Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 327

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Coaching from the margins: issues in written response

Leki, Ilona·2012·Second Language Writing
DOI 10.1017/cbo9781139524551.008
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

How best to respond to student writing is part of the broader question of how to create a context in which people learn to write better or more easily. To that end, teachers have tinkered with all aspects of the context: the number of assignments, the types of assignments, the nature of the relationship between teacher and student, and so on. This chapter addresses issues surrounding another aspect of the writing context, types of written responses to student writing. Although students often write responses to papers by their peers, the focus of this chapter is limited to responses written by teachers. Murray (1968) tells the story of an advertising executive who received written reports from his staff. Since he sometimes felt that the reports were not well written, he developed a response strategy to improve his employees' writing. He took written reports home, and the next day returned the reports to their authors in his private office saying, “Is this the best you can do?” The authors sheepishly took the reports back, worked on them, and resubmitted them. The boss once again took them and the next day again asked, “Is this really the best you can do?” This continued until the authors finally said, “Yes, it is the best we can do!” And the boss answered, “Good, then I'll read it.”

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9781139524551.008

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Leki, I.
Venue
Second Language Writing
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Published
2012-10-06
Pages
57-68
DOI
10.1017/cbo9781139524551.008
OpenAlex
W1834273448
Cited by
327
References
0
FWCI
116.16
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.