The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Feedback on second language students' writing
Abstract
Feedback is widely seen as crucial for encouraging and consolidating learning, and this significance has also been recognised by those working in the field of second language (L2) writing. Its importance is acknowledged in process-based classrooms, where it forms a key element of the students' growing control over composing skills, and by genre-oriented teachers employing scaffolded learning techniques. In fact, over the past twenty years, changes in writing pedagogy and research have transformed feedback practices, with teacher written comments often supplemented with peer feedback, writing workshops, conferences, and computer-delivered feedback. But while feedback is a central aspect of ESL/EFL writing programs across the world, the research literature has not been unequivocally positive about its role in writing development, and teachers often have a sense that they are not making use of its full potential. In this paper we examine recent research related to feedback on L2 students' writing, focusing on the role of feedback in writing instruction and discussing current issues relating to teacher written and oral feedback, collaborative peer feedback and computer-mediated feedback.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Collaborative learning and the “conversation of mankind”
Bruffee, K. A. (1984) · College English · doi:10.2307/376924 · Cited by 1,016
Group Work, Interlanguage Talk, and Second Language Acquisition
Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A. (1985) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586827 · Cited by 901 · cited 1×
“While not directly driving interest in peer feedback, interactionist perspectives offer an important theoretical foundation for it by suggesting how opportunities to negotiate meaning through group work are a means of encouraging more effective acquisition of the language (Long & Porter 1985).”
BackgroundDo secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?
Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(00)00022-9 · Cited by 648 · cited 2×
“Tsui & Ng (2000) found that Hong Kong secondary students viewed the teacher as a ‘figure of authority that guaranteed quality’ (p. 149) and were reluctant to trust their peers.”
BackgroundResultThe influence of teacher commentary on student revision
Ferris, D. R. (1997) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3588049 · Cited by 618 · cited 5×
“Ferris (1997), for instance, looked at 110 first and second drafts of papers by ESL tertiary students and found that three quarters of substantive teacher comments on the drafts were used by the students and they tended to improve student papers.”
BackgroundInfluentialThe effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing
Paulus, T. M. (1999) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(99)80117-9 · Cited by 522
Hyland, F., & Hyland, K. (2001) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(01)00038-8 · Cited by 521
Self-citationPeer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction
Mendonça, C. O., Johnson, K. E., & Mendonca, C. O. (1994) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587558 · Cited by 446
Focusing on form: student engagement with teacher feedback?
Hyland, F. (2003) · System · doi:10.1016/s0346-251x(03)00021-6 · Cited by 411
Self-citationReexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class
Zhang, S. (1995) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/1060-3743(95)90010-1 · Cited by 405
Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction
Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(96)90012-0 · Cited by 351
ESL students' perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups
Nelson, G. L., & Carson, J. G. (1998) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(98)90010-8 · Cited by 298
Interpersonal aspects of response: constructing and interpreting teacher written feedback
(2006) · Feedback in Second Language Writing · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524742.013 · Cited by 140
Self-citation
Cited by
LEARNERS’ PROCESSING, UPTAKE, AND RETENTION OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON WRITING: Case Studies
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109990532 · Cited by 398
A questionnaire-based validation of multidimensional models of self-regulated learning strategies
TENG, L. S., & ZHANG, L. J. (2016) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12339 · Cited by 345
Chen, C.-F. E., & Cheng, W.-Y. E. C. (2008) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/44145 · Cited by 304
AI in the Foreign Language Classroom: A Pedagogical Overview of Automated Writing Assistance Tools
Alharbi, W. (2023) · Education Research International · doi:10.1155/2023/4253331 · Cited by 286
The effects of computer-generated feedback on the quality of writing
Stevenson, M., & Phakiti, A. (2014) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.007 · Cited by 275
Metadata
- Authors
- Hyland, K., & Hyland, F.
- Venue
- Language Teaching
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2006-04
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 83-101
- ISSN
- 0261-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-3049
- OpenAlex
- W2170058424
- Cited by
- 1,016
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 81.53
- Type
- journal article
- 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.
