oral feedback session. Gayanna, on the other hand, did not focus on the written
comments* she spent most of her oral conference HtalkPingQ about plagiarismI. 7ewis also clarified
feedback points with his teacher which seemed to help him. However, there were one or two ma'or
misunderstandings towards the end of his prompted interview which he revealed his teacher Hdidn&t
have enough time to e1plainI. %his suggests that oral conferences are a crucial part of the feedback
process, and while they do not eliminate misunderstandings and>or miscommunication, they seem to
reduce them significantly.
51
Chapter Five: Conclusions
(. Discussion
1. What methods do teachers use to give feedback on written compositions in a pre-sessional
university course setting? Why are such methods employed?
%he findings suggests teachers in this university setting felt feedback was a necessary part of the
writing process and they generally provided written feedback combined with oral conferences, and
these methods were supplemented with peer feedback. %he decision to provide feedback in this way
was a comple1 one and several factors influenced the teachers& feedback practices. %hese included
institutional recommendations, past e1perience of successful and unsuccessful feedback practice, but
above all student preferences. %he findings from the interview data strongly suggest that the teachers
themselves would have preferred to give slightly less teacher feedback, but they believed their
students wanted them to be the main provider and thus gave feedback accordingly.
In fact, the findings indicate the students& wishes and needs were central and greatly influenced what
teachers provided feedback on and the way in which they responded. Hyland & Hyland (200c$
highlighted the inter0personal nature of teacher written feedback and found teachers used information
about the writer to target feedback to the students& personality and specific needs. %he teachers in this
study did appear to consider their students and were not simply responding to a te1t in isolation. %he
teachers, for e1ample, provided a great deal of feedback on language (grammar, vocabulary and
sentence structure$. %he data suggests that they responded to linguistic matters not because it is
relatively /safe& and within their domain of e1pertise, but rather because their students struggled with
this aspect of their writing and wanted their language issues to be addressed. However, while the
teachers were responding to the real needs and wishes of their students, they appeared to be slightly
uncomfortable with this focus on surface0level errors. %his /uneasy& focus on language is not
uncommon* studies by 7ee (2005$, 7eki (",,"$ and Aontgomery & 6aker (200B$ also suggest this.
;iven that the importance of /language& has varied greatly over the years, with product, process and
genre approaches viewing its significance differently, as well as the inconclusive nature of error
correction studies, it is perhaps not surprising that teachers are wary.
%he way language errors were addressed also seemed to be influenced by the student. 2hile this may
not necessarily have been shaped by student preferences, the teachers appeared to use their knowledge
of the writer, particularly their ability level, when correcting surface0level errors. 3tudies by (ohen
and (avalcanti (",,0$ and +erris et al (",,B$ found that teachers varied their feedback according to
the proficiency level of the student and this certainly seems to be the case in this setting. Cdam, for
52
e1ample, used one form of indirect corrective feedback for /stronger& students and another for
/weaker& students. -ate also used her knowledge of the students& level, using indirect correction when
she believed the students had the ability to self0correct and direct correction when she felt the
individual would be unable to correct it themselves.
%he wider feedback practices also show the teachers considered the writer as much as the te1t when
responding. %he teachers, for e1ample, used their knowledge of the individual students& general
strengths and weaknesses when providing feedback and considered the students& previous work when
selecting points to comment on. %his /personal& aspect was also evident when one looks at the
phrasing of the commentary. %he teachers were, to use Eoe&s words /human&, and were very aware that
their comments could have a significant impact on the writer. %hus, they made an effort to provide
positive feedback and>or mitigate or hedge any negative, critical feedback in order to manage learner
confidence and avoid upsetting their students.
2. How is this feedback received? What are students attitudes towards this feedback? What
preferences might they have?
%he findings show that students in this setting appreciated feedback from their peers, however, they
appeared to place a higher value on feedback from the teacher. %he findings also strongly suggest that
this teacher feedback was well0received by the students in this study and overall they appeared to be
receiving the kind of feedback they deemed helpful. It is arguable that this /match& is due to the fact
that the teacher considered the student and made use of what they knew of the writer when providing
feedback. %he fact that the students particularly favoured oral feedback discussions, a method closely
linked to more /targeted, individualised feedback& (2eissberg, 200$, certainly suggests the students
in this setting favoured a /tailored& approach.
%he findings certainly indicate that overall the students felt their needs were being met regarding the
focus of the feedback they received. Indeed, they were happy to receive significant amounts of
feedback on their surface0level errors, as many found e1pressing their ideas accurately particularly
problematic. However, the students& views did vary slightly. 3ome has strong feelings and wanted all
their surface errors corrected, while others wanted the teachers to focus more on vocabulary rather
than the minor grammatical /slips& that students could correct or /check in the dictionary& by
themselves.
%he students also had 9uite strong opinions about how they wanted their linguistic errors to be
corrected. %hey were however, rather more divided on this issue. -ris, for e1ample, favoured the use
of a correction code, whereas Gayanna strongly disliked this indirect form of error correction,
53
preferring instead to have her errors corrected directly by the teacher. 6ill was different again and
e1pressed a desire to receive both direct and indirect corrective feedback.
%he students in this setting did however appear to have similar opinions on the other indirect form of
feedback* the use of underlining>circling, and overall they were 9uite negative. %here is no evidence
to suggest this method is less effective. Indeed a study by +erris & Goberts (200"$ found that both
methods led to improvements in subse9uent revisions and that there was no statistically significant
difference between the two forms of indirect corrective feedback. ?evertheless, the students in this
setting appeared to find it unhelpful and e1pressed a desire to receive /more specific& forms of
feedback.
%hey were also largely in agreement over the use of criticism and praise. 8verall, the students
appreciated the teachers use of positive feedback and it was generally well received. 8ther feedback
studies have suggested that students can have a very negative view of praise and that it can /cloud
issues& (=.g. Hyland. +, ",,5* Hyland & Hyland, 200"* 7eki, 200$. %he students in this setting
however, did not appear to see praise as /mere dressing& and did not view it as /insincere& or
/worthless&. %here was also no evidence to indicate the students misunderstood or misinterpreted the
positive feedback. %he data does in fact suggest that the students in this university setting saw positive
feedback largely for what the teachers intended it to be* a way of boosting their confidence, and they
welcomed it.
8verall the students in this setting were generally satisfied with the /personalised& feedback they
received and there were only one or two issues where students& needs were not fully being met.
However, while the feedback was well0received in terms of student satisfaction, it was not always
well0received in terms of clarity and student comprehension. %he feedback literature has at times been
9uite critical of teacher written feedback (=.g. %ruscott, ",,* @amel, ",5#$ and it has been suggested
that students misunderstand teacher feedback, are confused by it and are often unable to utilise it (=.g.
(onrad & ;oldstein, ",,,* Hyland. +, ",,5$. %he findings of this study certainly seem to support
these negative assertions. In fact the prompted interviews revealed that the written feedback provided
was not always clear and the students were at times unable to read it. %hey also misunderstood on
occasion and were fre9uently unable to utilise the feedback. %he oral conferences did appear to help
greatly as students were able to clarify points and seek further guidance from the teacher when
necessary, but they did not eliminate all issues and the students were still unable to comprehend and
utilise various feedback points.
54
(.1. ,onclusion
%eachers devote a great deal of time and energy to providing feedback on students& written work.
However, it has been suggested that teachers may not be using their time effectively as the feedback
they provide may be unclear, unhelpful and unwanted by the learners themselves ((ohen &
(avalcanti, ",,0* +erris, ",,#* Hyland. +, ",,5$. %his study aimed to shed light on this issue and it
was hoped that e1amining what teachers do and why, and how students interpret, comprehend and
respond to the feedback, would enable teachers, like me, to give more effective feedback in the future.
Interestingly, this study did not corroborate (ohen & (avalcanti (",,0$ and +. Hyland&s (",,5$
assertions and overall there was no /mismatch& between the feedback teachers gave and feedback
students wished to receive. %he students and teachers in this setting had very similar views on
feedback and overall the teachers appeared to be providing students with the feedback they perceived
to be helpful. +or e1ample, both were 9uite negative about teacher written feedback. %here were
certainly instances of inconsistent, illegible and vague commentary and there were numerous
occasions when the students were unable to utilise the feedback. 6oth the teachers and the students in
this study were very aware of the negative aspects of teacher written feedback, however, despite the
problems, both felt it was an important and necessary part of the feedback process.
%he students and teachers were also largely in agreement on other aspects of the feedback process
such as the importance of praise and the aspects of writing which should be focussed on. %he fact that
the feedback was /tailored& somewhat to the individual student could certainly account for this match.
Indeed Hyland & Hyland (200c! 22.$ have concluded that feedback can only be effective if it
engages with the writer and have suggested that teachers should /keep the individual student in mind
at all times when responding to writing&. %his seems to be a wise suggestion as using knowledge of
the student to tailor feedback to their personality and specific needs appeared to be a successful
approach in this setting in that it produced feedback that met the needs of the student.
However, it does seem the feedback in this setting was not completely /targeted& and /individualised&
as there were one or two aspects of written feedback where students& needs were not being fully met.
%he students had 9uite strong opinions on these matters, unfortunately, their teachers were largely
unaware of the gap. %hese issues were generally language based, for e1ample, the students did not
always appreciate how the teacher went about selecting errors to comment on and>or how the errors
were corrected. %his indicates these surface0level issues are particularly individualised and the
feedback students want from their teachers on such matters may vary considerably.
55
(.2. Im!lications for teaching
%his study is small in scale and one would not wish to suggest the findings are generalisable* however
it raises some interesting issues and highlights some of the problems inherent in the feedback process
which teachers in other similar settings may wish to consider.
+irstly, the students& wishes and needs were central and greatly influenced what teachers provided
feedback on and the way in which they responded in this setting. Hyland & Hyland (200c$ have
claimed that feedback can only be effective if it gives the writer a sense that it is a response to a
person rather than to a te1t and the students in this setting responded favourably to this approach.
3tudents certainly have their own aims and concerns and it is important that teachers seek to discover
these and where possible address them in our feedback. 8ne way this could be done is through face0
to0face discussions, ideally held in the early stages of a course. %eachers could use this time to talk in
detail about feedback issues in order to gain an awareness of the students& perspective and their
individual aims and e1pectations with regard to feedback. %eachers would then have the necessary
information to provide truly /individualised& feedback.
%he negative aspects of teacher written feedback were also highlighted by this study. @amel (",5#$
was one of the first to reveal the problematic nature of teacher written feedback in the ",50s and this
study suggests that it remains a cause for concern. %his does not necessarily mean the practice should
be abandoned, indeed this study suggests 9uite the opposite, however, we teachers must pay close
attention and monitor our written feedback so that it is consistent, clear and helpful. It is also
important to allocate time for oral conferences. +. Hyland (2000$ concluded that clear and full
communication was an essential ingredient for effective feedback and that this was best achieved on a
one0to0one basis. 8ral conferences certainly seemed to be effective and highly valued by both the
students and the teachers in this setting. %he oral feedback sessions appeared to mitigate the negative
aspects of teacher written feedback, allowing students to seek guidance and clarify any issues arising
from the written feedback and they enabled teachers to provide more targeted feedback.
(.3. )imitations&-reas for future research
Cs discussed earlier, time constraints and access to participants had a significant impact on this study.
It was a particularly busy time for the department so access to participants from the sample population
was always going to be limited and sub'ect to last minute change. However, the course co0ordinator
(my contact person$ fell ill shortly before the start of the course, and this unforeseen factor put
increased pressure on staff and effectively meant that only "" out of the 2) classes on pre0sessional
course C could be included in this study. It was therefore 9uite a small scale study and I cannot claim
56
that it reflects the attitudes and opinions of all students in this setting. %he small scale nature of the
study also has implications for generalisability in wider =+7>=37 writing conte1ts.
It must also be noted that this study dealt largely with perceptions of teacher feedback and did not
seek to e1amine whether the feedback given>received was particularly effective and actually led to
improvements in students& writing. +erris (",,,, 2002$ believes it is important for teachers to give
students the type of feedback they want. 3he believes a mismatch between the feedback teachers
provide and the feedback students want can have a detrimental effect on their writing. However,
%ruscott (",,$ has claimed that simply because students and>or teachers believe a particular feedback
practice is helpful does not necessarily mean it is. It would certainly be interesting to investigate the
issue further to discover if the feedback students and teachers perceive being helpful does actually
lead to improvements in subse9uent revisions.
Cnother issue which came to light in this study was the importance of oral conferencing. %his was
however, again based largely on the participants impressions of, and attitudes towards oral feedback
discussions and this study does not provide direct evidence of its efficacy in helping =37>=+7
students become better writers. %he area of oral conferencing certainly needs further investigation as
we know relatively little about what happens during such discussions and while previous research and
practice suggest that they play an important role and help students improve their writing (=.g. (onrad
& ;oldstein, ",,0* 2eissberg, 200$, direct, empirical evidence of their efficacy is lacking.

57
.eferences
Cshwell, % 2000. /<atterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple0draft composition
classroom! Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best methodO& .ournal of 'econd
$anguage Writing% ,/ 22BS2#5.
6elcher, D ",,,. /Cuthentic interaction in a virtual classroom! 7evelling the playing field in a
graduate seminar.& !omputers and !omposition% "! 2#.02B.
6itchener, E 2005. /=vidence in support of written corrective feedback.& .ournal of 'econd $anguage
Writing% "B! "020""5.
6itchener, E & -noch, : 2005, /%he value of written corrective feedback for migrant and
international students.& $anguage eaching 0esearch% "2! )0,0."
6itchener, E , Roung, 3, & (ameron, D 200#, /%he effect of different types of corrective feedback on
=37 student writing.& .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing% ,! 22B02#5
6raine, ; ",,B. /6eyond word processing! ?etworked computers in =37 writing classes. !omputers
and !omposition% ")! )#0#5.
6rown, E. D 200". 1sing 'urveys in $anguage 2rograms. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress.
(asanave, (.< 200). !ontroversies in 'econd $anguage Writing/ 3ilemmas and 3ecisions in
0esearch and )nstruction. Cnn Crbor! :niversity of Aichigan <ress.
(handler, E 200.. /%he efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy
and fluency of 72 student writing.& .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing% "2/ 2BS2,.
(ohen, C.D & (avalcanti, A.( ",,0. /+eedback on compositions! %eacher and student verbal reports&
in -roll, 6 (=d.$ ",,0. 'econd $anguage Writing/ 0esearch )nsights for the !lassroom. (ambridge!
(ambridge :niversity <ress, "##0"BB.
(ohen, 7, Aanion, 7 & Aorrison, - 200B, 0esearch 4ethods in 5ducation 6
th
5dition. 7ondon!
Goutledge.
(onrad, 3 & ;oldstein, 7 ",,,. /=37 student revision after teacher written comments! %e1ts, conte1ts
and individuals&. .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing% 5 ! ")B0"50.
Dornyei, @ 200.. 7uestionnaires in 'econd $anguage 0esearch/ !onstruction% "dministration and
2rocessing. Aahwah, ?E! 7awrence =rlbaum Cssociates.
=llis, G 200,. /C typology of written corrective feedback types&. 5$ .ournal% .! ,B0"0B.
=llis, G, 3heen, R, Aurakami, A & %akashima, H 2005. /%he effects of focussed and unfocussed
written corrective feedback in =nglish as a foreign language conte1t.& 'ystem% .! .#.0.B".
=nginarlar, H ",,.. /3tudent response to teacher feedback in =+7 writing&. 'ystem% 2"! ",.020).
+athman, C.- & 2halley, = ",,0. /%eacher response to students& writing! +ocus on form versus
content& in -roll, 6 (=d.$ ",,0. 'econd $anguage Writing/ 0esearch )nsights for the !lassroom.
(ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, "BB0",0.
58
+erris, D.G ",,#. /3tudent reaction to teacher response in multiple0draft composition classrooms&.
5'8$ 7uarterly% 2,! ..0#..
+erris, D. G ",,B. /%he influence of teacher commentary on student revision&. 5'8$ 7uarterly, ."!
."#S..,.
+erris, D. G ",,,. /%he case for grammar correction in 72 writing classes! C response to %ruscott
(",,$.& .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing% 5!"0"".
+erris, D. G 2002. reatment of 5rror in 'econd $anguage 'tudent Writing. Cnn Crbor! :niversity of
Aichigan <ress.
+erris, D. G 200.. /Gesponding to 2riting& in -roll, 6 (=d.$ 200.. 59ploring the 3ynamics of 'econd
$anguage Writing. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, "",0")0.
+erris, D.G 200). /%he /grammar correction& debate in 72 writing! 2here are we, and where do we go
from hereO (and what do we do in the meantime...O$&. .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing, ".! ),02.
+erris, D. G 200. /Does error feedback help student writersO ?ew evidence on the short0term and
long0term effects of written error correction&, in Hyland, - & Hyland + (=ds.$ 200. :eedback in
'econd $anguage Writing/ !onte9ts and )ssues. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, 5"0"0).
+erris, D. G, <e4one, 3, %ade, (. G. & %inti, 3 ",,B. /%eacher commentary on student writing!
descriptions and implications&. .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing, ! "##0"52.
+erris, D & Goberts, 6 200". /=rror feedback in 72 writing classes! How e1plicit does it need to beO&
.ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing% "0! ""0"5).
;ass, 3.A & Aackey, C 2000. 'timulated 0ecall 4ethodology in 'econd $anguage 0esearch.
Aahwah, ?E! 7awrence =rlbaum Cssociates.
;illham, 6 2000. 3eveloping a 7uestionnaire. 7ondon! (ontinuum
;olstein, 7 200". /+or -yla! 2hat does the research say about responding to =37 writers& in 3ilva, %
& Aatsuda, <.- (=ds.$ 200". 8n 'econd $anguage Writing. Aahwah, ?E! 7awrence =rlbaum
Cssociates, B.0,0.
;oldstein, 7 200. /+eedback and revision in second language writing! conte1tual, teacher and
students variables& in Hyland, - & Hyland + (=ds.$ 200. :eedback in 'econd $anguage Writing/
!onte9ts and )ssues. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, "5#020#.
;oldstein, 7 & (onrad, 3 ",,0. Input and the negotiation of meaning in =37 writing conferences.&
5'8$ 7uarterly% 2)! )).0)0.
;uenette, D 200B. /Is feedback pedagogically correctO Gesearch design issues in studies of feedback
on writing&. .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing, "! )0S#..
Hedgcock, E & 7efkowit4, ? ",,. /3ome input on input! %wo analyses of student response to e1pert
feedback in 72 writing&. he 4odern $anguage .ournal, 50! 25BS.05.
Hillocks, E.G ",5. 0esearch on Written !ompositions/ ;ew 3irections for eaching. :rbana, I7!
=GI( (learinghouse on Geading and (ommunication 3kills.
Horowit4, D ",5.&<rocess not product! less than meets the eye&. 5'8$ 7uarterly% 20! ")"0")).
59
Hyland, + ",,5. /%he impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers.& .ournal of 'econd
$anguage Writing% B! 2##025.
Hyland, + 2000. /=37 writers and feedback! ;iving more autonomy to students.& $anguage eaching
0esearch% )! ..0#).
Hyland, + & Hyland, - 200". /3ugaring the pill! <raise and criticism in written feedback.& .ournal of
'econd $anguage Writing% "0! "5#02"2.
Hyland, - 200.. 'econd $anguage Writing. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress.
Hyland, - & Hyland, + 200a. /+eedback on second language students& writing.& $anguage eaching%
.,! 5.0"0".
Hyland, - & Hyland + (=ds.$ 200b. :eedback in 'econd $anguage Writing/ !onte9ts and )ssues.
(ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress.
Hyland, - & Hyland, + 200c. /Interpersonal aspects of response! (onstructing and interpreting
teacher written feedback& in Hyland, - & Hyland + (=ds.$ 200. :eedback in 'econd $anguage
Writing/ !onte9ts and )ssues. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, 20022).
-epner, (. ; ",,". /Cn e1periment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the
development of writing skills.& 4odern $anguage .ournal , B#! .0#S."..
-roll, 6 (=d.$ ",,0. 'econd $anguage Writing/ 0esearch )nsights for the !lassroom. (ambridge!
(ambridge :niversity <ress.
-roll, 6 (=d.$ 200.. 59ploring the 3ynamics of 'econd $anguage Writing. (ambridge! (ambridge
:niversity <ress.
7alande, E ",52, /Geducing composition error! Cn e1periment.& 4odern $anguage .ournal% ! ")0S
"),.
7ee, I 200#. /=rror correction in the 72 writing classroom! 2hat do students thinkO& 5'$ !anada
.ournal% 22!"0".
7ee, I 2005. /3tudent reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong -ong secondary classrooms.&
.ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing% "B! "))0").
7eki, I ",,0. /(oaching from the margins! Issues in written response& in -roll, 6 (=d.$ ",,0. 'econd
$anguage Writing/ 0esearch )nsights for the !lassroom. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, #B0
5.
7eki, I ",,". /%he preferences of =37 students for error correction in college0level writing classes&.
:oreign $anguage "nnals, 2)! 20.S2"5.
7eki, I ",,2. 1nderstanding 5'$ Writers/ " #uide for eachers. <ortsmouth, ?H! 6oynton>(ook
<ublishers.
7eki, I 200. / HRou cannot ignoreI! 72 graduate students& response to discipline0based written
feedback& in Hyland, - & Hyland + (=ds.$ 200. :eedback in 'econd $anguage Writing/ !onte9ts
and )ssues. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, 2025#.
7incoln, R.3 & ;uba, =.; ",5#. ;aturalistic 5n+uiry. 6everly Hills, (C! 3age.
60
Aackey, C & ;ass, 3.A 200#. 'econd $anguage 0esearch/ 4ethodology and 3esign. Aahwah, ?E!
7awrence =rlbaum Cssociates.
AcDonough, E & AcDonough, 3 ",,B. 0esearch 4ethods for 5nglish $anguage eachers. 7ondon!
Crnold.
Aendonca, (.8 & Eohnson, -.= ",,). /<eer review negotiations! Gevision activities in =37 writing
instruction.& 5'8$ 7uarterly% 25! B)#0B,.
Ailton, E 200. /Gesource0rich 2eb0based feedback& in Hyland, - & Hyland + (=ds.$ 200. :eedback
in 'econd $anguage Writing/ !onte9ts and )ssues. (ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, "2.0".,.
Aontgomery, E.7 & 6aker, 2 200B. /%eacher written feedback! 3tudent perception, teacher self0
assessment, and actual teacher performance.& .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing% "! 520,,.
?elson, ; & (arson, E 200. /(ultural issues in peer response! Gevisiting /culture&& in Hyland, - &
Hyland + (=ds.$ 200. :eedback in 'econd $anguage Writing/ !onte9ts and )ssues. (ambridge!
(ambridge :niversity <ress, )20#,.
<aulus, %.A ",,,. /%he effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing&. .ournal of 'econd
$anguage Writing% 5! 2#025,.
Geid, E ",,). /Gesponding to =37 students& te1ts! %he myths of appropriation&. 5'8$ 7uarterly% 25!
2B.02,).
Gobb, %, Goss, 3, & 3hortreed, I ",5. /3alience of feedback on error and its effect on =+7 writing
9uality.& 5'8$ 7uarterly% 20/ 5.S,..
3aito, H ",,). /%eachers& practices and students& preferences for feedback on second language
writing! C case study of adult =37 learners. 5'$ !anada .ournal% ""! )0B0.
3emke, H.D ",5). /=ffects of the red pen.& :oreign $anguage "nnals% "B! ",#0202.
3heen, R 200B. /%he effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on =37
learners& ac9uisition of articles.& 5'8$ 7uarterly% Fol. )"! 2##025..
3heppard, - ",,2. /%wo feedback types! Do they make a differenceO& 05$! .ournal% 2.! "0.0""0.
3ilva, % ",,0. /3econd language composition instruction! Development, issues, and directions in =37&
in -roll, 6 (=d.$ ",,0. 'econd $anguage Writing/ 0esearch )nsights for the !lassroom. (ambridge!
(ambridge :niversity <ress, ""02..
3ilva, % ",,.. /%oward an understanding of the distinct nature of 72 writing! %he =37 research and its
implications.& 5'8$ 7uarterly% 25! #B0BB
3ilva, % & Aatsuda, <.- (=ds.$ 200". 8n 'econd $anguage Writing. Aahwah, ?E! 7awrence
=rlbaum Cssociates.
%ruscott, E ",,. /%he case against grammar correction in 72 writing classes.& $anguage $earning%
)/ .2BS.,.
%ruscott, E ",,,. /%he case for H%he (ase Cgainst ;rammar (orrection in 72 2riting (lassesI! C
response to +erris.& .ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing, 5! """0"22
61
%ruscott, E 200). /=vidence and con'ecture on the effects of correction! C response to (handler.&
.ournal of 'econd $anguage Writing, ".! ..BS.)..
2arschauer, A 2002. /?etworking into academic discourse.& .ournal of 5nglish for "cademic
2urposes% ", )#0#5
2eissberg, G 200. /3caffolded feedback! %utorial conversations with advanced 72 writers& in
Hyland, - & Hyland + (=ds.$ 200. :eedback in 'econd $anguage Writing/ !onte9ts and )ssues.
(ambridge! (ambridge :niversity <ress, 2)02#.
@amel, F ",5#. /Gesponding to student writing.& 5'8$ 7uarterly% ",! B,0"0".
62
1ppen(i7 1
5niversity o# :out%ampton ;orre!tion ;o(e
5niversity o# :out%ampton <ar*in, :!%eme
63
64
65
66
67
1ppen(i7 6
$ea!%ers= Questionnaire
:tu(ents= Questionnaire
$ea!%ers= Intervie" .roto!ol
:tu(ents= Intervie" .roto!ol
;onsent 'orm >sample?
'ee()a!* :amples >1363;?
68
Teacher Questionnaire
1. How many hours per week do you normally spend teaching academic writing? (Please
tick only one answer)
1-3 hours 4-6 hours -! hours "1# hours
$. %o you &eel this is an appropriate amount o& time? (Please tick only one answer)
'es
(o-would like to spend more time on writing
(o-would like to spend less time on writing
3. )hat is the *iggest challenge you &ace when it comes to teaching academic writing?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4. How important is it &or teachers to pro,ide &eed*ack on students- writing? (Please tick only
one)
.ery important
/mportant
0uite important
69
/ am an 12 student in,estigating the teaching of EFL writing with a focus on feedback and would *e
e3tremely grate&ul i& you could help me *y completing this 4uestionnaire.
5he 4uestionnaire should take around 1# minutes to complete. /t is totally anonymous and the
in&ormation pro,ided will only *e used in my research pro6ect.
Please read the 4uestions care&ully and complete them as indicated. 'our answers should *e *ased on
your e3perience o& teaching writing and gi,ing &eed*ack on pre-sessional courses here at the 7ni,ersity
o& 8outhampton.
Please answer the 4uestions honestly to help me gain an accurate picture o& teachers- practices and
opinions on 9:; writing and &eed*ack.
/& you ha,e any 4uestions a*out this 4uestionnaire or the study in general< please &eel &ree to contact me
*y e-mail. 1y e-mail address is jo4g09@soton.ac.uk.
5hank you ,ery much &or your help.
(ot really important
(ot important at all
=. How o&ten do you pro,ide &eed*ack on the written work gi,en to you *y your students?
(Please tick only one answer)
2lways
1ost o& the time
8ometimes
>arely
(e,er
6. )hat methods do you usually use to pro,ide &eed*ack? (Please rank in order< 1? method
most o&ten used< =?method least o&ten used)
+++++++ 5eacher written &eed*ack
+++++++ Peer &eed*ack
+++++++ @ral student-teacher con&erences (during timeta*led classes)
+++++++ @ral student-teacher con&erences (outside timeta*led classes)
+++++++ 9lectronic &eed*ack (9.g. ,ia e-mail)
. )hat aspects o& writing do you pro,ide &eed*ack on? (Please rank in order< 1? Most
&eed*ack on this aspect< 4? Least &eed*ack on this aspect)
+++++++ AontentBideas
+++++++ @rganisation (9.g. paragraphing< links *etween ideas)
+++++++ ;anguage (9.g. grammar< ,oca*ulary< sentence patterns)
+++++++ 2cademic con,entions (9.g. plagiarism< re&erencing)
C. )hat type o& &eed*ack do you usually gi,e? (Please tick only one answer)
@nly gradesBmarks
@nly error correction
@nly written comments
DradeBmark and error correction
DradeBmark and written comments
9rror correction and written comments
DradeBmark< error correction and written comments
(one o& the a*o,e
!. /& you correct language errors< do you usually (Please tick only one answer)
Aorrect all errors
@nly correct errors that impede comprehension
@nly correct &re4uently occurring errors
@nly correct errors you &eel the student can sel&-correct
@nly correct errors the student has asked you to &ocus on
@ther (please speci&y) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
70
1#. How do you usually correct language errors? (Please tick only one answer)
Pro,ide the correct answer
7nderlineBcircle errors
7se a correction code
@ther (please speci&y) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
11. How important is it to pro,ide positi,e &eed*ack? (Please tick only one answer)
.ery important
/mportant
0uite important
(ot really important
(ot important at all
1$. How important is it to pro,ide negati,e &eed*ack? (Please tick only one answer)
.ery important
/mportant
0uite important
(ot really important
(ot important at all
13. 5hinking a*out your normal &eed*ack practices. )hy do you gi,e this type o& &eed*ack?
(Please tick only one answer)
:ollowing institutional guidelines
93perience-worked well in the past
>ecommended *y other teacher(s)
5ime pressures
>e4uested *y the studentBclass
@ther (please speci&y) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
14. %o you &eel you gi,e the *est possi*le &eed*ack? (Please tick only one answer)
'es< always
1ost o& the time
8ometimes
>arely
(o< ne,er
1=. %o you &eel the amount o& time you spend gi,ing written &eed*ack is appropriate?
(Please tick only one answer)
'es< it-s appropriate (o< it takes up too much time (o< should spend more time
71
16. @,erall< is pro,iding &eed*ack on students- writing an e&&ecti,e practice? (Please tick only
one)
'es< ,ery e&&ecti,e
'es< e&&ecti,e
(either e&&ecti,e or ine&&ecti,e
(o< it is not e&&ecti,e
(o< it is a waste o& time
1. /n general< do you &eel students ,alue the &eed*ack they recei,e? (Please tick only one
answer)
'es< they highly ,alue it
'es< they ,alue it
(eutral
(o< they don-t ,alue it
(o< they don-t ,alue it at all
1C. )hat do you hope your &eed*ack will achie,e?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
/s there anything you would like to add?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated
72
Student Questionnaire
1. %o you think academic writing is important? (Please tick only one answer)
'es< ,ery important
'es< it is important
(o more important than other skills (9.g. reading< listening)
(o< it is not important
(o< other skills are much more important
$. %o you &eel an appropriate amount o& class time is gi,en to writing? (Please tick only one)
'es
(o-would like to spend more time on writing
(o-would like to spend less time on writing
3. )hat aspect o& academic writing do you &ind most di&&icult? (Please tick only one)
;anguage (Drammar< ,oca*ulary< spelling)
AontentBideas
@rganisationBstructure
@ther (please speci&y) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4. )hat type o& &eed*ack do you usually recei,e on your writing? (Please tick only one)
)ritten &eed*ack &rom the teacher
:eed*ack &rom your peersBclassmates
9lectronic &eed*ack &rom the teacher (9.g. *y e-mail)
5eacher-student discussions
/ don-t recei,e any &eed*ack
@ther (please speci&y) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Continued on back
73
/ am an 12 student in,estigating the teaching of EFL writing with a focus on feedback and would *e
e3tremely grate&ul i& you could help me *y completing this 4uestionnaire.
5he 4uestionnaire should take around $# minutes to complete. /t is not a test so there are no Eright- or Ewrong-
answers. / am interested in your personal opinions. 5he 4uestionnaire is also completely anonymous and will not
*e shown to your teachers.
Please read the 4uestions care&ully and complete them as indicated< and please answer as honestly as you can.
'our answers should *e a*out the teaching o& writing and &eed*ack gi,en to you during the pre-sessional courses
here at the 7ni,ersity o& 8outhampton.
/& you ha,e any 4uestions a*out this 4uestionnaire or the study in general< please &eel &ree to contact me *y e-
mail. 1y e-mail address is jo4g09@soton.ac.uk.
5hank you ,ery much &or your help
=. How important is it &or teachers to pro,ide &eed*ack on students- writing? (Please tick only
one answer)
.ery important
/mportant
0uite important
(ot really important
(ot important at all
6. How o&ten does your teacher pro,ide &eed*ack on your writing? (Please tick only one)
2lways
1ost o& the time
8ometimes
>arely
(e,er
. How important is it &or teachers to pro,ide positive &eed*ack? (Please tick only one)
.ery important
/mportant
0uite important
(ot really important
(ot important at all
C. How important is it &or teachers to pro,ide negative &eed*ack? (Please tick only one)
.ery important
/mportant
0uite important
(ot really important
(ot important at all
!. )hat area does your teacher pro,ide the most &eed*ack on? (Please rank in order<
1?Most &eed*ack< 4? Least &eed*ack)
++++++ AontentBideas
++++++ @rganisation (9.g. paragraphing< links *etween ideas)
++++++ ;anguage (9.g. grammar< ,oca*ulary< sentence patterns)
++++++ 2cademic con,entions (9.g. re&erencing< plagiarism< use o& e,idence)
1#. )hat type o& &eed*ack does your teacher usually gi,e? (Please tick only one)
@nly gradesBmarks
@nly error correction
@nly written comments
DradeBmark and error correction
DradeBmark and written comments
9rror correction and written comments
DradeBmark< error correction and written comments
(one o& the a*o,e
11. /& your teacher corrects your language errors< does heBshe (Please tick only one)
74
Aorrect all errors
@nly correct signi&icant errors
@nly correct errors you make o&ten
@nly correct smallBsimple errors
@nly correct errors that you ha,e asked himBher to correct
7nsure
@ther (please speci&y) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1$. How are your language errors usually corrected? (Please tick only one)
5he teacher corrects my errors &or me
5he teacher underlines or circles my mistakes
5he teacher uses a code (9.g. Dr?grammar< 8p?spelling)
@ther (please speci&y) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
13. /s the &eed*ack you are gi,en easy to understand? (Please tick only one)
2lways
7sually
8ometimes
>arely
(e,er
14. Aan you correct the language errors using the &eed*ack you are gi,en? (Please tick only
one)
'es< / can correct all the errors
/ can usually correct the errors
/ can sometimes correct the errors
/ can rarely correct the errors
/ can ne,er correct the errors
1=. %o you think &eed*ack &rom your teacher helps you *ecome a *etter writer? (Please tick
only one)
'es (o 7nsure
16. )hat ha,e you learnt &rom the &eed*ack on your writing?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Continued on back
75

1. @,erall< are you satis&ied with the &eed*ack you recei,e on your written work? (Please
tick only one)
'es (o %on-t know
1C. )hat aspects o& the &eed*ack are you particularly happy with?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1!. )hat aspects o& the &eed*ack are you less happy a*out?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
$#. )hat type o& &eed*ack would you like to recei,e more in the &uture?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
$1. )hat type o& &eed*ack would you like to recei,e less in the &uture?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
/s there anything else you would like to add?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you very much for your time
76
Interview 2uestions3 Teachers
1? ;an you tell me a little a)out yoursel#@
&%at are you tea!%in, at t%e moment@
Is t%is t%e Arst time you %ave tau,%t t%is !ourse@
Bo" (oes it !ompare "it% previous !ourses you %ave tau,%t@
6? Bo" "oul( you normally ,o a)out tea!%in, a!a(emi! "ritin,@
;oul( you (es!ri)e a typi!al "ritin, lesson@
4o you enCoy tea!%in, "ritin,@
&%at are some o# t%e !%allen,es you #a!e "%en it !omes to t%e tea!%in, o#
a!a(emi! "ritin,@
&%at (o you t%in* your stu(ents An( parti!ularly !%allen,in,@
In an i(eal "orl( %o" "oul( you tea!% a!a(emi! "ritin,@
;? 4o you al"ays provi(e #ee()a!* on your stu(ents "ritin,@ &%y@
In ,eneral3 (o you t%in* t%e #ee()a!* you provi(e %elps stu(ents@ &%y@ In
"%at "ays@
Bo" (o you usually ,ive #ee()a!* to your stu(ents@
&%y (o you !%oose to ,ive #ee()a!* in t%is "ay@
4o you t%in* it=s important #or stu(ents to provi(e #ee()a!* on ea!% ot%er=s
"ritin,@
4o you use peer #ee()a!*/e(itin, o#ten in your !lasses@
Bave you ever ,iven ele!troni! #ee()a!*@
4o you #o!us your #ee()a!* on any parti!ular aspe!ts o# "ritin,@ &%y@
4? Doo* at spe!iA! "ritin,/#ee()a!*
$ell me a)out t%is tas*@
;an you tal* me t%rou,% t%e #ee()a!* you provi(e( on t%is parti!ular pie!e o#
"or*@
4i( you !orre!t all lan,ua,e errors %ere@ 4o you normally@
4o you !orre!t all stu(ents "or* in t%e same "ay@ &%y/"%y not@
4o you al"ays "rite !omments@
4o you ever/usually ,ive a ,ra(e/mar*@ &%y/"%y not@
+verall3 "%at (o you %ope t%is #ee()a!* "ill a!%ieve@
-? 4o you %ave anyt%in, else you "oul( li*e to a((@
1re t%ere any 9uestions you #eel I s%oul( %ave as*e(@
4o you %ave any 9uestions #or me@
77
Interview 2uestions3Students
1? ;an you tell me a little a)out yoursel#@
Is t%is t%e Arst a!a(emi! -n,lis% pro,ramme you %ave atten(e(@
&%at (o you t%in* o# t%e university an( t%e !ourse so #ar@
6? 4o you t%in* a!a(emi! "ritin, is important@ &%y@
4o you An( a!a(emi! "ritin, easy or (iE!ult@
&%en (i( you last %ave a "ritin, lesson@ ;an you (es!ri)e t%is lesson to me@
;? 1re you #amiliar "it% t%e term F#ee()a!*=@
4o you al"ays re!eive #ee()a!* on your "ritin,@ &%o usually ,ives you
#ee()a!*@
Bo" (oes GGGGGGGG normally ,ive t%is #ee()a!* to you@
1re you satisAe( "it% t%is met%o(@
Bo" a)out #ee()a!* #rom your !lassmates3 is t%is important@
Is it more important t%an tea!%er #ee()a!*@
4? Doo*in, at 3 samples o# #ee()a!*
;an you tell me a)out t%is #ee()a!*@ &oul( you An( t%is %elp#ul@ &%y/&%y
not@
I# you %a( to !%oose one3 "%i!% #ee()a!* "oul( you pre#er to re!eive@ &%y@
-? Doo*in, at stu(ents= o"n "ritin,
$ell me a little a)out t%e tas*@
4es!ri)e t%e #ee()a!* you re!eive(@
Bo" (o you #eel "%en you rea( t%e #ee()a!*@
4o you An( t%e #ee()a!* use#ul@
Bave you learnt anyt%in, #rom t%is #ee()a!*@
I# you "ere a pre2sessional university tea!%er3 "oul( you ,ive #ee()a!*@
&%at #ee()a!* "oul( you ,ive to your stu(ents@
Bo" "oul( you ,ive it@
'? Is t%ere anyt%in, you "oul( li*e to a(( on t%is topi!@
1re t%ere any 9uestions you "oul( li*e to as*@
78
45NS$NT 5R) +6ersion 1,
:tu(y titleH 1n investigation of teaching $78$S7 writing with a focus on
teacher written feedback
8esear!%er nameH 9aneane 5wens
Please initial the box(es) if you agree with the statement(s):
I %ave rea( an( un(erstoo( t%e in#ormation s%eet an( %ave %a(
t%e opportunity to as* 9uestions a)out t%e stu(y
I a,ree to ta*e part in t%is resear!% proCe!t an( a,ree #or my (ata to
)e use( #or t%e purpose o# t%is stu(y
I un(erstan( my parti!ipation is voluntary an( I may "it%(ra"
at any time "it%out !onse9uen!e
Name o# parti!ipant >print name?IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
:i,nature o# parti!ipantIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII..
Name o# 8esear!%er >print name? IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
:i,nature o# 8esear!%erIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII..
4ateIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
79
80
81
82
1ppen(i7 ;
&ritin, :ample26ill
&ritin, :ample2De"is
&ritin, :ample28ayanna
&ritin, :ample2Jris
83
:ill;s <riting
84
:ill;s <riting 4ont=
85
7ewis; <riting
86
7ewsis; <riting 4ont=
87
Rayanna;s <riting
88
Rayanna;s <riting 4ont=
89
Rayanna;s <riting 4ont=

90
>ris; <riting
91
1ppen(i7 4
$rans!ription Jey
Intervie" $rans!ript21(am
Intervie" $rans!ript2Jris
92
Transcription >ey
I Intervie"er
1 1(am >$ea!%er?
J Jris >:tu(ent?
>..? s%ort pause
>I? lon, pause
H soun( stret!%in,
K lat!%e( utteran!e
>7777? una)le to trans!ri)e
> ? un!ertain trans!ription
>>laughs?? ot%er (etails
N.6. Normal pun!tuation !onventions are #ollo"e(.
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
IH Bo" "oul( you normally ,o a)out tea!%in, a!a(emi! "ritin,@ ;oul( you (es!ri)e a typi!al
lesson@
1H &o" umm >>laughs)? >..? a typi!al lesson ummm >..? "ell I t%in* umm #or over t%e years o#
(oin, t%e pre2sessional I=ve *in( o# umm !ome to t%e !on!lusion t%at t%e )est t%in, is to
approa!% pro)a)ly via stru!ture. I t%in* at t%e )e,innin, I (o somet%in, a)out style usually
an( a)out t%e *in( o# >..? *in( o# lan,ua,e t%at you are suppose( to repro(u!e so *in( o# umm
#ormality I suppose )asi!ally )ut t%en a#ter t%at I t%in* I ten( to #o!us mostly on stru!ture >so? I
t%in* is t%e most important t%in,3 #or me #rom "%at I=ve (is!overe( a)out it. 1n( err I suppose
t%ere "as a ten(en!y in sylla)uses %ere in t%e past to ,o #rom senten!e level to para,rap%
level to te7t an( I suppose I=ve *in( o# (one t%at er as "ell. 1lt%ou,% t%ey usually on t%e
!ourse %ere )e,in "it% a >..? a s%ortis% essay usually an ar,ument essay3 "%i!% isn=t t%at
(ierent #rom an I-D$: tas* t"o )asi!ally so "e sort o# start "it% %o" you "oul( "rite a ,oo(
tas* t"o in t%e Arst "ee* "%i!% t%en )e!omes no" let=s ma*e more a!a(emi! an( t%en. :o
it=s a *in( o# )uil(in, pro!ess I suppose.
IH &%en you say stru!ture3 !an I Cust !lari#y "%at you mean. 4o you mean stru!ture "it%in t%e
senten!e or "it%in t%e essay as a "%ole@
1H &it%in t%e essay as a "%ole. I t%in* yea% sort o# )i, pi!ture stu.
IH :o t%e or,anisation.
1H Intro(u!tion3 !on!lusion3 main )o(y.
IH +*
1H $%at sort o# stu.
IH +* umm >..? aHn( t%is essay >>points to sample)? I %ave %ere F6ein, an only !%il( versus
!omin, #rom a lar,e #amily= !an you tal* me t%rou,% %o" you ,ot to t%is point3 or %o" t%e
stu(ent ,ot to t%is point3 &%at >..?
1H 8i,%t. +* yea% sure. :o umm "%at %appene( "aHs er so t%is year on t%e !ourse "%at "e
%ave to (o is to ,ive t%e stu(ents an essay umm t%is is t%e se!on( essay t%at t%ey=ve (one to
su)mit er t%ey (i( one )e#ore3 "ell ee!tively it=s t%e t%ir( )e!ause t%ey (i( one at t%e very
)e,innin, "%i!% "as )asi!ally an( I-D$: tas* t"o umm in3 in !lass3 t%e Arst (ay t%ey arrive(
an( it=s also a *in( o# um to sort o# see "%ere t%ey are at "it% t%eir lan,ua,e an( everyt%in,
)asi!ally at t%e )e,innin,. $%en t%eir Arst tas* "as to re"rite t%at umm ta*in, into
!onsi(eration some o# t%in,s t%at "e tal*e( a)out. :o )e#ore t%at I tal*e( a)out style3 sort o#
stru!turin, umm in t%e sense o# intro(u!tion3 !on!lusion3 main )o(y an( umm "%at else@ -rrr
>...? a #e" ,rammar t%in,s t%at %a( !ome up3 t%at %a( resulte( #rom t%e Arst one t%at I=(
!orre!te( umm I also3 t%ey also %a( in(ivi(ual !orre!tions o# t%eir ,rammar ones to loo* at.
$%at=s %o" t%ey (i( t%e se!on( essay3 t%e t%ir( essay "as )asi!ally3 "e loo*e( at t%e stru!ture
o# an ar,ument essay a,ain3 umm an( t%en t%e i(ea "as t%at "e3 "e %a( rea(3 "e (i( a
rea(in, lesson a)out t%is su)Ce!t umm )ut I (i(n=t tell t%em at t%e time t%at t%at "as ,oin, to
)e t%e essay also )e!ause possi)ly I (i(n=t really3 >>laughs)? really *no". I t%in* I (e!i(e(
some"%ere aroun( t%en. No3 )ut it seeme( a ,oo( topi! to (o )e!ause t%ey ,ot 9uite into t%e
(is!ussion3 also )e!ause in t%e !lass t%ere are ;%inese stu(ents "%o %ave t%e one !%il( per
94
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
#amily t%in, umm an( t%ere=s also a ,uy #rom :au(i 1ra)ia "%o is one o# seventeen )rot%ers
an( sisters.
IH &o"
1H 1n( a ,irl #rom $%ailan( "%o is t%e youn,est o# seven sisters3 so it=s 9uite interestin, it
)rou,%t out some 9uite ni!e t%in,s in t%e (is!ussion in t%e !lass. :o3 I suppose "e sort o#
tal*e( aroun( t%e topi! Arst an( I en!oura,e( t%em to (o )rainstormin, er in ,roups ummm
an( t%en put t%eir i(eas to,et%er umm sort o# or,anisin, t%eir i(eas umm as t%e ne7t sta,e
an( t%en umm a#ter t%at umm #or t%is essay I3 I ma(e a very )i, point a)out outlinin, an( t%ey
all %a( to pro(u!e an( outline )e#ore t%ey (i( t%e essay3 umm an( I (KI tol( t%em spe!iA!ally
"e "ere loo*in, #or stru!ture3 "ell stru!ture( ans"ers an( "e tal*e( a)out topi! senten!es3
para,rap% unity umm >..? !o%esK!o%eren!e in terms o# repetition o# *ey nouns an( pronouns
er3 "e=( loo*e( at relative !lauses3 "e loo*e( at little )it a lin*in, "or(s an( so t%at "as3 *in(
o# all t%ose t%in,s "ere suppose( to )e in t%is Arst3 t%is Arst essay t%at t%ey3 t%e t%ir( essay o#
t%e !ourse so3 it=s all t%e t%in,s t%ey %ave learnt in t%e Arst #our "ee*s I suppose.
I H +*3 so it=s slo"ly )uil(in,. +*3 overall "oul( you say you enCoy tea!%in, "ritin,@
1H Les.
IH &%at (o you parti!ularly enCoy@
1H 5mm >..? I suppose I enCoy tea!%in, "ritin, )e!ause I li*e "ritin, mysel#3 I=ve (one *in( o#
!reative "ritin, !ourses an( t%in,s li*e t%at umm an( I=m very sort o# err I li*e literature as
"ell3 I tea!% literature as "ell so I li*e t%at "%ole aspe!t I suppose. 5mmm >..? also I suppose
pro)a)ly as a stu(ent3 t%is is all t%in*in, a)out learnin, styles an( t%in,s3 er as a stu(ent I
al"ays #oun( "ritin, easy an( I *no" a lot o# people (on=t an( I suppose t%at *in( o# intri,ues
me as to "%y3 "%y people An( it t%e most (iE!ult t%in, )e!ause umm espe!ially "%en I "as
at s!%ool I=( )e mu!% %appier to "rite an essay t%an to (o a tal* a)out somet%in,. 5mm3
may)e no" it "oul( )e t%e ot%er "ay aroun( )ut umm >>laughs)? I t%in* I al"ays *in( o# ,re"
up "it% t%at i(ea t%at a!tually "ritin, "as 9uite easy an( it=s3 t%e "ay I see it it=s all stru!ture
an( in a "ay it=s *in( o# all !opyin, a style umm in t%e same "ay you t%at you mi,%t mimi!
someone=s a!!ent "%en you3 "%en you start rea(in, a!a(emi! stu you !an start3 you
)asi!ally3 I t%in* people !opy t%e style an( t%ey pi!* !ertain p%rases out #rom %o" to "rite a
report an( umm so I t%in* it=s *in( o# 3 a lot o# it is *in( o# raisin, a"areness o# t%e #a!t t%at it=s
a!tually not t%at %ar( i# you approa!% it in a sort o# systemati! "ay. I t%in* t%at=s pro)a)ly "%y
I li*e it.
IH 1n( "%at are some o# t%e !%allen,es you #a!e "%en it !omes to tea!%in, a!a(emi! "ritin,
%ere in :out%ampton@
1H 5mm3 I=( say t%at t%e leKt%e a!tual lan,ua,e level o# t%e stu(ents is 9uite lo" #or t%at3 I
mean it=s lots o# I-D$: 5.5s t%at sort o# lo" Arst !ertiA!ate *in( o# level3 I suppose or Arst
!ertiA!ate *in( o#Kit=s a )it tri!*y tK"%en t%ey %ave a more limite( sort o# vo!a)ulary an( one
o# t%e )i, t%in,s is t%e use o# synonyms an( err >..? you ten( to %ave to (o a lot o# "or* on
vo!a)ulary an( rea(in,3 li*e un(erstan(in, vo!a)ulary in !onte7t an( t%in,s li*e t%at )e!ause
t%ey a!tually (on=t %ave su!% a lar,e vo!a)ulary umm anot%er t%in, I suppose "oul( )e *in(
95
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
10
9
11
o# so!ial umm or sort o# )a!*,roun( t%at t%ey are use to a very (ierent *in( o# a!a(emi!
)a!*,roun( to t%is one er may)e t%ey=ve not "ritten essay in -n,lis% )e#ore o#ten t%e :au(i
stu(ents I ,et t%at impression parti!ularly. 5mm or t%ey may !ome #rom !ultures "%ere t%e
i(ea o# "ritin, an essay is very (ierent to %ere an( a lot o# t%em are sort o# %ave I-D$: sort
o# in,raine( in t%em so t%ey "rite in a parti!ular I-D$: style at t%e )e,innin,. No"a(ays is t%e
Arst "or( usually o# t%eir Arst essay >>laughs)? 5mmm an( I suppose some o# t%e ,rammati!al
items t%at "e are suppose( to tea!%3 t%in,s li*e relative !lauses3 are >..? 9uite %eavy3 (ense
sort o# topi!s an( I suppose3 I3 my main t%in, is t%at I try to ma*e t%e "ritin, >..? systemati!3
step2)y2step >..? sort o# simpliAe( a )it an( I try to ma*e it #un as "ell F!ause ot%er"ise I t%in*
it !an )e a very (ry3 )orin, topi!. :o I try to (o as mu!% ,roup "or*3 (is!ussion "or* "it%in
"ritin,3 not Cust you *no" loo*in, at some senten!es an( t%en ,o an( "rite somet%in,.
IH Bo" a)out your stu(ents3 "%at (o you t%in* t%ey An( parti!ularly !%allen,in,@
1H 5mmmm >..? I t%in* >..? t%ey pro)a)ly An( >..? "ell "%en you say you are ,oin, to "rite a
lon, essay t%ey *in( o# ,o u%%% )ut I t%in* t%at=s )e!ause t%ey (on=t realise )y t%e a!tual
pro!ess o# (oin, t%e outline an( t%en "ritin, it an( I (on=t t%in* t%at "%en t%ey a!tually !ome
to it3 I (on=t t%in* most o# t%em An( t%e num)er o# "or(s a!tually %ar(. I t%in* >..? #or some
people ,ettin, t%e !on!ept o# >..? #ormal in#ormal is 9uite (iE!ult )e!ause o# t%e limite(
vo!a)ulary per%aps an( I=ve %a( 9uite a #e" stu(ents say to me t%is year %o" (o I *no" i# a
"or( is #ormal ummm3 err t%e (ieren!es )et"een t%e sort o# t%e #un!tion o# lin*in, "or(s3 I
t%in* t%ey An( (iE!ult ummm anot%er pro)lem is ele!troni! (i!tionaries )e!ause t%ey are
very use( to usin, t%ose3 t%at=s a vo!a)ulary pro)lem an( t%ey ten( to use "or(s "%i!% Cust
(on=t e7ist at t%e )e,innin, umm an( you sort o# %ave to "ean t%em o# t%at an( to"ar(s
!%e!*in, in ot%er pla!es li*e "it% !on!or(an!es. I usually (o somet%in, a)out %o" you !an
Cust !%e!* a "or( "it% a !on!or(an!e er or even ri,%t !li!*in, on t%e mouse in "or( an( all
sorts o# (ierent t%in,s3 Cust lots o# (ierent "ays to An( out a)out "or(s an( "%at it means
to *no" a "or( an( use it3 )e!ause t%ey ten( to Cust An( a ne" "or( an( plon* it (o"n an(
t%en. I %a( some)o(y "%o "rote somet%in, a)out t%e )ains an( )oons o# somet%in, t%is year
an( I "as li*e "%at is t%is3 no sorry ta*e3 ta*e t%at out
IH 4i( you ever An( out "%at it "as@
1H +%3 it "as suppose( to )e t%e pros an( !ons o# I t%in*
IH +*
1H 6ains an( )oons3 an( %e tol( me %e #oun( it in an -n,lis% (i!tionary "%i!%3 "ell I t%ou,%t
o*3 "ell may )e )ut >>laughs)?
IH >7777?
1H I (i(n=t let it pass t%rou,%3 no3 no3 no >>laughs)? )ains an( )oons "asn=t 9uite ri,%t
>>laughs)?
IH >7777? somet%in, ne"3 pros an( !ons you !an !%an,e it a )it. +*3 umm3 let=s move on an(
tal* a little )it more a)out #ee()a!*. 5mm (o you al"ays provi(e #ee()a!* on your stu(ents=
"ritin,@
1H 5mm3 yes3 I t%in* so3 pretty mu!% umm anyt%in, t%at is su)mitte( yes (eAnitely ummm "e
96
0
11
1
11
2
11
3
11
4
11
5
11
6
11
7
11
8
11
9
12
0
12
1
12
2
12
3
12
4
12
5
12
6
12
7
12
8
12
9
13
(o (o some ot%er t%in,s I mean "e %ave (one some para,rap%s3 ,roup "or*3 t%in,s li*e t%at.
&%i!% I usually (o provi(e #ee()a!* on as "ell )ut I ten( to (o t%at in a sli,%tly less #ormal
"ay I suppose umm .
IH +*. 5mm "%y (o you al"ays provi(e #ee()a!*3 even i# it is in a less sli,%tly #ormal "ay@
1H 5mm3 "%at even on para,rap%s an( t%in,s li*e t%at@
IH Les3 "%y@
1H 5mm >...? I t%in* t%at every opportunity to (o a )it o# "ritin, li*e t%at3 is an opportunity to
%ave a loo* at t%iKit )rin,s up t%in,s3 it !ertainly )rin,s up umm issues o# umm li*e
,rammati!al t%in,s3 lan,ua,e issues umm I also (o a lot o#3 t%ey "rite a para,rap% an( pass
t%em aroun( an( say loo* at ea!% ot%ers umm )e!ause I t%in* t%at=s a "ay also o# learnin,
t%in,s er learnin, stru!tures #rom ea!% ot%er as "ell umm. I (on=t *no" I Cust t%in* t%at i# you
"oul( (o an e7er!ise li*e t%at >..? itK"it%out t%e #ee()a!* t%ere isn=t really3 it (oesn=t ,o
any"%ere really3 it Cust sort o# you (o some "ritin,3 it=s o* it=s Cust pra!ti!in, "ritin, )ut t%ere
nee(s to )e some *in( o# #ee()a!* i# it=s #rom me or #rom t%eir partner3 it nee(s3 t%ere nee(s
to )e a #ee()a!* sta,e o# some sort3 as a *in( o# !on!lusion to any "ritin, a!tivity I ,uess.
IH +*. 5mm >..? in ,eneral "oul( you say t%e #ee()a!* you provi(e %elps your stu(ents@
1H 5%m >>laughs?? No3 I=( li*e to t%in* it (oes. I li*e too >...? I li*e to *in( o# >..? I=m tryin, to
ma*e a point o# )alan!in, !riti!ism an( praise so I3 I try to (o t%in,s li*e point out >..? er a
mista*e t%at t%ey are ma*in, over an( over a,ain #or e7ample somet%in, t%at t%ey !an
!orre!t 9uite simply espe!ially t%at=s in terms o# lan,ua,e an( also in terms umm o# *in( o#
stru!ture t%in,s an( t%in,s li*e t%at as "ell. 5mmm >..? er an( I t%in* t%at t%ey are sort o# li*e
little nu(,es in t%e ri,%t (ire!tion. I also try an( (o ,roup #ee()a!* li*e i# t%ere is somet%in,
li*e t%ey=ve all use( t%e "or( )esi(es at t%e )e,innin, o# senten!es or somet%in, li*e t%at I
mi,%t point out3 in t%eir very Arst essay #or e7ample3 I t%in* t%ree stu(ents use( every !oin
%as t"o si(es >..? an( I Cust sort o# li*e3 ta*e t%is out3 t%is is !li!%M "%i!% "e (on=t "ant. :o3 so
t%in,s li*e t%at I !an (o at a *in( o# !lass level as "ell. :o t%ey are all *in( o# nu(,es in t%e
ri,%t (ire!tion ummm 3 ummm an( I try to )e positive as "ell a)out you *no" you=ve (one t%is
very "ell an( may)e #o!us t%em t%rou,% usin, t%at s%eet t%at "e are ,onna loo* at umm
a)out %o" you *no" "%i!% areas t%ey nee( to "or* on3 usually #ormality or in#ormality or
stru!turin, or vo!a)ulary or )e!ause t%ey repeat t%e same t%in, an( I t%in* sometimes "%en
people "rite t%in,s t%ey (on=t realise t%at t%ey=ve repeate( t%e same "or( over an( over
a,ain so you a!tually en!oura,e t%em to loo* at "or* an( en!oura,in, t%en to proo#rea( I
suppose. :o umm >..?
IH :o (o you t%in* it=s #air to say t%at you (o t%in* it %elps t%em )ut it=s 9uite a slo" an(
,ra(ual t%in, rat%er t%an a eure*a >..?
1H 5mm3 yea% I t%in* yea%3 you !an %ave eure*a moments3 )ut I t%in*3 li*e "it% any *in( o#
tea!%in,3 it=s al"ays !y!li!al3 not%in, ever ,oes in t%e ne!essarily t%e Arst time. I *no" it
(oesn=t "it% mysel# so umm I t%in* it=s Cust %uman to *in( o# youKt%e repetition o# t%in,s it=s3
it=s li*e a *in( o# nu(,in, in t%e ri,%t (ire!tion.
IH 4o you ever #eel #rustrate(3 umm a#ter t%e #ee()a!* pro!ess "%en per%aps umm t%in,s
97
0
13
1
13
2
13
3
13
4
13
5
13
6
13
7
13
8
13
9
14
0
14
1
14
2
14
3
14
4
14
5
14
6
14
7
14
8
14
9
15
aren=t3 t%e stu(ent isn=t )ein, nu(,e( in t%e ri,%t (ire!tion@
1H 5mm3 I3 I=( )e #rustrate( i# #or e7ample I !ommente( on somet%in, in a Arst (ra#t an( t%en
in t%e se!on( (ra#t it appears a,ain3 t%ey %aven=t !orre!te( it. 5mmm )ut t%at very rarely
%appens. 5mm I=ve )een #rustrate( in t%e past "it% stu(ents3 t%is year my !lass seem to )e
all3 a #airly (e!ent level #or passin, t%is !ourse I t%in*. 6ut in previous years I=ve %a( stu(ents
"%o Cust >...? really Cust (i(n=t ,et it3 t%ey (i(n=t3 t%ey never >..? er3 an( a lot o# t%ose pro)lems
"ere sort o# >..? I remem)er one in parti!ular3 t%is ;%inese ,irl an( it "as all senten!e level
t%in,s an(3 an( t%e "or*3 t%e "ritin, Cust (i(n=t ma*e sense an( >..? s%e "as very resistant to
!%an,in, it an( I remem)er sayin, to %er3 I !an=t remem)er "%at %er name "as no"3 )ut I
remem)er sayin, to %er loo* t%is3 I=m sorry )ut IKt%is (oesn=t ma*e sense t%is para,rap%3 I
!annot rea( it (oesn=t3 it=s all >..? It "as )asi!ally li*e ,o))le(e,oo* an( s%e sai( no3 no3 no
t%ey are te!%ni!al "or(s3 an( I sai( "ell t%at=s not a!tually t%e pro)lem it=s not t%at t%ey are
te!%ni!al "or(s it=s Cust t%at t%ere=s not senten!es t%ere3 it=s a!tually impossi)le to rea( 3 t%ere
are no #ull stops #or a)out 6 lines an( it=s really !omple7 an3 an( I sat (o"n "it% %er an( I trie(
to *in( o# untan,le it )asi!ally3 )ut s%e still (i(n=t seem to ,et it3 s%e still seeme( to IKit "as a
real *in( o# mental )lo!* %er an( in t%e en( I a!tually %a( to say3 "%i!% "as not t%e sort o#
t%in, I "oul( normally (o umm is err I t%in* some)o(y else %a( an essay t%ere "%i!% %a( a
pass one an( t%is one "asn=t an( I s%o"e( %er someone else=s essay an( sai( loo* t%is is very
!lear t%e "ay t%ey %ave (one it3 an( in t%e en( I %a( to say to %er t%is one "ill pass3 t%is one
"ill not3 an( s%e no )ut i# I (o it3 I sai( no3 t%is one "ill not pass. $%is one passes )e!ause it=s
!lear3 I !an rea( it3 t%is one I !an=t rea(. I %a( to )e as )rutal as t%at. 1n( s%e (i( a!tually3 I
remem)er in t%at !ase3 s%e (i( a!tually ,et it an( #rom t%en on >..? er I !an=t remem)er t%e
ori,inal 9uestion *no"3 I=ve Cust )een rantin, a)out %er >>laughs)?
IH It=s o*3 no3 no3 no it=s Ane >>laughs)?
1H 6ut no I t%in*3 so you sometimes3 t%at "as a eure*a moment I suppose3 er )ut usually I
t%in* it=s more *in( o# nu(,in, in t%e ri,%t (ire!tion.
IH+*. 5mm. Lou=ve mentione( lots o# (ierent types o# #ee()a!*3 umm is t%e #ee()a!* you
,ive ,enerally "ritten #ee()a!* as in t%is !ase >>points to sample)) or #a!e2to2#a!e (is!ussions
or ele!troni! #ee()a!*3 (o you (o it via e2mail@
1H 5mm I %ave (one e2mail #ee()a!* in t%e past3 t%is year I %aven=t so #ar alt%ou,% t%ey (i(
su)mit via e2mail. 5mmm >...? I (on=t *no" "%y I %aven=t (one t%at3 I t%in* may)e )e!ause I
use( to %ave a pro,ramme t%at one o# !ollea,ues %a( invente( o# *in( o# (oin, t%e *in( o#
!orre!tion !o(e on a "or( (o!ument )ut I=ve lost it. 5mmm er I t%in* I sort o# (o a mi7ture o#
#a!e an( #a!e3 #a!e2to2#a!e an( "ritten )ot% to,et%er3 usually. I "oul(n=t3 #or an essay t%at=s
)een su)mitte( I t%in* it=s also it=s important to t%e stu(ents so umm t%ey "ant to tal* a)out
it3 very o#ten t%ey start as*in, as soon as t%ey=ve %an(e( it in o% "%en are "e ,oin, to tal*
a)out my essay3 so you %ave to3 you %ave to %onour t%at an( umm I t%in* I "oul( al"ays (o a
#a!e2to2#a!e t%in, "it%3 )ut "it% also some "ritten !omments umm an( I try to put t%e main
t%in,s as t%e !omments@
IH Bo" (o t%e !omments tie into t%e (is!ussions@ 1re t%ese t%e t%in,s you (is!uss3 or >..?@
98
0
15
1
15
2
15
3
15
4
15
5
15
6
15
7
15
8
15
9
16
0
16
1
16
2
16
3
16
4
16
5
16
6
16
7
16
8
16
9
17
1H 5mm3 yes I mean I "oul( sort o# usually say >..? somet%in, li*e umm overall I really li*e t%e
"ay you (i( t%is3 umm one t%in, I t%in* you nee( to "or* on is t%is umm an( t%en I=ll say o*
so any"ay let=s %ave a loo*3 umm so I=ve mar*e( t%is3 t%is3 t%is an( t%is o% an( anot%er t%in,
is you *no" may)e an( t%en at t%e en( I=ll say so I "oul( say t%ree t%in,s t%at you nee( to
loo* at are t%is3 t%is3 an( t%is )ut you are (oin, t%is really "ell >7777?
IH :o you re#er to t%e !omments )ut it=s not solely a)out t%e !omments.
1H No3 no3 no. 1n( t%en somet%in, else may3 may !rop up. 1n( sometimes >>laughs)? t%in,s
%appen li*e I3 I %a( one t%e ot%er (ay "%ere I sai( no3 t%is is too mu!% in#ormality an( t%en I
"as loo*in, at it an( I !oul(n=t An( any e7amples o# in#ormality an( I sai( "ell I t%ou,%t t%ere
"ere too many e7amples any"ay3 an( t%en I (i( An( t%em3 some t%in,s. +% o*3 o*. 6ut er no
sometimes you t%in* o% I put a !omment a)out t%at )ut on a se!on( rea(in, a!tually t%at=s
not t%e primary. :o it !an !%an,e.
IH +*. 5mm (o you ever >..? ,ive #a!e to #a!e (is!ussions (urin, t%e "ritin, pro!ess3 or (o you
ten( to save t%em Ftil t%e en(@
1H -r "ell3 t%is year t%at=s suppose( to )e t%e approa!% o# t%e se!on( %al# o# t%e !ourse "%en
t%ey are (oin, t%eir lon, essay. &e %aven=t ,ot to t%at sta,e yet. 5mm I=m a little )it (u)ious
a)out it as are some o# t%e !ollea,ues )e!ause in t%e past "e=ve al"ays (one a sort o# Arst
(ra#t3 se!on( (ra#t pro!ess "ritin, system an( t%en t%is year3 it=s more >..? not so mu!%
%an(in, in (ra#ts as Cust >..? er sort o# t%em "ritin, t%e essay (urin, !lass time >...? I=m not
sure %o" t%at "oul( "or* )e!ause I=m not sure t%at >..? #or me it "oul( "or*. I# I "as "ritin,
somet%in, an( I %a( t%e #eelin, someone is loo*in, over my s%oul(er "%ile I "as "ritin,3 I=m
not sure I "oul( li*e t%at personally. :o I (on=t *no" i# t%at=s ,oin, to )e3 t%at "ill )e
interestin, to see %o" t%at one "or*s out. 6ut #or t%is one3 #or e7ample3 I ,ot t%em to (o an
outline Arst an( "e loo*e( at t%e outline an( t%en >..? ummm >..? an( t%en some o# t%em I
loo*e( at para,rap%s an( sai( t%is isn=t !lear enou,% !oul( you re"rite t%at one para,rap%. :o
t%ere=s also some o# t%at ,oin, on.
IH +*
1H :o >..? um
IH 5mm. &%y (o you !%oose t%is *in( o# !om)ination o# "ritten #a!e2to2#a!e #ee()a!*@
1H 5mm3 uummmm >..? "ell t%e "ritten !omments3 I ,uess t%at=s somet%in, permanent to ta*e
a"ay an( >...? t%e #a!e2to2#a!e one I suppose is to ,ive a (ierent level o# !ommuni!ation #or
people "%o are >7777? au(itory "%atever. 5mm3 er3 I t%in* it=s important to (o t%e #a!e2to2#a!e
)e!ause you %ave to %ave t%at in(ivi(ual !onta!t "it% t%e tutor. $%at=s one o# t%e t%in,s "e
are %ere #or3 an( "e are pai( #or3 #or t%at. It=s part o# our !ontra!t to (o t%at. 5mm >..?
IH 6e!ause I=m Cust t%in*in, it=s 9uite a time2!onsumin, >..?
1H Lea%
IH .ro!ess
1H It is time2!onsumin, )ut I !an=t really >..? see %o" else you !an (o it. I mean you !an Cust
,ive "ritten #ee()a!*3 )ut t%e t%in, is "it% "ritten #ee()a!* sometimes you !an %ave t%in,s
t%at you "on=t un(erstan( an( so er >..? espe!ially I mean i# it=s %an("ritten li*e t%is >>points
99
0
17
1
17
2
17
3
17
4
17
5
17
6
17
7
17
8
17
9
18
0
18
1
18
2
18
3
18
4
18
5
18
6
18
7
18
8
18
9
19
to sample. Laughs?? 5mm3 you !an say you *no" I (on=t un(erstan(3 "%at=s t%is point you=ve
"ritten t%ere an( umm. It=s )etter to )e a)le to e7plain "%at you=ve "ritten an( #or t%em to
as* 9uestions as "ell. :o3 I (o en!oura,e t%em to as* 9uestions3 you *no" "%y %aven=t you
put t%is an( t%at *in( o# t%in,.
IH +*. 4o you t%in* it=s important #or stu(ents to provi(e #ee()a!* on ea!% ot%ers= "ritin,@
1H Les3 um.
IH 4o you (o t%is o#ten@
1H Lep3 yep3 I (o peer #ee()a!* #or most. $%ey (i( it #or t%is one )e#ore I (i( my #ee()a!* as
"ell. 5mm an( t%e IK"it% 9uite a #e" o# t%e tutorialsKnot all o# t%emK)ut "it% 9uite a #e" o#
t%e tutorials I )e,an "it% so "%at (i( you learn a)out your essay #rom your partner.
IH 1n( (oes t%is "or* "ell@
1H Lea%3 I t%in* so. It seeme( to3 umm a #e" o# t%em sai( o% %e pointe( out t%at t%is part o# my
intro(u!tion "asn=t lon, enou,% an( t%is (i(n=t %ave a proper t%esis statement an( t%en t%ere
"as too mu!% in#ormality an( t%at I=( use( t%is "or( over an( over a,ain an( t%in,s li*e t%at.
IH 4o t%ey ten( to trust t%e #ee()a!* t%ey ,et #rom t%eir partners@
1H 5mm >..? yes3 )ut t%ey3 it=s mu!% more important3 t%e tea!%ers #ee()a!* )e!ause t%at=s
presuma)ly "%ere t%ey3 "%ere t%ey !ome #rom3 an( t%at=s sort o# t%e )a!*,roun( t%ey %ave I
,uess. 6ut also )e!ause you are a native spea*er I suppose3 it=s 9uite natural to3 to er an( you3
you *no" you are t%e person "%o is *in( o# lea(in, t%em alon,3 so you are mar*in, t%em3
your assessin, t%em so o)viously it=s more important to *no" "%at you t%in* o# it3 I suppose.
6ut no3 I t%in* it is important to (o t%at3 an( also )e!ause t%at is somet%in, t%ey=ll (o
%ope#ully in t%eir #uture is t%at t%ey "ill pass essays aroun( )et"een !ollea,ues an(
!lassmates an( (is!uss t%em to,et%er so >..? um
IH +*3 umm3 "%ere am I up to@ >...? $%e )ottom one3 umm "%at aspe!ts o# "ritin, "oul( you
ten( to #o!us your #ee()a!* on@
1H >...? umm >..? I t%in* umm it=s le( )y t%e *in( o# mar*in, s%eet "e %ave )ut umm3 er3 I am3
er3 I pro)a)ly "oul(n=t "ant to a(mit it3 )ut I=m a!tually 9uite stru!tural. I t%in* so I (o ten( to
#o!us on t%at sort o# t%in,.
IH &%y "oul( you not "ant to a(mit it@
1H &ell no3 it Cust seems a )it )orin, (oesn=t it3 >>lau,%s?? t%e stru!ture t%in,. 5mm I t%in*
somet%in, t%at I=m not al"ays so ,oo( at pi!*in, up on umm is !ontent on %ave t%ey
ans"ere( t%e 9uestion or not an( I=ve noti!e( t%at sometimes "%en "e=ve (one *in( o#
stan(ar(isation t%in,s t%at ot%er tea!%ers are a lot %otter on "ell t%ey %aven=t ans"ere( t%e
9uestion.
IH 5mm
1H 1n( >..? I suppose #or me3 )e!ause it=s a *in( o#3 it=s more a)out ,ettin, t%e style an( t%at
*in( o# t%in,3 #or me it seems more li*e a lin,uisti! t%in,. I=m not really so intereste( in
"%et%er it=s a per#e!t lo,i!al ans"er to somet%in,. I3 I t%in* it=s more a)out %o" t%ey=ve
"ritten it umm so I3 I suppose possi)ly !ontent yes3 o* it is important )ut more in t%e sense o#
"%et%er it=s )alan!e( an( "%et%er t%ey=ve !onsi(ere( (ierent t%in,s. 5mm3 more t%an
100
0
19
1
19
2
19
3
19
4
19
5
19
6
19
7
19
8
19
9
20
0
20
1
20
2
20
3
20
4
20
5
20
6
20
7
20
8
20
9
21
"%et%er "%at t%ey=ve sai( ma*es sense3 I suppose3 or >7777? an( !ertainly not "%et%er I a,ree
"it% it or not. 5mm3 er3 umm so yea% I ,uess t%at=s one t%in, an( t%en3 )ut also t%ere=s
stru!ture an( t%e sort o# para,rap%in, an( t%in,s li*e t%at. 1n( I suppose lan,ua,e )ut >...? I
(on=t3 I (on=t "ant to sort o# Cump (o"n t%eir t%roats on every sin,le little t%in, so >..? t%ere is
t%at as "ell.
IH +*3 "ell "e !an %ave a loo* at some e7amples in a minute. 6e#ore "e loo* at t%is tasKt%is
#ee()a!* !an you tell me a )it a)out t%e tas*@ 1 )it o# )a!*,roun( >..?
1H Lea%3 sure t%ey %a( to "rite an essay #or t%e "%ole pre2sessional ,iven t%is t%in, t%at "e as
tutors %a( to !ome up "it%3 a3 a title o# (ierent titles #or t%em to "rite an ar,ument essay
"it%out usin, sour!es an( umm t%e i(ea "as t%at t%ey "oul( "rite >..? t%ey "oul( "rite3 t%ey
"oul( "rite >>laughs)? a s%ort3 not s%ort version3 )ut t%ey "oul( "rite up to 500 "or(s #or t%is
Arst essay3 t%en t%is "ee* "e=ll )e loo*in, at sour!es an( %o" to in!orporate t%em in t%e
te7ts an( t%en t%ey=ll )e "ritin, a lon,er version "%i!% is up to 1000 "or(s. $%at=s t%e i(ea.
ummm seems sli,%tly unnatural to "rite an essay in t%at "ay )ut never min( ummm
>>laughs)? umm 3 umm )asi!ally "%at "e (i( to start "it% "as "e #o!usse( on t%e ar,ument
an( er3 I ,ot t%em to (o an outline Arst. &e pi!*e( t%is title o# er )ein, an( only !%il( versus
!omin, #rom a lar,e #amily3 a(vanta,es an( (isa(vanta,es o# )ot% in terms o# #amily3 in3 in er
in(ivi(ual #amily an( so!iety. -r3 "e tal*e( a)out "ays in "%i!% you !oul( stru!ture it3
a(vanta,es Arst an( (isa(vanta,es Arst3 t%e ot%er one an( t%en also loo*in, at it point )y
point3 #amily3 in(ivi(ual3 so!iety3 "%i!%ever or(er. 5mm >..? an( t%at "as )asi!ally %o" "e set
it up.
IH +*. :o t%ere "as a lot o# set up involve(.
1H $%ere "as 9uite a lot o# set up3 I also ,ave t%em3 alt%ou,% t%ey "eren=t suppose( to use
sour!es I (i( ,ive t%em some umm3 sort o#3 #rom "e)sites one o# t%em a list o# 10 ,oo( points
a)out )ein, an only !%il( an( 10 ,oo( points a)out !omin, #rom a lar,e #amily. 5mm >..?
o%K"%i!% a#ter %avin, a (is!ussion3 t%ey (is!usse( it Arst3 t%en t%ey !ompare( t%at to see
"%i!% t%in,s t%ey %a( mentione( an( t%en "e %a( more o# a (is!ussion to see "%at t%ey
really t%ou,%t. :o it "as (is!usse( a lot )asi!ally3 umm t%e topi!. 1n( t%en t%ey Cust %a( to ,o
a"ay an( "rite it in(ivi(ually.
IH +*. 1n(3 so t%is is a Arst (ra#t3 yea%@
1H 5mm yes3 "ell I mean t%e only t%in, is t%ey (i( an( outline Arst >..? so t%ere "as3 an( I
en!oura,e( a #ull outline. I "as really surprise( a!tually t%ey (i( very ,oo( outlines "it% #ull
intro(u!tions3 !on!lusions an( points. 5mmm >..? I mean not all o# t%em3 )ut pretty mu!%
!ompare( to ot%er years I=ve tau,%t %ere3 I "as 9uite impresse(. 5mm so t%ey (i( (o t%at Arst
an( t%en sort o# )uilt it up #rom t%ere3 so3 um2um.
IH &%ere t%ey re9uire( to (o a revision3 usin, t%is er #ee()a!*@
1H No3 )ut er3 "e are ,oin, to "ell "e are ,oin, "rite it a,ain. $%is is t%e sli,%t pro)lem3 "it%
t%is3 t%is i(ea. &e are ,oin, to "rite a,ain )ut "it% sour!es in it.
IH +* 3 >7777? *eep >7777?
1H I t%in* t%ey are ,oin, to *eep it yes. $%e overall stru!ture t%ey=ll *eep )ut may)e t%ey ma*e
101
0
21
1
21
2
21
3
21
4
21
5
21
6
21
7
21
8
21
9
22
0
22
1
22
2
22
3
22
4
22
5
22
6
22
7
22
8
22
9
23
!%an,es )ase( on "%at I sai( %ere.
IH +*.
1H 5mmm.
IH +*3 umm !an you tal* me t%rou,% t%e >>places sample in front of interviewee)? #ee()a!*
you=ve provi(e( on t%is pie!e o# "or*. :o %ave a loo* at t%e points >..?
1H +*3 "ell I mean one t%in,3 one t%in, I (i( er sort o# as er >..? as one level is t%e *in( o# er
t%e3 t%e lan,ua,e. 5mm3 an( t%en "%i!% s%oul( )e t%e )lue t%in,s.
IH 5%2ummm
1H 1n( t%en t%e !omments in ,reen at t%e top umm3 not t%at I al"ays %ave t%is >>laughs??
!olour system3 it Cust %appene( )y a!!i(ent3 )ut t%e !olours at t%e top "ere sort o# t%e overall3
"%at are t%e most important t%in,s to loo* at umm >..? so alt%ou,% t%ere are e7tra !omments
in ,reen %ere3 )ut t%ey (i( a!tually3 t%ey "ere t%in,s t%at "e a((e( (urin, t%e (is!ussion3
t%at=s "%y t%ey are in ,reen >...?
IH &%en you are mar*in, it3 %o" (o you start3 %o" (o you ,o a)out (oin, it@ :o you ,et t%e
paper >...?
1H 5mm. umm3 I suppose I sort o# rea( >..? t%e intro(u!tion3 %ave a 9ui!* loo* at t%e topi!
senten!es >..? an( t%e !on!lusion to ,et an overall i(ea o# it. $%en I start rea(in, it a )it to see
%o" easy it is to rea( >..? umm a!tually a !ollea,ue o# mine use( to3 use( to (o t%is "%i!% I
t%ou,%t "as 9uite a ni!e i(ea3 is t%at "%en you=ve ,ot a "%ole loa( o# t%em3 s%e sai( t%at s%e
use( to *in( o# rea( t%rou,%3 Cust %ave a really 9ui!* loo* at t%em an( sort t%em into t%ese
ones are o*3 t%ese ones are ,oin, to !ause me a )it more o# a %ea(a!%e. :%e use( >>laughs??
to put t%ose ones at t%e )a!*. I (on=t a!tually (o t%at3 )ut umm I suppose I (o sort o#3 I (o
t%in* #or t%is stu(ent #or e7ample I t%in* s%e is one o# t%e stron,er ones in t%e !lass3 so I *in(
o# t%ou,%t >7777? t%is one "ill )e o*3 I !an rea( t%is one. :o I "as e7pe!tin, it to )e *in( o#
9uite easy to rea(. 5mm3 an( suppose I rea( t%rou,% it very 9ui!*ly3 ,et t%e sort o# ,eneral
i(ea o# it an( t%in* %mm an( may)e loo*in, at t%e *in( o# mar* s!%eme an( t%in*in, a)out
t%in,s li*e t%e !ontent3 t%e stru!ture an( t%at sort o# stu an( t%en ummm. 1n( t%en I *in( o#
,o t%rou,% it an( (o t%e lan,ua,e t%in, an( t%at )rin,s out some t%in,s3 sort o#3 also "%i!%
are non2lan,ua,e )ase(3 li*e t%is t%in, er >>reading from sample)? Ft%e in(ivi(ual !an !%oose
t%e suita)le style=3 not really !ause it=s you *no"3 it=s not really an in(ivi(ual=s !%oi!e is it3
"%i!% #amily you are )orn into. :o points t%at (on=t ma*e sense lo,i!ally3 I also pi!* out
may)e. 5mm >...? an( t%en also sometimes you ,o )a!* an( I t%in*3 t%in* "ell >..? o* I3 I=ve
>7777? t%is )it3 t%is is somet%in, t%at you=ve (one )e#ore in %ere an( I ,o )a!* an( mar*3 mar*
t%at. :o I noti!e( it in t%is one3 so I=ve sort o# ,et (o"n 9uite a lon, "ay )e#ore I ,et to a)out
%ere >>pointing at sample)? an( t%en I noti!e t%in,s li*e F,rey %air "ave= an( Fen(an,ere(
tri)es= an( I start t%in*in, umm vo!a)ulary %ere is3 s%e=s very ,oo( at tryin, t%is (ierent
vo!a)ulary3 )ut it=s not al"ays a!!urate3 s%e=s ,ettin, it "ron,3 li*e F"arm (is!ussions=. :o
umm I t%in* t%e point I=m ma(e to %er is vo!a)3 li*e *in( o# !%ill3 !ool it (o"n a )it.
IH 'or all t%ree o# t%ese you=ve ten(e( to put a 9uestion mar* >..?
1H 5mm
102
0
23
1
23
2
23
3
23
4
23
5
23
6
23
7
23
8
23
9
24
0
24
1
24
2
24
3
24
4
24
5
24
6
24
7
24
8
24
9
25
IH &%y (i( you (e!i(e to %i,%li,%t it in t%is "ay@
1H 5mm3 #or t%ose ones umm >..? "%en "it% F"arm (is!ussions= I "asn=t sure "%at s%e meant
)y F"arm (is!ussions= I t%ou,%t s%e may %ave spelt somet%in, >7777? I "asn=t really sure "%at
t%at "oul( )e. I (i(n=t really t%in* a)out it3 I (on=t t%in* until a!tually "e (i( t%e3 "%en "e
"ere tal*in, a)out it an( t%en s%e sai( a% t%ere *in( o# %ot topi!s3 an( I "as li*e a%% o* so
t%en t%e !ollo!ation %eate( (is!ussion !ame out3 "%i!% is "%y I "rote it up %ere. I "rote t%is
"%y "ere a!tually tal*in, a)out t%in,s. 5mm an( t%ese ones >7777? Fpopulation a,in,
situation= I put e7plain )etter. FDoosin, )irt% poli!y= an( F,rey %air "ave= I Cust t%ou,%t o* "e
are su((enly ,ettin, 9uite a lot o# t%in,s "ere I=m >..? sort o# pullin, )a!* an( so t%is one I=ve
put e7plain )etter )ut %ere rat%er t%an puttin, e7plain3 I t%ou,%t I=( Cust put 9uestion mar* so
t%at "%en "e tal* a)out it3 "e !an >..? umm "e !an say3 s%e !an3 s%e !an e7plain it a little )it.
:o it sort o# )rin,s t%at point out a )it more may)e.
IH 4i( you !onsi(er usin, a !o(e #or t%ese@
1H 5mmm. I (on=t really *no" "%at t%e pro)lem is3 I mean F,rey %air "ave=3 I mean
Fen(an,ere( tri)es= I put "ron, "or(3 )e!ause may)e en(an,ere( people3 en(an,ere(
populations )ut not tri)es really. :o in t%at !ase it=s more3 it=s one "or(. 6ut Floosin, )irt%
poli!y= >...? I mean I=m not 9uite sure "%at s%e means )y Floosin,= I mean err >..? an( F,rey %air
"ave= >>laughs)? $%is is not a %air(ressin, stu(ent. I (o3 I *no" "%at s%e means3 I (o *no"
"%at s%e means )y t%at one I t%in*3 t%at=s "%y "e tal*e( a)out F,reyin, population= >>referring
to a comment on the sample)? >7777? ,ave %er t%e alternative 1meri!an spellin, t%ere as "ell.
F0reyin, population= )ut err3 you *no"3 I )asi!ally >7777? I %a( to say t%is )rou,%t out t%e i(ea
o# !ollo!ations an( t%is )rou,%t out t%e i(ea o# ummm yes you are usin, interestin,
vo!a)ulary3 )ut it sometimes is not "or*in,.
IH I# you "eren=t ,oin, to (is!uss it a#ter"ar(s3 (o you t%in* you=( %ave )een a )it more
spe!iA! "it% t%e #ee()a!* %ere@
1H 5mmm >..? o% yea%3 I *no" i# I "asn=t3 i# I "asn=t ,oin, to (is!uss it I "oul( %ave put
un(erline( t%em. :ome t%in,s I=ve (one in t%e past is may)e put asteris*s ne7t to all o# t%em
an( put umm "%at (o you mean e7a!tly )y t%ese p%rases.
IH +*.
1H 5mm3 er t%ese nee( to )e e7presse( (ierently or somet%in, li*e t%at. -rr3 I suppose t%is
one3 I t%in* i# I=( t%ou,%t a)out it a)out more I !oul( %ave put "arm (is!ussions umm3 umm is
t%at t%e same as %ot topi!s it=s not t%e ri,%t !ollo!ation3 An( a "or( t%at ,oes "it% (is!ussions
t%at e7presses t%is )etter. 6ut umm3 um. I *no"3 I sometimes I pre#er to %ave a *in( o# more
open style o#. I (on=t usually use a !orre!tion !o(e. I ten( to use very simple >..? un(erline i# it=s
"ron,3 s9ui,,ly line i# it=s not 9uite ri,%t3 )ut t%at=s "it% t%e stron,er stu(ents. I t%in*3 t%ey=ve
,ot more o# a sort o# )a!*,roun( o# vo!a)ulary an( ,rammar. &it% t%is3 "e are en!oura,e( to
use a !orre!tion !o(e >..? an( so I suppose I *in( o# %al# use it )ut "it% t%at I "oul(n=t *no"
%o" to e7press it3 I mean is it "ron, "or( 3 is it >..?
IH It=s not al"ays !lear. :o !an Cust !lari#y3 (o you use a !orre!tion !o(e "it% t%e stron,er or t%e
"ea*er stu(ents@
103
0
25
1
25
2
25
3
25
4
25
5
25
6
25
7
25
8
25
9
26
0
26
1
26
2
26
3
26
4
26
5
26
6
26
7
26
8
26
9
27
1H 5mm3 pro)a)ly t%e "ea*er ones a!tually.
IH+*.
1H $%e "ea*er ones. 6e!ause "it%3 #or e7ample t%e .%4 stu(ents I use( in Italy. I (i( use a sort
o# !orre!tion !o(e3 )ut also )e!ause t%ere are less errors3 t%at t%e same as t%e sort o# tense3
"ron, "or( or(er3 not no "or( or(er3 not "it% Italian stu(ents er >>laughs)? er t%e3 t%e sort o#
mista*es ten( to )e sli,%tly (ierent3 so I suppose you !an %ave a looser !orre!tion !o(e.
&%ereas "it% t%is lot it=s )etter to %ave a more >..?
IH 4o you ever vary t%e "ay you !orre!t "it%in an essay itsel# rat%er t%an #rom person to
person@ :o "oul( you !orre!t some errors in one "ay an( ot%ers in anot%er@ I# t%at ma*es any
sense.
1H -r3 I suppose I mi,%t start )y ma*in, it more e7pli!it an( t%en to"ar(s t%e en( un(erlin,
t%in,s. 'or e7ample i# someone=s ,ot lots o# su)Ce!t2ver) t%in,s t%en to"ar(s t%e en( I mi,%t
>..? umm >..? sort o# Cust un(erlin, t%em so I (on=t nee( to repeat t%at3 so t%ey "oul( %ope#ully
)e3 )y loo*in, at t%e Arst ones realise t%at it=s t%e same mista*e a,ain.
IH +*. &oul( you ever use (ire!t error !orre!tion@
1H Lou mean "ritin, in t%e !orre!t ans"er. 5mm I o!!asionally (o3 I (on=t i# I=ve (one it %ere3
li*e t%ere I %ave >>points to example of direct correction in sample)?.
IH +*.
1H 5mm >...? er yea% "%en I (on=t *no"3 sometimes it Cust er >...? I suppose "%en it=s not3 "%en
it=s somet%in, t%at=s (iE!ult to e7plain %o" to !%an,e it umm >..? I suppose t%at "%en I "oul(
use it. I (on=t ten( to I ten( to use more open !orre!tion3 )ut o!!asionally >..? I (on=t *no"3 t%e
pen Cust slips >>lau,%s??. No3 it=s very3 "it% t%at one I mean I Cust t%ou,%t3 I (on=t really see t%e
point o# ,oin, t%rou,% F>7777? (ierently=3 "%at (o you mean e7a!tly >..? ummm >..? I t%in* it=s
easier Cust to say3 no2no you !an=t really say it li*e t%at3 you=( %ave to say Fin (ierent "ays=3 it
Cust (oesn=t sort o# ma*e sense. &%i!% in a "ay I (on=t min(3 F!os it=s a )it li*e i# a native
spea*er "%o "asn=t a tea!%er "as !orre!tin, it. :o I (on=t min( t%at *in( o# stu >..?
sometimes >..? )ut t%e rest o# it3 I t%in* is more *in( o# >..? e(u!ational i# you li*e.
IH +*. :o you "oul(n=t use t%at all t%e "ay t%rou,%3 (ire!t@
1H >..? No3 F!os t%at=s sort o# li*e you are proo# rea(in,. It (epen(s on t%e !ir!umstan!e )ut
,enerally "%en3 "%en it=s a !ourse an( t%is is a *in( o# )uil(in, pro!ess3 no3 I (on=t t%in* so.
IH +*. +*. 1re t%ere any ot%er points you=( li*e to (is!uss@
1H 5ummm >...? I mean t%ere are ot%er t%in,s o)viously t%at I=m noti!in, no"3 li*e t%ere #or
e7ample3 not p%ysi!ally3 )ut t%at s%oul( )e not only p%ysi!ally )ut also mentally >>referring to
an unidentifed error in sample)? )ut t%ere are t%in,s t%ere. I (on=t *no" a)out "%et%er to
!orre!t everyt%in,.
IH Lea%3 I "as ,oin, to as* a)out t%at.
1H 5mm >..?
IH &%at (o you t%in*@ 4o you3 "oul( you say you normally !orre!t everyt%in, or all t%in,s you
see@
1H -rr3 I t%in* )e!ause >..? mHy i(ea o# t%is is t%at )y t%e en( o# t%e 10 "ee*s t%ey=re not
104
0
27
1
27
2
27
3
27
4
27
5
27
6
27
7
27
8
27
9
28
0
28
1
28
2
28
3
28
4
28
5
28
6
28
7
28
8
28
9
29
,onna )e per#e!t3 so "e=re not loo*in, #or per#e!tion >..? 5mmm >..? an( I *no" t%ere=s t%at
sort o# re( pen syn(rome o# re!eivin, your "or* )a!* "it% Cust so many mar*s on it. $%is3 o*3 i#
you re!eive( t%at )a!*3 you mi,%t *in(a ,o oo% umm >>laughs?? )e!ause it (oes loo* li*e
t%ere=s 9uite a lot on it3 )ut I umm %aven=t use( re(. 5mm3 also >..? I=( may)e not !orre!te(
every sin,le little t%in, umm >...? an( I suppose part o# it is also tryin, to i(enti#y "%at are t%e
main t%in,s to !omment on rat%er t%an >...? you *no" umm >...? yea% rat%er t%an sort o# every
sin,le little Fs= or missin, F#=3 t%ir( person Fs= an( t%in,s li*e t%at3 t%at=s pro)a)ly um 3 I "oul(
say >...?
IH +*3 umm3 (o you !orre!t all your stu(ents "or* in t%e same "ay@
1H Lep3 more or less3 yep I (o to3 "ell3 it (epen(s on t%e tas* I suppose. :o #or t%is essay3 i# I (o
it #or one stu(ent I (o it t%e same "ay #or every ot%er stu(ent #or t%at essay (eAnitely. It mi,%t
vary sli,%tly3 I mean may)e i# t%ere "as a re"rite o# t%is3 I mi,%t use a sli,%tly looser
!orre!tion !o(e #or e7ample umm >..? oHr in t%e past "%en "e=ve (one Arst (ra#t an( t%en Anal
version3 Anal version "e (i(n=t really !orre!t so mu!% so >..? umm may)e more Cust t%e overall
!omments an( less o# t%e ,rammar err lan,ua,e !orre!tion I suppose. 6ut it (epen(s on t%e
tas*3 not on t%e stu(ent. $%e same stu(ents "oul( )e t%e same #or ea!% >..?
IH +*3 F!os I=m Cust t%in*in, are any o# t%ese !omments or points t%at you may)e "oul(n=t pi!*
up "it% anot%er stu(ent3 are t%ere any3 is anyt%in, 9uite spe!iA! to t%is stu(ent@
1H &ell3 I suppose one t%in, %ere is t%at er3 Jris is one o# t%e stron,er stu(ents in t%e !lass an(
umm3 er s%e=s very ,oo( at (oin, synonyms an( loo*in, #or ne" vo!a)ulary an( umm s%e=s
usin, t%in,s li*e sel(om an( t%in,s li*e t%at3 pre!o!ious3 I mean s%e=s ,one out an( #oun( er3
s%e=s usin, sel(om t"i!e "%i!%3 s%oul( )e use( sel(om3 I t%in* really >>laughs??
IH >>laughs)?
1H-rm3 )ut umm t%en s%e=s ,o t%e population a,ein, situation "%i!% (oesn=t soun( 9uite ri,%t3
t%e ,rey %air "ave "%i!% really (oesn=t an( t%e loosin, )irt% poli!y. 5mm >...? "%i!% soun(s
9uite pain#ul a!tually3 )ut so umm I (on=t *no" all t%ese t%in,s >..? I t%in* "it% %er3 it "as. It
"as more o# a t%in, to point out. 5mm I )ut I (on=t *no" is it more %er t%in, or is it more t%e
essay=s t%in,. I (on=t *no" i# it=s a)out t%e in(ivi(ual stu(ent or3 or not. :%e also %as a
ten(en!y an( in %er previous essay3 to ,o #or sli,%tly >..? >>alarm rings)? t%at usually ,oes at
t%is time I t%in*. -rr3 t%en #or sort o# ,eneralisations an( not t%at t%is one is really li*e t%at3 )ut
s%e sometimes ma*es s"eepin, statements t%at s%e (oesn=t 9uali#y an( I t%ou,%t u,%%% )ut I3
t%at in t%e previous essay t%at %a( *in( o# )een mentione(. :o I suppose t%in,s #rom )e#ore
mi,%t !ome )a!*. 5mmm3 um.
IH :o you t%in* you=re 9uite a stan(ar( >...?
1H I=m 9uite a stan(ar(3 I t%in*3 )ut err yea% I suppose
IH I >7777? mar*er t%e ri,%t "or( >7777? )ut a stan(ar( #ee()a!* provi(er >>laughs)?
1H 'ee()a!*er >>laughs)? I (on=t *no". 6ut I suppose I (o try to tailor it to t%e stu(ents a )it.
5mm I (i( somet%in, #unny "it% t%ese essays in t%e sense "it% one stu(ent "%ere I sort o#
starte( to ,et )o,,e( (o"n in loo*in, at t%eir para,rap%s. 5mmm an( I (i( start to ,et a )it
)o,,e( (o"n "it% it an( in t%e en( I Cust sai( loo* t%is is not "or*in,3 F!ause I=m a!tually
105
0
29
1
29
2
29
3
29
4
29
5
29
6
29
7
29
8
29
9
30
0
30
1
30
2
30
3
30
4
30
5
30
6
30
7
30
8
30
9
31
An(in, t%is really %ar( to rea(. :o "%at I really nee( you to (o is to ,o a"ay an( Cust re"rite
t%e main )o(y. $%ese para,rap%s3 t%in* a)out "%ere t%e para,rap%s )e,in an( en(3 )e!ause it
"as all very Cum)le( up. 5mm so t%at "as a )it unusual #or me3 I (on=t normally (o t%at. I
t%in* in t%e past I may %ave %a( t%e ten(en!y to plou,% on t%rou,% t%in,s3 "%en t%ey=re really
(ense an( t%en you start ,ettin, really !on#use( yoursel#. 1n( s%e )rou,%t t%at in t%is mornin,
umm t%is ot%er stu(ent an( umm s%e %a( improve( it a lot umm >..? so I "oKyes sometimes
re"ritin, part i# it really (oesn=t ma*e sense t%at somet%in, else. :o I suppose s%e ,ot
(ierent treatment in a "ay to t%e ot%er stu(ents3 )ut )e!ause I3 I !onsi(er %er to )e "ea*er3 I
(on=t !onsi(er Jris to )e "ea*er3 so >..?
IH +*.
1H 5m.
IH 5mm . 4o you ever ,ive a mar*@
1H 5mm "e "ere tol( not to in t%e Arst Ave "ee*s.
IH +*.
1H 6ut t%ey o)viously "or* out "%at t%eir mar* "oul( )e #rom t%is >>points to marking
scheme)?
IH 'rom t%is. +*. $%e I-D$: e9uivalent
1H -7a!tly3 yes.
IH +verall3 "%at (o you %ope t%is #ee()a!* "ill a!%ieve@
1H 5mmm I t%in* pro)a)ly #or t%e se!on( essay I "oul( li*e %er to ,o #or t%is point >>pointing
to a specifc comment )? Fma*e it a stron,er >7777? )e!ause I t%ou,%t it "as very )alan!e(3 )ut
s%e (i(n=t !ome (o"n on eit%er si(eKit "as a )it too >...?
IH 5% um
1H 1n( "e (is!usse( one3 "%en "e %a( t%e (is!ussion "e (is!usse( some)o(y else=s essay.
5mm t%at=s %er #rien( in t%e ,roup umm an( s%e sai( a% yes I *no" t%at one )e!ause I=ve
loo*e( at %is essay3 "e=ve loo*e( at ea!% ot%er=s. 5mm an( so s%e3 I t%in*3 may)e >..? I "oul(
%ope t%at s%e "oul( ,o #or t%is %ere. -rm an( t%e t%in, "it% t%e vo!a)3 I t%in* I as*e( %er to
*in( o# try an( Cust )rin, it (o"n3 ma*e sure it=s ni!e an( !lear an( not >..? I (on=t *no"3 I
never really *no" %o" to3 to say t%at to people "%en t%ey (o it. 4on=t ,o !raNy umm >..? it=s
not an ele!troni! (i!tionary t%in, "%i!% o#ten you ,et it=s3 it=s a *in( o# li*e tryin, too %ar( to.
5mm an( sometimes it "or*s really3 really "ell3 really ni!ely )ut ot%er times it=s Cust3 it !reates
a *in( o# >..? umm >..? it !reates a pro)lem.
IH 4o you ever "orry t%at t%is "ill *in( o# (emotivate an( (is!oura,e %er #rom tryin, "it% %er
vo!a)ulary@
1H 5mm >...? yeK"ell3 I suppose it !oul( (o. I t%in* it=s unli*ely t%at someone "%o %as t%is
"ritin, style is ,oin, to su((enly !%an,e to )e really simplisti!. :o I (on=t t%in* t%at s%e "oul(
!%an,e t%at mu!%. 5mm an( I t%in* may)e )e!ause I sai( e7plain )etter3 %ope#ully t%at s%e
"oul( ,o #or t%at approa!% rat%er t%an >..? really ma*in, it really simple. I (on=t >..? t%in*
people usually >..? t%e3 t%e3 anot%er ,uy in t%e !lass "%o "as er s"allo"e( an ele!troni!
(i!tionary *in(a !ase umm >..? %e3 I noti!e( in t%is essay #rom t%e Arst one3 %a( )rou,%t it
106
0
31
1
31
2
31
3
31
4
31
5
31
6
31
7
31
8
31
9
32
0
32
1
32
2
32
3
32
4
32
5
32
6
32
7
32
8
32
9
33
(o"n 9uite a lot. Be=( ,ot less o# t%e3 *in( o# "a!*y "or(s t%at (on=t !ome #rom any"%ere >..?
so I t%in* t%at t%ey (o move to"ar(s it >..? umm >..? er >..? )ut t%en I suppose sometimes you
%ave to !orre!t some)o(y "%o ,oes too #ar one "ay t%en too #ar t%e ot%er "ay an( you %ave
to try an( ,et t%em )a!* into t%e mi((le. I (on=t t%in* Jris "ill t%ou,% F!os s%e=s >..? umm
t%at=s *in( o# %er style an( so >..? um
IH Bo" (o you t%in* Jris #elt "%en s%e rea( t%is3 or (o you *no" %o" s%e #elt@
1H 5mm >..? o% I (on=t *no"3 you=ve spo*en to %er as "ell so I (on=t *no" >>laughs)?.
IH >>laughs)?
1H >7777? s%e "asn=t upset3 I (on=t t%in* s%e "oul( %ave )een upset. I mean you *no"3 s%e=s
sort o# 9uite !onA(ent ,irl >7777? umm3 umm I (on=t *no" I "orry3 >7777? ma*in, it a stron,er
ar,ument3 may)e it=s not ,oo( to re#er to anot%er stu(ent )ut I *no" t%ey are #rien(s an( t%at
t%ey %a( loo*e( at ea!% ot%er=s essays )e#ore so I t%ou,%t t%at it "as 9uite ,oo( to ,ive an
e7ample o# t%at. I t%in* also Jris is a ,oo( stu(ent an( it=s3 s%e=s one o# t%ose people t%at it3
it=s very important to )e a ,oo( a stu(ent3 s%e umm li*es praise very o#ten3 s%e very o#ten
ans"ers 9uestions. :%e=s a )it o# a lea(er "it%in a ,roup. I noti!e( to(ay t%at t%ey %a( to
invent senten!es "it% umm non2(eAnin, relative !lauses an( %er ,roup3 "%i!% "as %er an(
t%ree )oys t%ere3 t%ere senten!e t%ey invente( "ere Jris3 "%o is a very )eauti#ul ,irl >..?
IH >>laughs)?
1H an( I=m not sure i# it "as t%e )oys (oin, it )y t%emselves or "%et%er t%ey "ere *in( o# le(
into t%at a little )it more. 6ut umm3 umm >..? )ut no I mean I t%in* s%e3 s%e=s a ,reat stu(ent
#rom t%at point o# vie" )ut I er "it% %er I "oul( also not "ant %er to ,et too !onA(ent3
)e!ause t%is to me is a *in( o# too !onA(ent pro)lem3 "%ere you start to ,et >..? so in a "ay
t%at=s "%y I (i( s%o" %er someone else=s essay3 to say o*3 you are not t%e )est ne!essarily 3
t%ere are ot%er "ays o# (oin, t%in,s an( a!tually I (on=t t%in* %er essay "as 9uite as ,oo( as
>stu(ent=s name remove(?. It "as )etter #or vo!a)ulary )ut in terms o# !ontent it "asn=t as
,oo( umm an( so s%e *in( o# >...? I (on=t *no"3 not t%at3 I (on=t "ant to say s%e "ants to )e
*ept in line )ut I Cust (on=t "ant %er to ,et too sort o# !arrie( a"ay "it% t%in,s so >..? I (on=t
*no" I %ope3 I=( %ope t%at s%e realise( t%at t%at "as sort o# t%e maCor !%an,e t%at s%e %a( to
ma*e an( t%at t%is "as somet%in, t%at s%e "as (oin, "ell )ut er nee(e( to )rin, it (o"n a
little )it more.
IH 1re t%ere any e7amples o# praise on %ere@
1H >..? No >>laughs)? umm >...? No I (on=t t%in* t%ere are on t%is one. I3 I t%in* pro)a)ly t%ere are
on %ere >>looking at hand written comments on the marking sheet)?
IH 5%2um
1H F0oo( attempt= an( F0oo(= er I %ave3 I (i( (o it on some o# t%e ot%ers I %a( umm an( I put
sort o# smiley #a!es3 t%in,s3 ti!*3 ni!e vo!a)ulary >..?
IH 5%2um.
1H 5mm.
IH 4o you t%in* it=s 9uite important3 to #or t%is praise an( t%is positive rein#or!ement@
1H Lea%3 yea%3 yea%3 yea% (eAnitely. I (on=t t%in* it s%oul( )e Cust !riti!ism I t%in* it=s ,oo(3
107
0
33
1
33
2
33
3
33
4
33
5
33
6
33
7
33
8
33
9
34
0
34
1
34
2
34
3
34
4
34
5
34
6
34
7
34
8
34
9
35
,oo( to %ave positive t%in,s in t%ere as "ell. 1n( I suppose I t%in*3 "%at I t%in* "it% Jris is
t%at I t%in* s%e pro)a)ly *no"s t%at s%e=s a ,oo( stu(ent. :o I suppose t%at=s possi)ly "%y I
%aven=t put so many3 "%ereas "it% t%e ot%ers I=m tryin, to en!oura,e t%em a )it more3 "it%
%er I=m not so mu!%. I=m tryin, to slap %er (o"n.
IH >>laughs)?
1H >>laughs)? No3 I=m not3 no3 )ut I=m tryin, to )rin, %er (o"n sli,%tly !ause t%is is t%e *in( o#
over er >..? it=s a sli,%tly over t%e top t%in, s%e=s (oin, umm an( s%e (oes it in !lass. I mean
you !an see it in !lass3 s%e=ll ans"er a 9uestion an( it=s not ri,%t s%e sort o# loo*s at me
!rest#allen #or a se!on( an( t%en s%e=s )a!*. :%e=s t%at *in( o# personality I t%in*3 so nee(s to
)e mana,e( in t%at "ay3 sli,%tly. $%at soun(s a"#ul no"3 sorry3 mana,in, personalities3 sorry
>..?
IH No3 >7777? no you %ave to in a !lassroom "%en you %ave ,ot lots o# (ierent people3 (on=t
you.
1H &ell3 I suppose you3 t%at=s3 t%at=s t%e ni!e t%in, a)out %avin, small !lasses is t%at you !an
rea!t to t%e person in(ivi(ually so t%e stron, stu(ent you !an *in( o# ma*e sure t%ey *eep
"it%in t%e lines an( t%e "ea* stu(ent you !an *in( o# praise t%em up >..? so
IH 4o you ever An( yoursel#3 you *no" >..? (esperately tryin, to An( t%in,s to3 to praise t%em
>..? #or@ +r are you 9uite >..? *in( o# you *no"3 as it is.
1H No3 I suppose may)e my praise is a little )it over e7a,,erate( #or "%at it is sometimes. Lou
*no"3 "o" t%at=s a really3 I li*e t%e "ay you=ve separate( your para,rap%s or somet%in,
>>laughs)? sometimes. 6ut it=s still ,oo( to %ave some praise #or t%e "ea*er stu(ents I
suppose. 5mm an( i# I say to one o# t%e ot%er stu(ents in t%e !lass #or e7ample t%is ,uy
>stu(ent=s name remove(?3 "%o=s #rom :au(i3 you=ve ,ot really ,oo( vo!a)ulary %ere. Be %as
,ot really ,oo( vo!a)ulary #or %im3 )ut it=s not%in, !ompare( to Jris. :o it=s relative3 I
suppose.
IH +*. 5mm t%in*in, a)out t%e "ay you er provi(e #ee()a!* spe!iA!ally t%is pie!e o# paper
>>pointing to feedback)?3 umm %ave you al"ays (on=t it t%is "ay@ +r is somet%in, "%i!% %as
(evelope( over time3 t%rou,% e7perien!e or is it somet%in, you=ve )een tol( to (o@
1H 5mm >..? $%e !orre!tion !o(e "e=ve )een tol( to (o t%is year an( ot%ers t%at I=ve3 I %ave
use( a more3 a looser one in t%e past3 umm >..? mmm t%e *in( o# 9uestion mar* t%in, "%o >..?
I3 I t%in* t%at=s also >...? er a )it li*e t%e sort o# native spea*er loo*in, at somet%in, *in( o# "ay
o# (oin, it )e!ause I %ave in t%e past )een *no"n to "rite u%%%O >>laughs)? )e!ause I Cust t%in*
"%en you are rea(in, it you (o ,o u%%%3 "%at@
IH Lea%. It=s your rea!tion3 yea%.
1H Lea%3 I=ve sometime "ritten t%in,s li*e "%at is t%is@ 1n( t%in,s li*e t%at )ut3 "%i!% mi,%t
loo* really %ars% )ut I t%in* "%en you are (oin, it orally t%at=s Ane )e!ause you !an say I
(i(n=t un(erstan( t%is point %ere an( umm >...? er an( umm. Les3 an( I3 I t%e i(ea o# "ritin,
t%is is somet%in, I ,ot into o# er t%in,s t%at you nee( to !%an,e. :o I suppose t%is one %asn=t
,ot a lot o# praise3 a!tually F!os I ten( to (o *in( o# smiley #a!e3 "it% I li*e t%e "ay you (i( t%is
or3 somet%in, li*e ti!*3 li*e t%is3 line or s9ui,,ly line umm you !oul( loo* at t%is3 you !oul( loo*
108
0
35
1
35
2
35
3
35
4
35
5
35
6
35
7
35
8
35
9
36
0
36
1
36
2
36
3
36
4
36
5
36
6
36
7
36
8
36
9
37
at t%at an( it=s usually more )alan!e(. 6ut #or %er=s3 t%ere are Cust t"o ne,atives3 so t%is "as
pro)a)ly not t%e )est e7ample to ,ive you "as it >>laughs)?. 6ut no3 s%e is pro)a)ly t%e
stron,est stu(ent a!tually3 I t%in*. In lan,ua,e terms. :o t%at=s "%y. :o umm yes3 it=s *in( o#
(evelope( t%e "ay I=ve3 I=ve (one t%in,s an( I (on=t li*e ,ivin, mar*s3 umm i# I !an avoi( it.
1n( I *no" t%at t%e stu(ents "ant it )ut "e "ere spe!iA!ally tol( not to ,ive t%em t%is time so
I t%in* t%at )y ,ivin, t%em t%ese *in( o# ,lo)al !omments t%at *in( o# repla!es t%at.
IH +*. 1n( %as t%is "or*e( "ell in t%e past@
1H Lea%. I t%in* so3 I t%in* so F!os it=s t%e3 t%e t"o or t%ree t%in,s people "or* on it=s )etter
t%an too many t%in,s.
IH +*. :o overall t%ese are t%e t%in,s you "ant t%e stu(ent to ta*e a"ay #rom t%is #ee()a!*@
>>pointing to global comments??
1H Lea%3 yea%3 yea%. 1n( t%en #or t%e lan,ua,e t%in,s3 I t%in* t%at=s an3 it=s almost li*e an
e7tra e7er!ise. I mean "e are en!oura,e( to (o t%at an( t%en t%ey !an tal* to a resour!e tutor
a)out t%at as "ell. :o t%at (oesn=t even ne!essarily !ome )a!* to us. 1lt%ou,% some o# t%em
%ave as*e( i# t%ey !oul( re"rite a para,rap% an( I=ve sai( yea%3 o*. 5mm3 )ut ,enerally t%at=s
somet%in, e7tra I t%in*3 t%at=s li*e an e7tra e7er!ise. $%at=s not t%e main #o!us %ere.
IH +*. 5mm >..? "%ere t%ere any points spe!iA!ally t%at !ame up in t%e umm #a!e2to2#a!e
(is!ussions t%at er Jris (i(n=t really un(erstan(@ 1ny parti!ularly pro)lemati! points@
1H I !an=t remem)er no" really. 5mm >...? s%e (eAnitely un(erstoo( t%Kt%e in#ormality.
IH 5%2um.
1H >...? ummm >..? I t%in* t%e3 t%e lan,ua,e t%in,s mostly s%e=( ,et. I mean it "as a )it more3
s%e (i(n=t un(erstan( (aily supplies I (on=t t%in*3 "%en I sai( I=m sure "%at you mean e7a!tly
)y t%at. I (on=t t%in* s%e "as sure a)out t%at one >..? err s%e (i(n=t seKsel(om I t%in* I sai(
"ell you=ve use( t%at "or( t"i!e an( it=s not3 you *no" you !oul( say less #re9uently or
somet%in, instea(. It=s not so3 use( so mu!% li*e t%at. 1n( may)e t%ese t%in,s3 it "as 9uite a
%ar( !on!ept to e7plain t%at >..? puttin, t%in,s to,et%er li*e t%at (oesn=t al"ays "or*. :o I
trie( to sort o# say you *no"3 you nee( to e7plain t%at )etter F!os no)o(y says an( ,rey %air
"ave3 "%at (o you mean li*e t%at e7a!tly@ 1n( I sai( it soun( a )it li*e %air an( s%e lau,%e(3
an( so t%at *in( o# t%in,. 5mm an( t%is point %ere >...? ummm >..? yea% I mean3 I3 I mean an(
at t%e )e,innin, o# t%e senten!e t%at=s anot%er t%in,. 1n( at t%e )e,innin, o# senten!e is I
suppose in#ormal3 it=s Cust it=s not3 it=s not !orre!t a!a(emi! style so it=s >7777? in#ormal
ne!essarily I (on=t t%in*. 6ut I try to en!oura,e t%em not to use an( or )ut at t%e )e,innin, o#
a senten!e or you *no"3 t%at *in( o# t%in,. 5mm >..? t%is one %ere >>pointing to comment on
feedback sample)? may)e3 t%at point t%ere I=m not sure>..? I sort o# %a( to sort o# say to %er3
e7plain t%at one a )it more. 6ut I t%in* t%at "as t%e most (iE!ult t%in, to e7plain. $%e
!ollo!ation stu.
IH >vo!a)ulary? +*. 5mm >...? I t%in* I Cust !ome )a!* to one more point. Lou sai( you (on=t
!orre!t all3 all errors. &%y (i( you sin,le out t%is :V. or t%is ver) p%rase@ &as t%ere parti!ular
reason3 "%y you (e!i(e( to %i,%li,%t t%is "it% a !orre!tion !o(e3 an( not ot%ers@
1H 5mm >...? I t%in* t%at one >>points to unidentifed error?? I possi)ly (i(n=t noti!e >>laughs)?
109
0
37
1
37
2
37
3
37
4
37
5
37
6
37
7
37
8
37
9
38
0
38
1
38
2
38
3
38
4
38
5
38
6
38
7
38
8
38
9
39
IH No3 I t%in* t%at=s 9uite normal isn=t it.
1H 5mmmm >..? umm I (on=t *no". I=m Cust t%in*in, a)out ot%er3 "%at ot%er mista*es t%ere are
in t%ere.
IH <ay)e you (i( !orre!t t%em all.
1H I mean I suppose t%at one >>pointing at and reading out possible unidentifed errors)) Fless
people=3 an( in #a!t #e"er3 it s%oul( really >7777? people ma*e t%at mista*e. Native spea*ers
ma*e t%at *in( o# mista*e any"ay >..? -r Ft%e maCority o# or,anisations=3 a,ain may)e I (i(n=t
noti!e it >>laughs)?. >7777? Fin an area= I t%ou,%t a)out t%at )ut >..? in a parti!ular area3 o*.
5mm I suppose t%ese3 "%K"%at t%e reason I "oul( (o t%is is )e!ause I Cust t%in* t%at=s a
mista*e you !an !orre!t. It=s an( easy !orre!ta)le one.
IH+*
1H $%at=s "%y3 :V. I ten( to (o :V )e!ause I3 I t%in* rea(in, t%rou,% your o"n "or* t%at=s t%e
t%in, t%at you noti!e. 1n( I al"ays say to stu(ents3 you *no"3 i# you rea( t%rou,% your "or*3
al"ays loo* at t%e ver)s. :%oul( it %ave an Fs= on t%e en(@ 1n( I %a( a statisti! on!e #rom
some)o(y a)out %o" i# you rea( t%rou,% your "or* you !an !at!% t"enty per!ent o# your
mista*es )y rea(in, t%rou,%. :o I al"ays en!oura,e t%em to reKan( I3 I t%in* Jris pro)a)ly
(oes rea( t%rou,%3 )ut I t%in* t%ere are ot%ers t%at (on=t. 5mm >..? um so I suppose t%at=s
more o# a sort o# !arelessness t%in, F!os I "oul( e7pe!t %er to *no" t%at pro)a)ly.
IH :o "oul( you say t%at you %i,%li,%t t%e "or(s t%at you t%in* t%ey !an !orre!t t%emselves@
1H I t%in*
IH :mall
1H I t%in* little t%in,s t%at t%ey !an !orre!t t%emselves. $%in,s li*e >..? >>reading from the
sample)? >7777? Fas a sin,le !%il( #amily more or less pus%es t%e !%il( to %ave %is or %er o"n
opinion #rom a very=3 o* it "oul( )e )etter to say t%e !%il( is pus%e(. &e %aven=t tal*e( a)out
t%e passive yet3 umm an( loo*e( at t%at. 1lso3 I mean t%at3 t%at (oes *in( o# "or*. I (on=t
t%in*3 it=s3 it=s un(erstan(a)le an( li*e I say "e are not aimin, #or per#e!tion. I (on=t t%in* t%ey
are ,onna )e per#e!t. :o I (on=t t%in* everyt%in, nee(s to )e %i,%li,%te(.
IH +*. :o i# it=s not a )i, issue er i# it=s a small issue3 somet%in, easily !ollK!orre!ta)le you !an
%i,%li,%t it. 1n( i# it=s not somet%in, "%i!% really impe(es meanin, t%en >..?
1H Lep3 t%en I !an leave it. Lep3 an( t%en i# it=s somet%in, "%i!% is li*e er3 li*e t%is vo!a) issue.
I t%in* t%at=s more important #or %er to a((ress3 no"3 t%an t%ose ot%er t%in,s. $%e sort o#
in)et"eeny t%in,s. :o simple t%in,s s%e s%oul( )e a)le to Cust !orre!t t%ose3 umm Cust )y
!%e!*in,. 5mm t%e !ollo!ation t%in,s3 t%e ot%er e7tremes3 t%e more (iE!ult t%in, to3 to
(is!uss t%at=s "%at s%e nee(s to "or* on per%aps. 1n( t%Kt%ere=s still senten!es "%ere it=s
not 9uite ri,%t3 may)e you !oul( use a passive ver) FmaCority o#= t%ey are not )i,3 )i, issues
t%ey !an *in( o# un(erstan( t%em rea(in, t%rou,%3 I suppose3 um.
IH +*. 5mm >..? I t%in* t%at=s pretty mu!% it. I t%in* I=ve ,ot everyt%in, >..? on my list. 5mm is
t%ere anyt%in, else you=( li*e to a((@
1H 5mm >..? No3 not really. I mean t%is is t%e mar*in, s!%eme t%at "e are suppose( to use
>>looking at marking sheet)?
110
0
39
1
39
2
39
3
39
4
39
5
39
6
39
7
39
8
39
9
40
0
40
1
40
2
40
3
40
4
40
5
40
6
40
7
40
8
40
9
41
IH 5%2um
1H I suppose one t%in, I "oul( say is t%at t%is is #or all "ritin, so t%e re#eren!in, is not )ein,
use( #or t%is one.
IH +*.
1H 5mm. $%e i(ea is t%at "e are suppose( to %i,%li,%t a)ove an( )elo" so t%at it !an )e in t%e
mi((le. 5mm #or t%e a!tual mar*in, o# t%in,s. 5mm >..?
IH 4o you An( t%is use#ul@ 4o you t%in* it %elps t%e stu(ents@ 4o t%e stu(ents appear to
respon( to it@
1H 5mm >..? No3 not really. I (on=t t%in* it=s >..? er umm. 6e!ause I=ve (one t%is no" si7 years in
a ro". 1t t%e )e,innin, "e %a( very (ierent mar*in, s!%emes. &e=ve %a( 1363;343-. 5mm
"e=ve %a( per!enta,es. &e=ve %a(3 umm no" "e=ve %a( t%is one umm "it% t%e sort o# I-D$:
s!ores. -r "e also at t%e )e,innin, %a( a very3 t%e Arst year I (i( "as mu!% more3 mu!% looser
*in( o# !on!ept o# >..? "%at=s t%is an( "%at=s t%at. Is it a ;3 or is it a 4@ 1n( t%at "as very *in(
o# loose3 I t%in* an( it=s3 t%e sort o# stan(ar(isation %as ,ot )etter. I (on=t t%in* t%ere is
enou,%3 )ut it %as ,ot )etter. 5mm an( t%ere "as a point "%ere "e3 a #e" o# us as*e( #or
%avin, )an( s!ores3 F!os I=m also an I-D$: e7aminer. 1n( um I=m use( to "or*in, "it% )an(
s!ores3 as are some ot%er people3 an( I t%in* t%at=s t%e )est "ay to assess.
IH 5%2um.
1H <y #avourite3 my #avourite year "as one year "%en "e %a( >..? it3 it "as more3 t%ere "as
more "or* involve( )ut you %a( !ontent3 re#eren!in,3 stru!ture an( you !oul( "rite !omments
#or ea!% t%in,. 1n( t%at "as more open style3 I a!tually pre#erre( t%at in a "ay to t%is.
IH +*.
1H $%e only trou)le is I suppose t%at one tea!%er to anot%er people "rite (ierent t%in,s.
:ome people Cust "rite ,oo( or people ti!*. &%ereas ot%er people "rite you nee( to %ave a
loo* at your re#eren!in, an( "rite a "%ole para,rap%. :o I.
IH 4o you t%in* t%is saves time t%en3 F!os you (on=t %ave to..
1H +%3 it (eAnitely saves time )ut.. I mean >..? yea% u%2u% I mean it=s (iE!ult. I mean %ere I=ve
put #e" unsupporte( ,eneralisation "%i!% >..? I3 I t%in* you *no" it !oul( )e e7pan(e(3 )ut t%at
F!os it=s a s%ort essay an( also t%is3 t%is is not really a ,eneralisation t%is point at t%e en( )ut I
*in( o# lin* it to t%e i(ea o# ,eneralisations )e!ause it=s >..? umm it=s not lo,i!al3 It (oesn=t
really3 it=s not 9uite t%e same t%in,3 )ut t%at=s "%at I t%in* I "as t%in*in, o# most3 more or less3
"%en I %i,%li,%te( t%at. 5mm3 %ere I=ve put para,rap% t"o3 in parti!ular F!os I t%ou,%t t%at
%ere t%ere "as a3 it ,ot a little )it >..? umm I t%in* I (i( say t%at to %er. 5mm >..? an( I t%in* you
!an sort o# see "%ere you !an *in( o# say yes3 you=ve (one "ell. :o I t%in* t%e ,rammar "as
,oo( an( t%e style is a ,oo( attempt an( t%e vo!a)ulary3 alt%ou,% it=s a ,oo( attempt3 it=s t%e
over !ompli!atin,3 so t%ere is some su!!ess. I "as a)le to (o t%at.
IH 5m.
1H :o yes3 )ut it=s not. I mean I (on=t t%in* t%is *in( o# system "oul( ever )e per#e!t3 )ut >...?
yea%. I (on=t *no"3 umm3 may)e a *in( o# ti!* list "oul( )e )etter or somet%in,. I=m not sure3 I
(on=t3 it=s very (iE!ult to %ave a per#e!t mar*in, s!%eme.
111
0
41
1
41
2
41
3
41
4
41
5
41
6
41
7
41
8
41
9
42
0
42
1
42
2
42
3
42
4
42
5
42
6
42
7
42
8
42
9
43
IH 5m
1H 6ut. 1n( "%en t%is "as Arst )rou,%t out t%ey %a( t"o versions. +ne #or t%e tea!%er an( one
#or t%e stu(ent "it% you %ave (one t%is3 you %ave (one t%at. 5mm )ut I (on=t *no" t%at t%at
"as ne!essarily any !learer. 6ut i# you loo* at t%e a!tual lan,ua,e on %ere it=s not3 I mean
>>reading from marking sheet)? irrelevan!ies3 ,eneralisations3 input in(istin!t. It=s not3 it=s not
very !lear is it really.
IH 4oes t%is inPuen!e t%e !omments an( t%e #ee()a!* you ,ive on paper@
1H 5mm >...? I a!tually (o t%is as t%e Anal sta,e.
IH 5%2um
1H :o not3 not really. 1lt%ou,% I *no" "%at=s in it I suppose3 more or less. I (on=t3 I (on=t3 I (on=t
use p%rases #rom %ere #or t%at li*e ma*e it a stron,er ar,ument isn=t t%e same as >>laughs?? as
umm as t%is one )ut umm. I sort o# *no" "%at=s t%ere )ut I usually (o t%is as t%e Anal sta,e.
IH 5%2um. +*
1H I sometimes even (o t%is in #ront o# t%e stu(ent "%en I=ve (one t%e ot%er t%in, an( I=ll say
"ell loo*3 I "oul(n=t ,ive you t%is3 I=( %ave to say t%at )e!ause o# "%at "e tal*e( a)out.
IH +*. :o even i# you (i(n=t %ave t%is >>referring to marking scheme)?3 you t%in* t%is >>referring
to written feedback on sample)? "oul( still )e t%e same@
1H Les3 yea% more or less. Les3 sort o# lan,K,rammar !orre!tion #or t%is an( t%en t%e *in( o#
maCor points to #o!us on3 um.
IH +*. 5mmm are t%ere any 9uestions you t%in* I s%oul( %ave as*e( you@
1H 5mmm >..? no. I (on=t t%in* so t%at=s Ane.
IH +*. 1ny 9uestions #or me@
1H 5mmm >..? "ell yes3 I suppose I s%oul(n=t3 I !an=t *no" t%at )e!ause o# !onA(entiality )ut is
t%e sort o# t%in, I=ve sai( more or less t%e same as ot%er tea!%ers %ave sai(@
IH 5mmm3 yea%. I3 yea%3 t%ere=s no umm I=ve only intervie"e( t%ree3 I=m a#rai(3 I !an=t really
,eneralise3 )ut >..? yea% I t%in* it=s not%in, parti!ularly >..? (ierent.
1H 5m. 6e!ause I Cust "on(er "%et%er people3 I (o t%in* t%at may)e3 I (on=t really "ant to (o it
F!os it=s a pain3 )ut (oin, um more stan(ar(isation mi,%t )e a ,oo( t%in, #or a !ourse li*e t%is.
8eally. 5mm an( I (on=t t%in* "e ,et enou,% o# t%at. $%ere isn=t a lot o# essay s"appin, ,oin,
on.
IH $%ere. I=m tryin, to t%in* t%e #ee(Kit3 loo*s pretty mu!% >..? t%e same as t%e ot%er #ee()a!*
I=ve seen.
1H +%3 yea% no I=m sure
IH I %aven=t really e7amine( t%is >>referring to the marking scheme)) in ,reat (etail F!os I am
#o!ussin, more on t%e !omments an( t%e !orre!tions an( t%is type o# t%in,. 1n( a lot o# t%e
earlier stu3 t%e tea!%ers (i(n=t use t%is. :o I=ve not e7amine( t%at !riteria so mu!%. 6ut yea%
umm >...? I t%in* >..? I t%in* it=s 9uite an in(ivi(ual t%in, %o" you !orre!t. -very3 I (on=t t%in*
t%ere is a ri,%t or "ron, "ay an( people %ave t%eir o"n >...?
1H 5%2u%2u%2um.
IH 1n( people %ave umm t%eir o"n #eelin,s a)out it. :o I (on=t ne!essarily *no" i# you !an say
112
0
43
1
43
2
43
3
43
4
43
5
43
6
43
7
43
8
43
9
44
0
44
1
44
2
44
3
44
4
44
5
44
6
44
7
44
8
44
9
45
(o it t%is "ay.
1H No3 it=s al"ays ,onna )e a su)Ce!tive 9uality to it in a "ay.
IH Lea%3 similar to t%e tea!%in,3 you *no" t%ere=s no stan(ar(3 "ell t%ere is a stan(ar(isation in
t%at t%ere=s a sylla)us an( a )oo*3 )ut >..? you=re 9uite #ree >..?
1H Lea% an( may)e t%at=s ,oo(3 it=s ,oo( to (o it t%at "ay. I mean may)e t%ey s%oul( )e
en!oura,e( to %ave (ierent opinions I suppose3 it "oul( )e 9uite ni!e in a "ay F!os >..? I3 I
*no" "%at I=m not >..? I=m not3 I=m not ,oo( at seein, an( I *no" "%at I=m )etter at seein,.
IH 5mm.
1H 1n( I=m 9uite ,oo( at seein, stru!ture. I=m not a!tually very ,oo( at pun!tuation. 6e!ause I
*in( o# >..? i# a stu(ent as* me a 9uestion a)out pun!tuation3 say s%oul( t%ere )e a !omma
a#ter t%is3 er yes3 yes3 yes3 yes >>laughs)?
IH I t%in* I=m pro)a)ly "it% you on t%at one3 yea%.
1H >>laughs)? )ut I (on=t see t%at as )ein, t%e most important t%in, eit%er >..?
IH Lea%. $%e pro(u!t o# a 6ritis% e(u!ation system.
1H Lea%3 yea% e7a!tly3 t%at=s true. 6ut I t%in* also3 I Cust t%in* t%e i(ea3 t%e i(ea #or me an(
also )e!ause t%at=s t%e "ay I am. $%e i(ea o# !apturin, t%e style3 or tryin, to ,et t%at style.
&%en a stu(ent starts (oin, t%at3 I t%in* a%Ko* t%ey=ve ,ot it. $%ey=ve ,ot t%e i(ea is t%at
t%ey are tryin, to "rite in t%is "ay. ;os it=s li*e puttin, yoursel# in a "ay o# "ritin,. 1n(
)e!ause I li*e "ritin,3 I t%in* t%at=s t%e "ay I t%in* a)out it. It=s t%e same "ay #or
presentations3 #or spea*in, I t%in* t%at "%en people *in( o# (evelop a presKpresentation style3
you !an see it. Lou !an see t%at a%3 t%ey=ve *in( o# !ottone( on to "%at t%ey s%oul( (o an( so
um yea%. 5mm yea%3 so t%at=s *in( o# "%y I *in( o# ,o #or )i, pi!ture stu rat%er t%an3 )ut
%avin, sai( t%at I=ve ,ot all t%ese little t%in,s >..? )ut not every little t%in,. >>pushes sample
away)? &%atever >>laughs)?.
$nd of Interview
113
0
45
1
45
2
45
3
45
4
45
5
45
6
45
7
45
8
45
9
46
0
46
1
46
2
46
3
46
4
46
5
46
6
46
7
46
8
46
9
47
114
0
47
1
47
2
47
3
47
4
47
5
47
6
47
7
47
8
47
9
48
0
48
1
48
2
48
3
48
4
48
5
48
6
48
7
48
8
48
9
49
115
0
49
1
49
2
49
3
49
4
49
5
49
6
49
7
49
8
49
9
50
0
50
1
50
2
50
3
50
4
50
5
50
6
50
7
50
8
50
9
51
116
0
51
1
51
2
51
3
51
4
51
5
51
6
51
7
51
8
51
9
52
0
52
1
52
2
52
3
52
4
52
5
52
6
52
7
52
8
52
9
53
117
0
53
1
53
2
53
3
53
4
53
5
53
6
53
7
53
8
53
9
54
0
54
1
54
2
54
3
54
4
54
5
54
6
54
7
54
8
54
9
55
118
0
55
1
55
2
55
3
55
4
55
5
55
6
55
7
55
8
55
9
56
0
56
1
56
2
56
3
56
4
56
5
56
6
56
7
56
8
56
9
57
119
0
57
1
57
2
57
3
57
4
57
5
57
6
57
7
57
8
57
9
58
0
58
1
58
2
58
3
58
4
58
5
58
6
58
7
58
8
58
9
59
120
0
59
1
59
2
59
3
59
4
59
5
59
6
59
7
59
8
59
9
60
0
60
1
60
2
60
3
60
3
60
5
60
6
60
7
60
8
60
9
61
121
0
61
1
61
2
61
3
61
4
61
5
61
6
61
7
61
8
61
9
62
0
62
1
62
2
62
3
62
4
62
5
62
6
62
7
62
8
62
9
63
122
0
63
1
63
2
63
3
63
4
63
5
63
6
63
7
63
8
63
9
64
0
64
1
64
2
64
3
64
4
64
5
64
6
64
7
64
8
64
9
65
123
0
65
1
65
2
65
3
65
4
65
5
65
6
65
7
65
8
65
9
66
0
66
1
66
2
66
3

124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
IH 4o you t%in* a!a(emi! "ritin, is important@
JH Les3 )e!ause "e nee( to ,ive our o"n i(eas a)out our o"n maCor an( umm i# "e !an=t ,ive a
!lear err %o" to say it3 instru!tions or some i(eas t%Kt%e ot%ers "on=t un(erstan( us an( er all
our resear!%es seems to )e #aile( .
IH +*. I sit more important t%an spea*in,3 )e!ause you !an also ,ive your i(eas >..? orally@
JH 5mmm >..? "ell I t%in* t%ey are (ierent )e!ause spea*in, "e !an (o some #a!e2to2#a!e or
some presentations )ut "ritin, umm I t%in* is more important )e!ause some people #rom ot%er
!ountries t%ey !an also rea( it even "e3 "e %aven=t meet "it% ea!%2ea!% ot%er )e#ore. $%ey !an
rea( it may )e (ire!tly in -n,lis% or t%ey %ave a (i!tionary to !%e!* "%at I=ve (one so I t%in* it=s
very interestKa% very important.
IH +*. $%an* you. 5mm 4o you An( a!a(emi! "ritin, easy or (iE!ult@
JH +% it=s very (iE!ult )e!ause "e nee( to use some #ormal "or(s )ut I (on=t *no" "%at t%ey
are. :ometimes it=s very (iE!ult #or me.
IH 4o you %ave any ot%er pro)lems apart #rom #ormal "or(s@
JH 5mm yes3 yeas3 yes )e!ause sometimes umm "%en I Cust (oin, my %ome"or* my tea!%er tell
me "o" it seems your e7amples are o* )ut er t%e "or(s you use Cust a little )it "ea*. Lou nee(
some stron, "or(s. 6ut I t%in* "%at=s t%e stron, "or(s3 (i!tionary (i(n=t say anyt%in, a)out
stron, "or(s. $%ere are no si,ns a)out stron,3 t%ey Cust %ave #ormal3 in#ormal. :Ksome oral
orKorKor t%e ot%er -n,lis% or 1meri!an3 )ut no stron, "ea* so I t%in* it=s (iE!ult.
IH +*. 5mm &%en (i( you last %ave a "ritin, lesson@
JH Dast 'ri(ay.
IH Dast 'ri(ay. +*. ;an you (es!ri)e t%is lesson to me@ &%at %appene(@
JH 5uu,% "ell >..? let me3 let me t%in* u,%3 u,% o*. In t%e lesson umm our tea!%er ,ive )a!* our
>..? in !lass essay umm #or t%e3 #or &e(nes(ay. I mean in !lass essay an( ,ive some #ee()a!* an(
er a% >..? our !lassmate3 "e tal* to ea!% ot%er an( ,ive ea!% ot%er some er3 er !omments mmm
an( "e (is!uss our essay an( t%en %e ,ive )a!* t%at %ome"or* an( er %ave a #a!e2to2#a!e
#ee()a!* to us.
IH +*. :o you spent lots o# time in t%at lesson (is!ussin, >..?
JH Les
IH &ritin, you=( (one )e#ore.
JH Les.
IH 5mm . Bo" a)out &e(nes(ay=s !lass. Lou sai( you "rote an essay on &e(nes(ay.
JH +%% yes. &e "rote >7777? essay on &e(nes(ay in !lass essay. 6e!ause in t%at !lass "e tal*
a)out3 somet%in, a)out pla,K pla,iarism so u,%. $%e Arst "e (i(3 t%e tea!%er tol( us some
(eAnitions an( er t%e ori,in #or pla,iarism an( "e "rote an essay an( "e learnt %o" to use
)i)lio,rap%y an( t%e in2te7t re#eren!e.
IH +*. 8i,%ty2%o. 5mm. Det=s move on an( tal* a little )it a)out #ee()a!* no".
125
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
JH +*.
IH 5mmm. 4o you *no" "%at t%is term means3 #ee()a!*@ ;os I ,uess it=s 9uite a ,eneral >..? term.
JH 5mm.
IH 4o you >...?
JH &ell3 in my opinion I t%in* t%e #ee()a!* may)e t%e >..? tea!%er "ill tell me "%at=s t%e pro)lem
o# my %ome"or* an( ,ive some su,,estions.
IH 5%2u%. Lep. 5,% )asi!ally yea%3 )ut it (oesn=t %ave to )e your tea!%er3 ot%er people !an rea(
your "or*.
JH 'rom my %oK#rom my !lassmates.
IH Lea%3 somet%in, li*e t%is. 1n( o# !ourse t%e #ee()a!*3 t%ey !an "rite t%e su,,estions an( t%e
a(vi!e or t%ey !an (is!uss it "it% you or t%ey !an e2mail it to you. 5mm so t%ere=s lots o# (ierent
"ays3 )ut yea%3 )asi!ally it=s someone rea(in, your "ritin, an( ,ivin, you a(vi!e or su,,estions
a)out %o" to improve it. +*. 4o you al"ays re!eive #ee()a!* on your "ritin, %ere@
JH Les.
IH +*. 1n( "%o normally ,ives you t%is #ee()a!*@
JH +ur tea!%er3 our tea!%er an( our !lassmate.
IH +*. Bo" (oes your tea!%er normally ,ive t%is #ee()a!* to you@
JH 5,%%% >..? "ell "it% some "or(s an( er I. -r you *no" in some>..? in some "ritin, >>looking in
fle)? %e also ,ives some smilin, #a!e >..? i# %e #oun( some parts %e very li*e so you !an see %ere
t%e smilin, #a!e >>shows writing with smiley faces)?. &ell3 t%e smilin, #a!e3 I t%in* very en!oura,e
me3 so I li*e t%em very mu!% so I t%in* may)e paintin, sometimes more po"er#ul t%an "or(s
>>laughs)?
IH 5%%m interestin,. 4oes %e al"ays "rite t%e !omments on t%e paper@
JH Les3 yes %e (o.
IH 1n( is t%is t%e only "ay %e ,ives #ee()a!* to you@
JH No3 "e %ave also some #a!e2to2#a!e tal*in, to ea!% ot%er.
IH 4o you al"ays %ave t%eKt%e er t%e "ritin, an( t%e #a!e2to2#a!e (is!ussion to,et%er3 or
sometimes (o you Cust %ave t%e "ritin, or Cust #a!e2to2#a!e@
JH &ell a!tually er a#ter %e Anis%e( (oin, t%e "ritin, #ee()a!* "e al"ays tal* to us3 "it% ea!%
ot%er. &e al"ays ,iveK%ave t%e #a!e2to2#a!e #ee()a!*.
IH +*. 1n( are you satisAe( "it% t%is met%o(3 or "oul( you pre#er to re!eive (ierent >...?@
JH &ell3 a!tually I really li*e t%is "ay. I really li*e it )e!ause I t%in* may)e "e !an tal* to us more
an( er "%en "e tal* to ea!% ot%er I t%in* may2u,% >..? %o" to say it3 %o" to say )e!ause ummm
>..? u,% )e!ause only "%en t%e tea!%ers rea( your "ritin, t%ey !an=t u,%%3 umm t%ey "on=t *no"
"%at you are t%in*in, a)out very mu!% so "%en I "ill tal* to ea!% ot%er !an e7plain my t%in*in,
an( %e (o some su,,estions a)out "%at I=ll improve my e7perien!e somet%in, li*e t%at.
IH +*. :o you !an ma*e it more !lear.
JH 5%2u%3 yes.
IH +*. 5mm >...? 4o you t%in* it=s ne!essary #or t%e tea!%er to "rite on your paper or (o you t%in*
it=s )etter i# %e Cust (is!usses "it% you@
126
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
JH I t%in* it=s )etter #or %im to "rite (o"n on my paper or I "on=t *no" "%ere t%e pro)lem is. It=s
!lear3 it=s !lear.
IH +*. 5mm you mentione( t%at you %ave #a!e2to2#a!e (is!ussions >..?
JH 5%2umm.
IH &%en (o you normally re!eive t%ese@ &%en you %ave Anis%e( t%e "ritin, or "%eK(urin, t%e
"ritin,@
JH 5%%%% >..? &%en "e Anis%e( t%e "ritin,.
IH 1n( is t%is o*. Is t%is %elp#ul@
JH Les3 it=s %elp#ul. 1n( er sometimes %e Cust as* us to3 to re"ritin, a)out our essay a#ter "e
Anis%e( t%e #a!e2to2#a!e #ee()a!* so I t%in* it=s really interestin, an( use#ul #or us to improve our
er a!a(emi! "ritin,.
IH 4o you t%in* it "oul( )e %elp#ul i# your tea!%er sat (o"n "it% you an( (is!usse( #a!e2to2#a!e
(urin, t%e "ritin,@
JH No3 I (on=t t%in* t%at "oul( )e use#ul )e!ause umm %e "ill interrupt my t%in*in,3 my i(eas3 so
I (on=t t%in* t%at "oul( )e use#ul.
IH +*3 so it=s )etter at t%e en( o# t%e "ritin,.
JH Les.
IH +*. 5mm an( %o" a)out #ee()a!* #rom your !lassmates. Is t%is important@
JH 5,%% yes I t%in* it=s important )e!ause er "e !ome #rom (ierent !ountries so "e (on=t s%are
er same i(eas. :ometimes t%ey Cust ,ive some e7perien!e a)out t%eir i(eas so I t%in* it=s really
interestin,3 ,oo(. 1nH( u,%% t%e ot%er t%in,s is )e!ause sometimes you rea(in, your o"n essay
you !an=t An( t%e pro)lems3 )ut anot%er people t%ey "ill easily An( "%at is "ron, an( "%at=s t%e
may)e ,rammar mista*es or some er >..? a%%% spellin, mista*e. $%ey "ill An( easily3 t%an your
o"n.
IH 4o you (o t%is o#ten in your !lass@
JH Les3 "e (o t%is o#ten. I (o t%is o#ten.
IH 5,%% (o you t%in* t%is is umm more or less important t%an #ee()a!* #rom t%e tea!%er@
JH 5mmm >...? 1!tually >...? ummm >..? I (on=t *no"3 a!tually I (on=t *no" )e!ause I t%in* t%ey are
(ierent "ays to ,et t%e #ee()a!*. <ay)e our tea!%er is m2m2more .. err a!a(emi! )ut er my
#rien(s t%ey "ill ,ive some er more i(eas a)out t%e topi! )ut not t%e -n,lis% itsel#.
IH +*.
JH :o I t%in* t%ey are (ierent.
IH :o t%ey are not more or less. $%ey are )ot% important )ut in (ierent "ays.
JH Les3 t%ey are )ot% important.
IH $%at=s interestin,3 t%an* you. +*. 5mmm I am ,oin, to ,ive you t%ree pie!es o# paper no".
$%ey are allKa small pie!e o# "ritin, on "%i!% a tea!%er %as provi(e( #ee()a!*3 )ut t%e #ee()a!*
is 9uite (ierent on ea!% one. 5mm !oul( I as* you to spen( one or t"o minutes Cust rea(in, t%e
#ee()a!*3 you (on=t nee( to rea( t%e essay3 >lau,%s? umm an( Cust %ave a loo* at t%e #ee()a!*.
$%in* "%at is t%is #ee()a!* )out3 is t%is #ee()a!* use#ul3 "oul( it %elp you3 "oul( you )e %appy
to re!eive t%is type o# #ee()a!*.
127
10
9
11
0
11
1
11
2
11
3
11
4
11
5
11
6
11
7
11
8
11
9
12
0
12
1
12
2
12
3
12
4
12
5
12
6
12
7
12
8
JH +*.
IH :o "e %ave 13 6 an( ; >>gives three feedback examples to interviewee)?. :o i# you ta*e your
time an( "e "ill (is!uss t%em
JH +*
IH In a moment.
JH >>approximately .! minutes later)? +*. I %ave Anis%e(.
IH +*. :%all "e )e,in "it% 1. ;an you tell me "%at is t%is #ee()a!* a)out@
JH 5mm t%e #ee()a!* is a)out er t%e ,rammar pro)lem an( t%e "or( usin, an( er sometimes
spellin, >..? an( er ,rammar also ,rammar t%e arti!le.
IH 5%2um 1nH( er "oul( you An( t%is type o# #ee()a!* %elp#ul@
JH 5,%%% >..? yes3 it=s %elp#ul )ut a!tually I (on=t li*e it )e!ause all is a)out t%e pro)lems >..? t%e
say anyt%in, er no2t%ere is not%in, a)out t%e ,oo( point o# t%e essay3 so umm a!tually I (on=t
li*e it. 1n( sometimes mmm )e!ause u,%% >..? all t%e #ee()a!* in t%e3 t%e vKvery s%ort #orm so
mmm >...? %o" to say it mmm %o" to say it >...? mmm may)e t%e #ee()a!* is so spe!iA! >..? so
spe!iA! mmm i# I am t%e "riter o# t%is essay I "oul( li*e more u,%% su,,estions )ut not only t%e
>..? t%ese mar*s.
IH +*. $%at=s ,oo(. $%an* you very mu!%. 63 "%at a)out 6@
JH +% 6 is only t%e su,,estions an( somet%in, > 7777? o# t%e essay )ut not as spe!iA! as 1. 5mm
"ell mmm I (on=t t%in* it=s very use#ul )e!ause I !an=t see any ummm >..? pro)lem in t%e essay.
Be (i(n=t point out anyt%in,3 so I (on=t t%in* it=s very use#ul. <ay )e i# I re!eive t%e #ee()a!* I
Cust put it a"ay >>mimes putting paper in her bag)?. I "on=t rea( it a,ain.
IH Bo" a)out t%e mar*3 t%e ,ra(e@ Is t%at %elp#ul at all@
JH 5,,%% yes. It=s a little )it %elp#ul3 )ut not very mu!%3 not very mu!% )ut u,%% "ell )e!ause I
!ome #rom ;%ina3 in ;%ina t%e tea!%er al"ays (o t%is >7777? )ut i# I ,ot very )a( mar*s I "ill #eel
very ummm upset an( umm >...? it ma*es me "orry a)out u,% my pro,ress sometimes so I (on=t
li*e t%e mar*s a!tually an( er t%at=s "%y I ,ive up t%e I-D$: e7amination )ut I !%oose to %ave a
pre2sessional !ourse %ere.
IH +*. Interestin,.
JH >>laughs)?. :o I (on=t li*e t%is too.
IH +*. Not so ,oo( so #ar >>laughs)? let=s %ave a loo* at ;.
JH I li*e t%is one most )e!ause er t%is one not only points out some spe!iA! pro)lems %ere an(
also ,ive su,,estions. :o I t%in* t%is one is t%e most er %elp#ul one.
IH 1n( "%at are t%e su,,estions a)out@
JH :u,,estions a)out t%e ,oo( points >7777? use lin*in, "or(s an( you also %ave some ,oo(
i(eas )ut >..? on t%e ot%er %an( some nee( more pro,ress in some ot%er part so I t%in* it=s very
use#ul >..? 1n( )ot% en!oura,e an( point out t%e pro)lems >..? "%i!% nee( to >..? (o more "or* on.
:o I t%in* t%is one is t%e most er %elp#ul one.
IH 1n( are t%ere any ne,ative points a)out t%is #ee()a!*3 or (o you li*e all o# it@ 1re you %appy
"it% all o# it@
JH 5mmm >...?"ell may)e er t%e only su,,estion is er i# t%e tea!%er #oun( some er ,oo( point3
128
12
9
13
0
13
1
13
2
13
3
13
4
13
5
13
6
13
7
13
8
13
9
14
0
14
1
14
2
14
3
14
4
14
5
14
6
14
7
14
8
,oo( point Cust li*e my tea!%er !an ,ive some smilin, #a!e3 some paintin, t%at "oul( )e more
en!oura,e.
IH -7!ellent3 o* ,oo(. +* so "oul( you say overall ; is t%e >..?
JH Les
IH t%e )est one #or you.
JH Les3 t%is is t%e )est one #or me.
IH +*3 e7!ellent. +* t%an* you3 I=ll ta*e t%ose )a!* >>removes feedback samples)?. +*3 let=s %ave a
loo* at your3 your "ritin, no" >>places interviewee"s sample in front of interviewee)? It=s
si,niA!antly lon,er >>laughs?? t%an t%ose ones. 6e#ore "e tal* a)out t%e #ee()a!* !oul( you tell
me a little )it a)out t%e tas*@
JH 5mmm
IH :o3 #or e7ample t%is title3 (i( you !%oose it@
JH +% no3 I (i(n=t !%oose t%is3 our tea!%er ,ive us t%e title )ut er3 umm )e!ause er umm t%is type
o# >7777? rea(in, material "e3 "e (i( in our rea(in, !lass an( a#ter t%at "e Cust ma*e some
(is!ussions a)out t%is title an( t%en tea!%er sai( may)e you !an (o some u,%% "ritin, yoursel#
so t%at=s "%y "e (i( t%is an( !%oose t%is title )ut not !%oose )y ourselves.
IH 1n( (i( you An( it parti!ularly interestin,3 parti!ularly !%allen,in,@
JH 5,%% I t%in* it=s really !%allen,in,3 it=s really !%allen,in, )e!ause "e (on=t er everyt%in, a)out
t%at )e#ore an( er you see somet%in, a)out )ein, one !%il( or !omin, #rom t%e very lar,e #amily.
I=m a sin,le !%il( in my #amily so it=s %ar( #or me to ima,ine t%e li#e "it% many si)lin,s. :o it=s
really !%allen,in, )ut er "e (i( some er3 er (is!ussions in !lass so many er !lassmates t%ey
!ome #rom (ierent *in( o# er #amilies so it=s very interestin, to (is!uss "it% ot%ers an( t%en
"rite (o"n all t%e ot%ers opinion.
IH +*. -7!ellent. 5mmm (o you li*e topi! "%i!% are parti!ularly !%allen,in,@ +r "oul( you pre#er
to re!eive easier topi!s@
JH 5mm I li*e topi! "it% er !%allen,in, )e!ause t%at "oul( )e more interestin, may )e simple
one I3 I "on=t spen( more time on it. I "on=t (o3 I "on=t ma*e it serious so I t%in* may)e
!%allen,in, "oul( )e o* an( I "ill !%e!* online or rea( some )oo*s a)out it t%at3 t%at "ill )e
use#ul an( I !an improve a lot may)e in some lan,ua,e or >..? Cust er s%are opinions "it% ea!%
ot%er so I t%in* t%at "ill )e use#ul I t%in* an( er more interestin,.
IH $%an* you. 5mmm you mentione( t%at you (i( lots o# (is!ussions to %elp you "it% i(eas. 4i(
you (o anyt%in, else to prepare )e#ore you starte( "ritin,@
JH 5m3 I=m sorry "%at (o you mean )y t%at@
IH 5mm you sai( you3 you er (is!usse( umm to ,et some i(eas #rom your !lassmates um so
o)viously t%is is %elpin, you )e#ore you "rite. 4i( you (o anyt%in, else to prepare )e#ore you
a!tually starte( "ritin,@
JH 1%% I >7777? )e!ause er3 )e#ore t%at "e (i( a outline a)out t%is one. I !an An( it %ere >>looking
in folder)? I !an An( t%e ol( one >...? :o may)e %avin, a ,oo( outline "ill )e %elp#ul >..? "%en "e
are "ritin, t%is essay )e!ause er t%is is stru!ture an( "e Cust put more !ontains in it an( it=s
easier #or us to (o it so er a!tually "e (i( t%is outline t"o (ays )e#ore "e (i( t%is so >..?
129
14
9
15
0
15
1
15
2
15
3
15
4
15
5
15
6
15
7
15
8
15
9
16
0
16
1
16
2
16
3
16
4
16
5
16
6
16
7
16
8
IH Lou %ave lots o# time to t%in* an( prepare >..?
JH Les
IH+*
JH 1n( er t%e tea!%er "ill also ,ive some su,,estions an( >..? umm a)out t%e stru!tures so >..? um
a#ter "e mm !orre!t t%e pro)lem %ere3 t%en "e start t%e essay3 t%at "ill )e easier.
IH 5%2um. Is t%is t%e Arst time you=ve (one t%is essay or is it t%e se!on( time@
JH 5,%%% t%is one seems to )e t%e se!on( time >..? >>looking in folder)? )e!ause umm "e %ave a
s%ort one >...? +% I=m sorry3 I (i(n=t mean. 1%%% it=s %ere3 it=s %ere >7777? +%%% it=s
IH It=s t%e same topi!3 )ut it=s a )it (ierent3 it=s not e7a!tly t%e same essay is it@
JH No3 it=s not t%e same essay3 )ut er >...?
IH 4o you ever "rite an essay an( t%en your tea!%er ,ives you #ee()a!* an( t%en you ,o a"ay
an( you "rite it a,ain@
JH +%3 yes "e (i( t%at. &e (i( t%at >..?
IH :o is t%e Arst time3 or t%e se!on( time@
JH 5,%% t%is one is "%en it=s t%e Arst time.
IH :o it=s a Arst (ra#t3 yea%.
JH Les3 t%is one=s t%e Arst time3 an( t%en a#ter "e Cust er "rite it a,ain u,%% "e ,ive to our
tea!%er an( %e ,ives some #ee()a!*s )ut er3 er )e!ause it=s a#ter !lass "or* an( t%ere=s not >..?
%o" to say it3 it=s not #or!e( to (o some "or*3 Cust option. +ption3 it=s option "or* so some
stu(ent !%oose to (o t%at3 some not.
IH +%3 o*. 1n( (i( you or %ave you >...?
JH Les
IH re"ritten t%is@
JH Les3 I re"ritten it. 6ut I sent t%e3 umm e2mail to our tea!%er.
IH +*. 5mm >..? er >..? umm 4i( you "rite t%is at %ome or in !lass@
JH No3 I3 I o% I a!tually I "rite t%is at %ome.
IH +*. 4o you umm. I=m Cust noti!in, some o# your "or* is %an("ritten an( ot%ers are "or(
pro!esse( on a !omputer.
JH 1%% yes3 )e!ause our tea!%er sai( er3 er it=s important #or us to use t%e !omputer )e!ause in
t%e #uture in our master (e,ree t%e s!%ool "ill as* us to use t%e3 er !omputer most times >..? soH
>..? er &%en "e nee( to (o %ome"or* at %ome %e al"ays as* us to use t%e !omputer )ut in !lass
essay >..? Cust er %an("ritin,.
IH +*. :o it "asn=t your !%oi!e to (o it t%is "ay@
JH-r !omputer )e!ause er t%e !omputer !an !orre!t t%e spellin, pro)lem >>laughs)?.
IH >>laughs)? 6ut you %ave to )e !are#ul F!os t%ey3 it (oesn=t al"ays "or* un#ortunately. +*3 umm
s%all "e %ave a loo* spe!iA!ally at t%e #ee()a!* no".
JH +*.
IH +* so i# "e start at t%e )e,innin, !an you (es!ri)e t%e #ee()a!* you %ave re!eive( on t%is
pie!e o# "or*. :o i# you %ave a loo* at it3 tell me a)out it >..?
JH 5mm3 you mean some (etails a)out t%e #ee()a!*@
130
16
9
17
0
17
1
17
2
17
3
17
4
17
5
17
6
17
7
17
8
17
9
18
0
18
1
18
2
18
3
18
4
18
5
18
6
18
7
18
8
IH Lea%.
JH 5,%%% >...? ummm >..? )e!ause er a!tually )e!ause I %ave tal*e( a)out t%is #ee()a!* in t%e
essay "it% my tea!%er so >..? er "ell at t%e )e,innin, %e Cust point out some er mmm ,rammar
pro)lem3 >777? !ollo!ations. :ee.
IH +*.
JH -rm some !ollo!ation pro)lems )e!ause >..?
IH +*3 so "%at (oes t%is mean@
JH 1%%%% in >...? in t%e >7777? >..? no I #or,et a)out t%is one. :orry.
IH It=s o*.
JH >...? +% >..?
IH :o "%at (oes t%e tea!%er "ant you to (o %ere@
JH 5mm may)e some3 a(( somet%in, a(( some "or(s3 a(( an arti!le %ere3 an( an arti!le %ere.
IH +* so t%is means you nee( to a(( a "or(3 yea%@ 1n( you !an (o t%is yoursel#@
JH Les3 I !oK!an (o t%is mysel# an( )e!ause our tea!%ers sai( to us er )e!ause "e are not t%e
Arst (ay %ere so a)out some ummm simple pro)lems3 li*e t%e ,rammar an( t%e spellin, %e Cust
!ir!le out an( "e !an (o ourselves. +r a#ter "e Cust tal* to our >..? !lassmates an( t%ey "ill point
out t%e pro)lems.
IH 5%2um. +*. 5mm so "%at=s t%is %ere@
JH 5mm %e sai( er t%e -n,lis% people (on=t say in t%is "ay.
IH 5%2um
JH 1n( t%is one is a !ollo!ation pro)lem )e!ause u,%%% >..? I3 I learnt a lot o# ne" "or(s %ere an( I
try to use t%em in my essay )ut sometimes I ma*e mista*es oKo# t%e !ollo!ations. 1n( er t%is
one is not #ormal3 not #ormal )e!ause I try to use anot%er "or( or it seems al"ays !%il(ren3
!%il(ren3 !%il(ren3 !%il(ren3 !%il(3 !%il(3 !%il(3 !%il( so I try to use t%is one )ut un#ortunately it=s
in#ormal.
IH ;an you t%in* o# anot%er "or( t%at you !an repla!e it "it%@
JH 5mmm may)e osprin,.
IH +*.
JH <ay)e osprin,. 1nH( %ere3 a)out t%e >..? pun!tuate )e!ause it=s a "or( so may)e "e nee( t%e
>>makes a swishing sound)? %ere. 1n( u,%% t%e one is reKsimple3 sorry it=s a3 a,%%% >..? %o" to
say t%at3 it=s )e!ause it=s a one people so "e nee( !omes3 !omes %ere an( >e7ten(e( #amily?
>7777? it seems to )e mo >..? ,enerous an( >..? prKpre!o!ious. +% it=s a ne" "or( I !%e!* it in t%e
(i!tionary so I=m not #amiliar "it% t%e "or( >I Cust "rite?
IH >>laughs?? &%at=s t%is@
JH 5mm t%e tea!%er (oesn=t er not very sure a)out "%at=s my i(ea %ere an( %e tell me to
improve some3 may)e ,ive more er e7amples or !%an,e anot%er "ay to "%en I "rite t%is
para,rap%.
IH 1n( "%at3 "%at "ill you !%an,e it to@
JH &ell umm >..?
IH 4o you t%in* you !an improve it@
131
18
9
19
0
19
1
19
2
19
3
19
4
19
5
19
6
19
7
19
8
19
9
20
0
20
1
20
2
20
3
20
4
20
5
20
6
20
7
20
8
JH Les3 I !an improve it )e!ause I try to umm >..? umm may)e %o" %ere I "ill !%an,e t%is
para,rap% say at Arst er t%e only one !%il( #amily t%ey %ave some (isa(vanta,es or a(vanta,es
er #or t%e mmm #or t%e !%il(ren #or t%e !%il(. 6ut >..? t%e3 in3 in t%e lar,e #amily t%ey are opposite.
$%ey3 t%ey %ave some oppKopposite si(e )e!ause )la%3 )la%3 )la%3 )la%. <ay)e I "ill3 "ill turn
t%is para,rap% to t%at one.
IH +*3 so you #eel 9uite !onA(ent t%at you !an !%an,e it@
JH Les3 )e!ause "e %ave alrea(y tal*e( a)out t%is >>laughs??
IH o* >>laughs??. 6e#ore you tal*e( a)out it3 (i( you un(erstan( t%is@
JH Les >..?
IH &as it !lear@
JH Les3 it=s very !lear. It=s very !lear )e!ause "e %ave t%e instru!tions3 umm "%at=s t%e3 yes t%e
instru!tions3 t%e paper. :o "e !an see very easily a)out "%at t%e tea!%ers is tal*in, a)out in t%e
para,rap%.
IH +*. 1nH( !an "e %ave a loo* %ere.
JH +% >>reading highlighted part of text) ? an( er t%is one my tea!%er sai( t%ey (on=t use t%is
one3 t%ey (on=t use t%is "or(s %ere3 may)e !%an,e anot%er "ay on t%e ot%er %an(.
IH5%2um
JH 1n( >>reading highlighted part of text) ? >...? umm it=s a ver) #orm pro)lem >..? use( to >pai(? or
somet%in, >..? no3 I (on=t *no"3 I >7777? #or,ot )e!ause t%is seems to )e t%e ver) #orm >..? may)e
I nee( to !%e!* in t%e (i!tionary. I nee( to !%e!* t%e (i!tionary %o" to use t%e use( #or3 )e use(
to an( >>reading highlighted part of text)) >..? a%% >...? may)e in t%eir "or* or >>reading text)?
an( no3 not t%e ot%er "or(3 !an!el t%e ot%er >...? 1n( t%is is also t%e pro)lem o# t%e >7777? >..?
IH ;an I as* a)out t%is one@
JH >>reading from text)? :el(om >...? o% >..? I !an=t see "%at=s t%at >..? >>looking in folder)? 82-2.
>...? >>looking through papers)? >...? >>looking at correction code key) ? 5%m t%ere=s not 82-2. %ere@
>>laughs)? &%at=s t%at3 I #or,et3 I #or,ot.
IH :o you are not sure "%at t%e pro)lem is %ere@
JH Les3 I am not sure "%at=s t%e pro)lem %ere >>laughs)?. 6e!ause you *no" "%en "e tal* a)out
t%is in >..? 'ri(ay3 in 'ri(ay a#ternoon3 a#ter t%at I (i(n=t (o >7777? a,ain )e!ause it=s3 it=s "ee*en(.
I Cust (oK,o an( enCoy t%e "e2t%e "ee*en( li#e so I #or,ot >>laughs??
IH $%at=s not a pro)lem >>laughs)?. :%all "e move on@ &%at=s t%is !omment a)out %ere@
JH 1%% )e!ause %ere t%at=s t%e >mean"%ile t%ey? )ut Arst it seems say somet%in, a)out er
!%il(ren an( er #amilies so er tea!%er sai( it=s not very !lear "%at I=m tal*in, a)out i# t%e !%il(ren
or t%e #amily so maKma*e more !lear a)out t%eKt%ey3 %ere.
IH +*.
JH 6ut a!tually %e sai( ummm t%is para,rap% is not very po"er#ul so3 so I nee( to !%an,e ummm
somKsomKsomet%in, I=m tal*in, a)out an( %e su,,est me to er may)e tal* a)out t%is
para,rap% "it% er some o# my !lassmates mmm so may)e t%ey "ill ,ive me some su,,estions
)e!ause t%ey (i( really ,oo( Co) "%en t%ey ma*e stron, (is!ussions.
IH +*
132
20
9
21
0
21
1
21
2
21
3
21
4
21
5
21
6
21
7
21
8
21
9
22
0
22
1
22
2
22
3
22
4
22
5
22
6
22
7
22
8
JH 1n( a!tually "e s%are( our %ome"or* a#ter !lass >..? mmm an( t%en I li*e er t%eir "ritin, very
mu!%. &ell3 %ave you ever meet t%is situation "%en you "rite somet%in, you (on=t %ave any i(ea
)ut a#ter you Cust re2rea( ot%ers "ritin, you Cust say a%%%% t%at=s really easy.
IH Lea%3 you !an ,et %elp #rom ot%er people.
JH <mmm so on t%is para,rap% t%e tea!%er tol( me to may)e as* #or some %elp #rom t%e #rien(s
>..?
IH 5mmm I noti!e in t%e ne7t para,rap% you=ve ,ot some >..? 9uestions mar*s. ;an you tell me
a)out t%ose please@
JH 1%% )e!ause t%e tea!%er3 t%e tea!%er sai( t%ey (on=t use t%is "ay to say t%is *in( o# t%in,s.
1n( )e!ause somKsomet%in, I Cust !%e!* in t%e (i!tionary or I Cust %ear( )e#ore an( I use in my
essay so er it seems not er very !orre!t3 so >..?
IH 4o you t%in* t%ese3 sorry
JH t%ese remar*s. um
IH 4o you t%in* t%is sym)ol is !lear@
JH 5,%%% "ell >..?
IH :o "%en you see it3 (o you *no" imme(iately "%at t%e pro)lem is@
JH &ell a!tually i# "e (on=t tal* a)out3 to ea!% ot%er I "on=t *no" t%e> ..? meanin, )ut )e!ause
"e %ave t%e #a!e2to2#a!e #ee()a!* so I *no" "%at t%e pro)lem is. &%at sometime it seems "e3
more !orre!Kmore spe!iA! umm instru!tions a)out t%e mar*. umm >..?
IH +*. :%all "e move on@ 1re t%ere any ot%er t%in,s you "oul( li*e to tal* a)out@
JH 5mmm >...? No3 I (on=t t%in* >..?
IH Bo" a)out t%at one@
JH 1%%%. 6e!ause our tea!%er sai( "e3 I nee( to ,ive some e7amples
IH 5%2um
JH 1)out "%i!% tri)e is en(an,ere(3 >7777? I %ave sai( somet%in, a)out t%at3 )ut it seems I nee(
more e7amples ummm to ma*e my >..? or some !lues to ma*e my (is!ussion more stron,.
IH +*. 1n( &2&@ &%at=s t%at #or@
JH $%e "ron, "or(3 t%e "ron, "or(. <ay)e some en(an,ere( er >..? population or some er3
u,%%% ummm some !ountry "it% many #e" people 3 very #e" people.
IH +* so "%i!% "or( is "ron,@
JH &%i!% "or(. $%is "or( is "ron, >>points to #tribe")) )e!ause not very !orre!t %ere. 1n( )e!ause
I nee( mere e7amples to er >..? %o" to say3 to e7Ke7plain "%at I am tal*in, a)out so it seems not
very ,oo( "or( %ere.
IH +*. 5mm you seem to un(erstan( 9uite a lot o# t%is #ee()a!*. 5mmm >..? is t%at 9uite normal@
JH Les. It=s 9uite normal. 5,%%%% anH( >...? &ell a!tually )e!ause3 I t%in* may)e )e!ause "e Cust
!ame %ere #or er a lon, time so our tea!%ers #ee()a!* seems to )e umm >..? less (etaile( t%an
)e#ore. &ell sometimes I t%in* it=s ,oo( )e!ause "e !an An( some pro)lems )y ourselves3 t%e
tea!%ers "oK(on=t nee( to point out all t%e pro)lems %ere an( also )e!ause may)e our -n,lis% is
a little )it prove( an( "e !an tal* to ea!% ot%er a)out t%e pro)lems3 not only #rom t%e tea!%ers.
:o may)e it=s not anot%er "ay to pra!ti!e our -n,lis% usin, an( "ritin, -n,lis% mmmm >..? &ell
133
22
9
23
0
23
1
23
2
23
3
23
4
23
5
23
6
23
7
23
8
23
9
24
0
24
1
24
2
24
3
24
4
24
5
24
6
24
7
24
8
>..? may)e a >7777? #or more (etaile(3 more (etaile( one mmm >..? )ut a!tually I t%in* it=s not a
proKpro)lem "%en I "rite t%e essay )e!ause ummm I learnt somet%in, %ere an( I try to put t%e
ne" "or(s an( t%e ne" t%ou,%ts in my essay )ut I3 mista*es so I t%in* t%at=s "%y I %ave more
pro)lems t%an I (i( )e#ore mmm an( t%e tea!%ers also u%%% "%at (o you "ant to tal* a)out3 it=s
not very !lear. 1n( sometimes it seems umm "eK"e also %ave somet%in, li*e t%e s!ore
>>referring to marking scheme)?3 )ut t%e tea!%er (i(n=t ,ive t%e !orre!t s!ore o# ours )e!ause %e
sai( it=s not ne!essary #or t%e >..? Arst Ave "ee*s )e!ause "e %ave totally ten "ee*s may)e a#ter
t%e Ave "ee* %e "ill ,ive t%e s!ores3 t%e !orre!t s!ore. :o it seems not t%e same s!ore as I (i(
>..? )e#ore >..? mmm o* >>shows interviewer another completed making scheme)?. 6e!ause you
!an see %ere t%e last "or* I Cust ummm nearly all t%e3 t%is3 in t%is >point? an( t%e ot%ers also.
:eems very ,oo(3 )ut in t%is one >..? u,%%% I !an say it=s (ra")a!*3 you !an see %ere an( may)e
%ere3 t%ey !an )ot% >...? t%ey are )ot% %ere. :o it seems not as ,oo( as )e#ore. 6ut I t%in* may)e
t%at means mmm I trie( to put some ne" t%in, %ere so it seems not )etter t%an t%e "or* I (i(
)e#ore )ut >..? I still pro,ress >..? Qust3 I en!oura,e mysel# >>laughs)?
IH &%y not. 5mmm I Cust %ave3 I=( li*e to %ave a 9ui!* loo* at some sym)ols %ere. :o you=ve ,ot
&&3 umm V'3 IN'3 t%ese sym)ols "ere also use( %ere >>referring to feedback sample $)?.
JH Les.
IH Bo" (o you #eel a)out t%ese sym)ols@
JH 5mm >..?
IH 4o you An( t%is is a %elp#ul "ay to umm to %i,%li,%t your ,rammar mista*es@
JH Les3 I t%in* it=s er it=s vKvery use#ul an( er mmm it !an use very a%%% simple "or(s to say t%e
)i, pro)lem an( t%e tea!%er (on=t nee( to say a lon, "or(s not #ormal "or(.
IH 4oes your tea!%er al"ays use t%is !o(e@
JH Les3 yes. Be al"ays use t%is3 t%is !o(e an( also umm our tea!%er #rom t%e pre pre2sessional
!ourse >..?
IH +*
JH :%e also use t%is also.
IH +*. Bo" "oul( you #eel i# t%e tea!%er ,ave you t%e !orre!t ans"er@
JH 5mmm3 no I (on=t t%in* it=s ,oo( )e!ause i# s%e or %e ,ave t%e !orre!t ans"er I "on=t !%e!* in
t%e (i!tionary so may)e let me to !%e!* "ill )e more improve.
IH +*3 ummm %o" (o you #eel "%en you rea( t%is #ee()a!*@ &%at=s your #eelin,@
JH 5mmm >...? "ell umm I (on=t *no" it=a !ompletely 3 itKitKit=s >!omple7? )e!ause er I
sometimes I li*e toKtoKto see t%e ,oo( mar* an( t%e smiley #a!e )ut I also "ant some pro)lems
)e!ause i# I (on=t *no" "%ere t%e pro)lem is I !an=t improve mysel# an( er ummm >..? &ell I t%in*
en!oura,es is ne!essary )ut point out t%e pro)lems also very er use#ul (urin, t%e stu(y.
IH -rm %ave you learnt anyt%in, #rom t%is #ee()a!*@
JH Les3 yeas )e!ause I !an An( t%e pro)lems so I "ill er may)e (o some "or* on it mmm. &ell
)e!ause it=s very (ierent #rom "%at "e (i( in ;%ina. $%e tea!%er o#ten only ,ive you t%e er
some mar*s a)out "%at you (i( "ron,3 t%ey never en!oura,e you. :o it=s not very %appy to )een
a stu(ent in ;%ina. I=m very ,la( to3 to )e %ere an( stu(yin, an( t%e tea!%er seems to )e #rien(s
134
24
9
25
0
25
1
25
2
25
3
25
4
25
5
25
6
25
7
25
8
25
9
26
0
26
1
26
2
26
3
26
4
26
5
26
6
26
7
26
8
)ut not t%e3 may)e somKsome Cust li*e u%% t%e parents. 6e!ause in ;%ina t%e tea!%er is more
li*e parents )ut not #rien(s3 "%en t%ey tal* to you3 you Cust sit %ere an( listen an( you=( never
,ive your o"n i(eas to t%e tea!%er an( t%ey "on=t listen to you sometimes so u%%% a!tually I li*e
t%e #ee()a!* an( tal* "it% t%e tea!%ers %ere very mu!%.
IH +*. 5mm3 I=( li*e you to ima,ine no" t%at you are t%e tea!%er an( I am t%e stu(ent. ;%an,e
positions. &oul( you ,ive me #ee()a!* on my "ritin,@
JH 1%%%% >...? )ut a!tually I %aven=t rea( anyt%in, )e#ore3 so3 so >..? I (on=t *no"
IH :o i# I (o some "ritin, (o you t%in* it=s ne!essary #or you to ,ive me #ee()a!*@
JH Les3 it=s ne!essary3 it=s ne!essary )e!ause "e nee( to tal* a)out "%at you are "ritin, a)out
an( i# I=m not sure "%at=s your i(ea "e3 "e !an tal* a#ter3 a#ter I rea( t%at an( er may)e I=ll ,ive
some su,,estions or may)e you !an ,ive me some su,,estions.
IH 6ut you=re t%e tea!%er@
JH 1%% yes3 )ut tea!%er also nee( su,,estions #rom stu(ent. 5mmm )e!ause (ierent stu(ent
%ave t%eir o"n learnin, style so umm may)e some er #ee()a!* #rom stu(ent "ill also improve
t%e tea!%ers "or* so I t%in* it=s important #or t%e tea!%ers to tal* "it% t%e stu(ent. 5mmm an( er
may)e u%%%% "%at else3 "%at else3 "%at else@ 1%% o* a#ter I rea( t%e3 your essay or your "or*
an( I !an An( your pro)lem an( I !an re!ommen( some )oo*s may)e you nee( to rea( to
improve your -n,lis% or t%e i(eas >..?
IH 1n( "%en you loo* at "ritin,3 o)viously t%ere are many t%in,s you nee( to !onsi(er3 ,rammar3
vo!a)ulary3 i(eas3 stru!ture. 5mm "%i!% one (o you t%in* is t%e most important #or you to
provi(e #ee()a!* on@
JH 5mmm >..? I t%in* is stru!tures3 stru!tures )e!ause it seems it=s very (ierent3 t%e a!a(emi!
stru!tures3 "ritin, stru!tures an( t%e ot%er one may)e #or e7ample t%e I-D$: "ritin, t%ey are
very (ierent so ummm anH( may)e in t%e ot%er "ritin, you "on=t %ave t%e very !lear
para,rap%s3 somKsomtimes uKunity not very !lear so I t%in* may)e t%e stru!tures is t%e most
important #or me.
IH +*. 1n( %o" a)out ,rammar an( vo!a)ulary3 (o you t%in* t%is is important@
JH 5%%% yes t%ey are important an( sometimes er3 espe!ially t%e !ollo!ation pro)lem3 t%e
!ollo!ation pro)lem )ut I t%in* sometimes "e !an !%e!* t%at in t%e (i!tionary )y ourselves so
u%%% it=s not as important as t%e ot%ers. <ay)e Cust t%e3 li*e t%e stru!tures )e!ause you !an=t
An( t%e stru!tures in (i!tionary or in t%e )oo*s. <ay)e you !an rea( a )oo* an( you t%in* a%%
yes t%e stru!ture is very !lear )ut "%en you "rite yoursel# you3 you (on=t *no"3 you !an=t An(
your pro)lem.
IH 5%2um3 o*. 5mmm an( "oul( you !orre!t all my ,rammar an( vo!a)ulary mista*es@ +r Cust
may)e a #e"@
JH 1 #e"3 a #e" >...? "ell I (on=t *no" )e!ause I t%in* may)e some small u%%% some small
pro)lem may)e you !an An( yoursel# an( er sometimes I t%in* it=s a "aste o# time to3 #or t%e
tea!%ers to An( all t%e pro)lems. <ay)e er t%ey "ill ,ive some more su,,estions a)out t%e
stru!tures or t%e i(eas )ut not very #o!us on t%e small pro)lem a)out t%e "or(3 spellin,.
IH +*. -rm some tea!%ers t%in* it=s 9uite important to "rite positive !omments or smiley #a!es
135
26
9
27
0
27
1
27
2
27
3
27
4
27
5
27
6
27
7
27
8
27
9
28
0
28
1
28
2
28
3
28
4
28
5
28
6
28
7
28
8
umm even "%en t%e stu(ent=s "or* may)e isn=t very ,oo(. &oul( you (o t%is3 i# my "or* "asn=t
so ,oo(@
JH Les3 I=ll (o t%is3 I=ll (o t%is i# u%%% )e!ause I t%in* >..? i# t%e stu(ent !an=t re!eive many positive
su,,estions t%en may)e (isKer %o" to say3 umm (isappointe(3 (isappointe( an( #eel sa( a)out
t%e "or*s3 Cust li*e me I "as3 "%en I "as in !olle,e I Cust (i( very >7777? not only in >7777? in
p%ysi!s )ut also mat%emati!s )e!ause u%%% I3 t%e Arst year I #aile( mat%emati!s e7amination an(
t%e se!on( year I #aile( also. $%e t%ir( year #aile( an( t%e #ourt% year I Anally a%% passe( my
e7amination )ut t%e tea!%er al"ays say "ell may)e you (on=t %ave t%e min( on mat%emati!s
you "on=t su!!ess u%% in t%e #uture so I t%in* it=s really >..? )eat me (o"n so I t%in* it=s ne!essary
#or t%e tea!%er to ,ive t%e er ,oo( #ee()a!* an( ,oo( su,,estions >7777? stu(ent an( t%ey "ill
en!oura,e t%e stu(ent a lot.
IH +*. 4o you t%in* positive or ne,ative3 "%i!% one "oul( you say is more use#ul@
JH 5mmm t%ey are )ot%3 t%ey are )ot% very use#ul3 t%ey are )ot% very use#ul )e!ause er may)e
u%%% only t%e ,oo( one t%e stu(ent "ill never see i# t%eir pro)lem is )ut only t%e )a( one t%e
stu(ents a#ter t%ey !%e!* t%e pro)lem t%ey "on=t *no" t%eir pro,ramme er3 er improvement.
$%ey !an=t see any improvement o# t%emselves so it=s not ,oo(. <ay)e %al# %al# is o*.
IH -7!ellent. +J "ell3 I t%in* "e=ve nearly Anis%e(. Is t%ere anyt%in, you "oul( li*e to say3
anyt%in, you "oul( li*e to a((@
JH 5mmm >...? a!tually I (on=t %ave anyt%in,.
Interview continues but participant discusses personal matters which are not
pertinent to this study=
136
28
9
29
0
29
1
29
2
29
3
29
4
29
5
29
6
29
7
29
8
29
9
30
0
30
1
30
2
30
3
30
4
30
5
30
6
30
7
30
8
137
30
9
31
0
31
1
31
2
31
3
31
4
31
5
31
6
31
7
31
8
31
9
32
0
32
1
32
2
32
3
32
4
32
5
32
6
32
7
32
8
138
32
9
33
0
33
1
33
2
33
3
33
4
33
5
33
6
33
7
33
8
33
9
34
0
34
1
34
2
34
3
34
4
34
5
34
6
34
7
34
8
139
34
9
35
0
35
1
35
2
35
3
35
4
35
5
35
6
35
7
35
8
35
9
36
0
36
1
36
2
36
3
36
4
36
5
36
6
36
7
36
8
140
36
9
37
0
37
1
37
2
37
3
37
4
37
5
37
6
37
7
37
8
37
9
38
0
38
1
38
2
38
3
38
4
38
5
38
6
38
7
38
8
141
38
9
39
0
39
1
39
2
39
3
39
4
39
5
39
6
39
7
39
8
39
9
40
0
40
1
40
2
142