GIVING FEEDBACK ON
STUDENT WRITING
Lecture 4
Teaching Writing in EFL/ESL
Joy Robbins
TODAY’S SESSION

Looks in detail at Hyland & Hyland’s (2001)
investigation into how 2 teachers gave feedback
to their students on their writing, and how the
students responded
2
THE ROLE OF FEEDBACK

Teachers ‘may be fulfilling several different and
possibly conflicting roles as they give feedback:
sometimes acting as teacher, proofreader,
facilitator, gatekeeper, evaluator, and reader at
the same time.’ (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 187)
What do Hyland & Hyland mean by this? How
can a teacher act as teacher, proofreader,
facilitator, gatekeeper, evaluator, and
reader when giving feedback?
Are there any other roles which you think
feedback fulfils?
3
FEEDBACK & THE STUDENT – TEACHER
RELATIONSHIP

‘In addition, [the teacher’s] personal knowledge of
the writer is usually greater than it would be
between [for example] a book reviewer and an
author, and they probably have more interest in
creating and maintaining a good face-to-face
relationship with the student.’ (Hyland & Hyland
2001: 187)
4
HYLAND’S INFORMANTS & DATA
6 international students (3 undergrad, 3
postgrad) on pre-sessional courses at a New
Zealand university
 Students from China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, &
Thailand
 2 teachers (1 for undergrad class, 1 for postgrad
class), both experienced writing instructors
 Hyland analyzed teachers’ comments written at
the end of each piece of writing for (1) praise; (2)
criticism; and (3) suggestion

5
PRAISE


Praise is defined as ‘an act which attributes
credit to another for some characteristic,
attribute, skill, etc., which is positively valued by
the person giving feedback.’ (Hyland & Hyland
2001: 186)
Example of teacher comment offering praise:
Vocabulary is good
6
CRITICISM


Criticism is defined as ‘an expression of
dissatisfaction or negative comment on a text’.
(Hyland & Hyland 2001: 186)
Example of teacher comment offering criticism:
Poor spelling
7
SUGGESTION
Suggestion is defined as ‘coming from the more
positive end of a continuum. Suggestions differ
from criticisms in containing an explicit
recommendation for remediation, a relatively
clear and accomplishable action for improvement,
which is sometimes referred to as “constructive
criticism”. (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 186)
 Example of teacher comment offering suggestion:

You need a more general statement
to introduce the topic
8
DRAFTS VS. FINAL ESSAYS (1)

Do you/Should you give students different
kinds of feedback on their writing,
depending on whether they’re writing a first
draft or the final version of their essay? Why
(not)?
9
DRAFTS VS. FINAL ESSAYS (2)

‘Feedback offered at a draft stage will often be
different from feedback on a final product,
intended to perform a different function. Many
teachers view feedback on drafts as more
developmental and so offer more critical
comments on specific aspects of the text, while
feedback on a final product is likely to give a
holistic assessment of the writing, praising and
criticising more general features.’ (Hyland &
Hyland 2001: 188)
10
TYPES OF COMMENTS ON DRAFTS VS. FINAL
ESSAYS (%)
Draft
Final
Total
Praise
26.2
73.8
100
Criticism
54
46
100
Suggestion
46.6
53.4
100
Totals
39.2
60.1
100
11
DRAFTS VS. FINAL ESSAYS (3)

‘…nearly three quarters of all praise was reserved for
final drafts. Interviews with the two teachers revealed
that Nadia felt happier offering critical comments on
drafts where there was potential to improve them, and
Joan was uncomfortable making critical comments on
drafts without appending a positive comment. In final
versions, it seems that praise was extensively used to
motivate the students in their next writing. …
[A]lthough the type of feedback the students received
most often overall was praise, the feedback they
received most on first drafts was criticism.’ (Hyland &
Hyland 2001: 194)
Do you agree with Nadia and Joan’s comments?
12
SUGARING THE PILL: MITIGATION IN
FEEDBACK

‘…baldly negative comments such as “Poor
spelling” or “Referencing is inadequate” were
rare. In fact, 76% of all criticism and 64% of
suggestions were mitigated in some way. Praise
was presented baldly 75% of the time but was
itself widely used to tone down the negative effect
of comments.’ (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 194)
13
SUGARING THE PILL: STRATEGIES
What different ways can you think of to sugar
the pill when giving (negative) feedback? In
other words, how can you make students feel
a little better about themselves?
14
4 WAYS HYLAND’S INFORMANTS SUGARED
THE PILL

Hyland identifies 4 ways the 2 teachers in her
study sugared the pill:
(1) Paired act patterns
(2) Hedges
(3) Personal attribution
(4) Interrogative syntax
Let’s look at them in turn…
15
(1) PAIRED ACT PATTERNS


This is when critical feedback is combined with
praise, suggestion, or both praise and suggestion.
Criticism was combined with praise in 20% of the
teachers’ remarks, with suggestion in 15 % of
remarks, and with a combination of praise and
suggestion in 9% of remarks.
16
CRITICISM & PRAISE: EXAMPLE
COMMENTS


Vocabulary is good but grammar is not
accurate and often makes your ideas
difficult to understand.
The idea is OK, but the problem with this
essay is the difficulty of finding the
main idea. (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 195)
17
CRITICISM & SUGGESTION: EXAMPLE
COMMENTS


This conclusion is all a bit vague. I
think it would be better to clearly state
your conclusions with the brief reasons
for them.
This is a very sudden start. You need a
more general statement to introduce
the topic. (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 195)
What do you think of using
paired act patterns when you
give feedback?
18
(2) HEDGES


Examples of hedges include perhaps, slightly, and
a little, and are used ‘to tone down criticisms and
reflect a positive, sympathetic relationship with
student-writers’.
They’re NOT used here to lessen possibility, but
to ‘mitigate the interpersonal damage of critical
comments’. (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 196-7)
19
HEDGES: EXAMPLES
Where are the hedges in the comments below?



Some of the material seemed a little
long-winded and I wonder if it could
have been compressed a little.
Tomoko wrote well on this, you might
ask to read hers.
It might also be good to change the
order of your paragraphs/ideas. (Hyland
& Hyland 2001: 197)
20
(3) PERSONAL ATTRIBUTION

‘judging another’s work is always an inherently
unequal interaction because the power to evaluate is
nonreciprocal and lies exclusively with the teacher. By
expressing their commentary as a personal response,
however, teachers can make a subtle adjustment to the
interactional context and perhaps foreground a
different persona. It allows them to relinquish some of
their authority and adopt a less threatening voice. In
other words, personal attribution allows teachers to
react as ordinary readers, rather than as experts, and
to slightly reposition themselves and their relationship
to the student-writer. …The personal expression of
criticism, then, reminds the reader that the comment
carries only the view of one individual, thereby
conveying the limitation of the criticism.’ (Hyland &
Hyland 2001: 198)
21
PERSONAL ATTRIBUTION: EXAMPLES


I’m sorry, but when reading the essay, I
couldn’t see any evidence of this really.
Perhaps you should have given me your
outline to look at with the essay.
(Contrast the impersonal construction: it was
hard to see any evidence of this)
I find it hard to know what the main
point of each paragraph is.
(Contrast the impersonal construction: it is
hard to know what the main point is)
22
(4) INTERROGATIVE SYNTAX

‘Questions are a means of highlighting knowledge
limitations and can be used to weaken the force
of a statement by making it relative to a writer’s
state of knowledge. While they generally seek to
engage and elicit a response from the reader,
questions also express the writer’s ignorance or
doubt and, therefore, can mitigate the imposition
of a suggestion or a criticism…’. (Hyland &
Hyland 2001: 198-9)
23
INTERROGATIVE SYNTAX: EXAMPLES



The first two paragraphs—do they need joining?
In addition, questions are also useful when one wishes to
protect oneself or one’s reader from the full effects of what
might be considered serious allegations. […]:
You only mention Ward once in the essay. Are all
the other ideas your own? You need to make it
clear which are yours and which are hers.
Did you get some help with the editing? (Hyland &
Hyland 2001: 198-9)
What ‘serious allegation’ do Hyland & Hyland have in
mind here?
24
SUGARING THE PILL: YOUR VIEWS
Do you use mitigating strategies when you
correct students’ work?
 If so, do you use the same strategies as the
teachers in Hyland & Hyland’s study? If you use
alternative strategies, what are they? Why do
you use them?
 Do mitigating strategies work? (In other words,
do they make students feel a little better?) How
do you know whether they work or not? How
could you find out?
 What would make you change the way you give
feedback to students on their writing?

25
TEACHERS’ REASONS FOR SUGARING THE
PILL (1)

Hyland & Hyland show how interviews with the
teachers revealed the reasons for mitigating criticism:
‘[Joan] mentioned an experience on a previous course
which had affected the way she gave feedback,
making her less willing to be directly critical:
‘I had a Korean student who was kind of a
fossilisation problem, I guess. And her writing was
just full of errors and like you didn’t even have
paragraphs and it was very short. On the very first
test, I think I made some criticism…and she wrote in
her journal that she found this very devastating and
“please try and encourage me” and so after that I
modified my feedback to try and be more positive.’ .’
(Hyland & Hyland 2001: 199-200)
26
TEACHERS’ REASONS FOR SUGARING THE
PILL (2): PLAGIARISM

‘Another possible reason for mitigating the force
of comments was to minimise the possible threat
which criticism carries for the “face” or public
self-image of students. This was particularly
evident in cases where teachers dealt with
plagiarism, a very sensitive issue for feedback
and something teachers are often unwilling to
address directly.’ (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 200-1)
27
PLAGIARISM (CONTD.)

The teachers’ sensitivity towards this issue is revealed by
think-aloud data. The teachers speak into a tape recorder
while writing their feedback:
‘It doesn’t sound like her words—I hate accusing people
of plagiarism, but when you think it is, what do you do?’
‘Joan wrote as her feedback—Where did you get this
information? Have you used quotations?—and considered
the interrogative form “a subtle way of doing it”.
Unfortunately, the student’s retrospective interview
revealed that she failed to identify these as rhetorical
questions and to detect the underlying criticism and the
implicit suggestion. The offending text remained in her28
final draft.’ (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 201)
STUDENTS’ REACTIONS TO PRAISE




How do students react to praise/positive feedback?
Does this vary from culture to culture? What other
factors might affect how students respond (e.g. age,
gender, etc.)?
As a language learner, were you ever asked what kind
of feedback you wanted on your writing? If so, what
happened?
If you’re a teacher, have you ever asked your students
what kind of feedback they wanted? If so, what did they
say?
29
STUDENT REACTIONS TO PRAISE: HYLAND
& HYLAND

Students’ reactions varied:
‘Some thought such feedback served no useful
function. A student in Nadia’s class, Zhang, for
example, believed positive remarks were
“useless” unless they were backed up by “serious”
comments that he could act on….
This view of positive comments was reinforced by
another student in Nadia’s class, Mei Ling, who
said she discounted positive comments because “I
want to know my weaknesses most”.’ (Hyland &
Hyland 2001: 201-2)
30
STUDENTS’ REACTIONS (2)

Mei Ling explained what she meant in her
interview:
She spoke against positive feedback as a waste of
time; what she wanted was what she termed
“negative” feedback highlighting her problems. For
her, positive comments were insincere and,
therefore, worthless:
‘Sometimes maybe the teacher doesn’t mean it, but
they just try to encourage you. … Because there is
always “but” after the positive. Sometimes the
teacher just tries to find something good in my essay
and then may be that strength is not the main
31
point’. (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 202)
STUDENTS’ REACTIONS (3)

However, other students enjoyed receiving
praise. Another student said:
‘If teacher give me positive comments it means I
succeed’. (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 202)
32
RESPONDING TO STUDENT REACTIONS



Here’s one reaction by a teacher to Hyland & Hyland’s
student informants’ comments:
‘It’s clear they don’t know what kind of feedback they
want and what kind of feedback they need. I wouldn’t
change a thing. The students can’t make up their
minds’.
What’s your response to these comments?
What light do these students’ comments throw on the
best way of giving feedback?
If the students in your class had said the things Hyland
& Hyland’s student informants did about feedback, how
would you conduct feedback in future? What changes
would you make from what you do now (if any)?
33
LESSON: DIFFERENT STUDENTS LIKE
DIFFERENT TYPES OF FEEDBACK


Hyland & Hyland’s (2001) study demonstrates that
different students want different types of feedback,
confirming earlier studies by Enginarlar (1993) and
Radecki & Swales (1988)
Hence Goldstein (2005) argues persuasively that it’s
important for us as teachers to find out exactly what
type of feedback different students in our classes
want, otherwise dissatisfaction can be the result…
34
FINDING OUT WHAT FEEDBACK
STUDENTS WANT

Here are some of Goldstein’s (2005) ideas for finding out
what students’ feedback preferences are:
‘First, we can ask students to write autobiographies,
detailing their past experiences as writers, including as
complete a description as possible of the types of feedback
they have received from previous teachers, what they did
and did not like about this feedback, and what they did
after they received this feedback. If they have saved any of
their work that has teacher commentary on it, students
can be encouraged to attach this work…. We can also
devise questionnaires in which we ask students about their
preferences.’ (pp.50-1)
Goldstein (2005) recommends that teachers also
discuss with students all the different ways feedback
can be done, so they realize they don’t necessarily
have to like the way they’ve been given feedback in 35
the past…
MITIGATED FEEDBACK &
MISCOMMUNICATION

‘…it soon became clear during the student
interviews that they were often unable to
understand the teachers’ mitigated comments.
[E]ach case study provided several examples
where students failed to understand, or only
partly understood, such mitigated comments.’
(Hyland & Hyland 2001: 202-3)
36
MISCOMMUNICATION: EXAMPLE 1

‘Our first example comes from Nadia’s response to
Zhang’s assignment where she wanted him to define a
term which he used throughout the essay. She drew his
attention to this with a bald criticism followed by an
interrogative suggestion:
‘My concern in this essay is that you introduce several
terms in the introduction but do not provide a definition
for any. I should like to know more about
‘macroscopic’—is this what you are talking about in your
conclusion?’
However, in his final draft of the essay, the term was
still being used without a definition, and Nadia
commented that this aspect “still hasn’t changed” in this
version. Zhang was surprised and somewhat put out to
read this comment and said that he “didn’t understand
what she wanted”.’ (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 202-3)
37
MISCOMMUNICATION: EXAMPLE 2

‘…Joan felt that Keith was repeating himself and
tried indirectly to alert him to the fact that
certain information was superfluous with a
hedged criticism’
Joan’s tape-recorded comments when writing
her feedback show how she tries to mitigate
her criticism:
‘It seems funny to have this repeated—oh so this
second part is like a summary—this just seems
like a summary—it’s not necessary. I might just
write—The second section seemed like a summary
of the previous information.’ (Hyland & Hyland
2001: 204)
38
MISCOMMUNICATION: EXAMPLE 2
(CONTD.)
But when the student was interviewed about
Joan’s comments, it was clear he had
misunderstood what she wanted:
R Why did you change this part?
K Because here—Your second section seemed
like a summary. Because in my proposal,
this includes two parts, so I think this is
very necessary. At the end of part one I
make, like Joan says, a summary. So also I
have put in another summary in here.
R Right so now you have two summaries at the
end of each part?
K Yes. (Hyland & Hyland 2001: 204)
39
MISCOMMUNICATION: CONCLUSIONS

‘…while teachers often have laudable interpersonal
and pedagogic reasons for mitigating their feedback,
tentative comments have the very real potential to
cloud issues and create confusion. …it seems that
mitigated criticism was most opaque to students and
a source of particular confusion, especially when it
was phrased interrogatively and not coupled with an
explicit suggestion for revision. Indirectness
frequently seems to be counter-productive to the aim
of clearly conveying the point the teacher wishes to
make and is often reinterpreted by students according
to their own writing concerns and agendas. In other
cases, failure to understand implied criticisms or
toned down praise leads the student to revise aspects
of the text which are not problematic.’ (Hyland &
Hyland 2001: 206)
40
MISCOMMUNICATION: SOLUTIONS




In the light of Hyland & Hyland’s finding that sugaring
the pill often leaves students confused or uncertain what
they need to do to improve their writing, is it best not to
mitigate criticism at all?
Has Hyland & Hyland’s study changed your attitude to
feedback? Why (not)?
Should you sugar the pill less or more when dealing with
lower level learners? Why?
How should you deal with plagiarism? Is it necessary to be
more direct? (‘This is not your own work. This is
41
cheating.’)
HELPFUL EXAMPLES OF FEEDBACK
The following chapter by Ferris features
several helpful examples of comments on
student texts, and models and suggestions
you could use:
Ferris, D.R. (2008) Feedback: issues and options.
In P. Friedrich (ed.), Teaching Academic Writing.
London: Continuum, pp.93-124.
42
TASK



One thing we haven’t done yet on this course is
look at a range of ELT textbooks, to determine the
approach they use to teach writing…
I’d like you to begin looking at a selection of ELT
textbook writing activities, speculating whether
the materials writer favours product, process,
post-process…or a combination, or even none of
these approaches! Finish looking at the material
before next week.
Next time we’ll discuss the materials together…
43
REFERENCES
Enginarlar H (1993) Student response to teacher feedback in EFL
writing. System 21: 193-204.
Goldstein LM (2005) Teacher Written Commentary in Second
Language Writing Classrooms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press.
Hyland F & Hyland K (2001) Sugaring the pill: praise and criticism
in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 10: 185202.
Radecki P & Swales J (1988) ESL student reaction to written
comments on their written work. System 16: 355-365.
This week’s reading
Casanave CP (2003) Looking ahead to more sociopolitically-oriented
case study research in L2 writing scholarship (But should it be
called “post-process”?) Journal of Second Language Writing 12: 85102.
Ferris, D.R. (2008) Feedback: issues and options. In P. Friedrich (ed.),
Teaching Academic Writing. London: Continuum, pp.93-124.
44