A genre-based approach to written feedback on
writing exercises in English as a second language
Claudia Böttger & Nicole Diedrichsen
Europäische Fernhochschule Hamburg - University of Applied
Sciences
Bristol University - 25.5.2012
Challenges
1:4 appeals from students are on the type of feedback they get
Annual student evaluation of distance teaching on all B.A., M.A. and M.B.A.s show that
feedback causes discontent
foreign languages and business communication is largely exempt from this
Process of Quality Assurance Agency underway - focus on research-based teaching
Launch of pilot project on student support systems at distance university (May 2012)
Feedback particularly important during first year
(Tait 2003; Chetwynd & Dobbyn 2011)
Students
• Adult learners studying while at
work
• Studying for business-based
• B.A., M.A. and M.B.A.
• Mandatory Business language
module
• 25-50 years of age
• 48 % male – 52 % female
• At work most of them engage in
NNS-NNS (written) interactions
on a weekly/regular basis
• (Highly) motivated, but very busy
Tutors
• 6 tutors business English
• 2 tutors business Spanish
• 2 tutors business French
• Degrees in second language
teaching (B.A., M.A., Ph.D.)
• Experienced as language teachers,
translators and authors
Background
Considerable differences in types of feedback
given by tutors
•
varying according to tutor
•
to types of language exercises
wanted by students and their reported uses of it
•
Feedback is too short
•
Comments are not clear and not helpful.
Functions of feedback
• helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards)
• facilitates the development of self‐assessment (reflection) in autonomous learning
• provides assessment to students about their learning
• triggers tutor and peer dialogue around learning
• encourages positive motivational beliefs and self‐esteem in autonomous learners
• opens opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance
• gives information to tutors to help devise learning material for autonomous learners.
(Nicol 2007)
Purpose of study
To sensitize tutors to form and function of written feedback by using a corpusbased approach (Swales & Feak 2009a, 2009b)
To give support to students to adequately exploit feedback's potential in
distance-learning context
by analysing written feedback as a genre from a textlinguistic perspective
(Mauranen 1993; Bhatia 1998; Hyland 2011).
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Background
Methodological considerations
Discussion of examples
Next steps
Form and function of genres
Genres
• are historically grown and institutionally shaped textual patterns
• have a set of communicative purposes
• may vary their generic function, i.e. across domains, media, cultures and
over time.
The rationale for the genre
• shapes the schematic and rhetorical structure of the discourse
• determines and constrains choice of content and style.
(Swales 1990; Bhatia 2003)
Genre analysis
• provides framework for move analysis
• rhetorical move structure analysis explores
• communicative function of text
• identifies words/phrases associated with it.
Corpus on feedback to business
English tests
Corpus on Feedback on writing texts for
Business English in international contexts (internal)
London Chamber of Commerce (B2)
Business English Cambridge (B2)
International legal English certificate, Level B2/C1
Pilotstudy
For each of these 4 tests: corpus of 20 feedback samples
Subcorpus on feedback to ILEC test
International legal English certificate, Level B2/C1
Reading test:
1. multiple-choice cloze, emphasis on lexis
2. Open cloze, emphasis on structure
3. Word formation, emphasis on lexis
4. Text preceded by multiple matching questions
5. Text from which sentences have been removed and placed in jumbled
order after the text.
6. Text followed by four-option multiple-choice questions.
Writing test: writing a letter and memorandum
Subcorpus on feedback in EFL
•
Subcorpus: Feedback on ILEC test
•
1 page template to write a commentary and give marks
•
20 feedbacks of 2 different types of feedback
•
10 feedbacks on written EFL tests with good grades
•
10 feedbacks on written EFL tests with bad grades
Subcorpus on feedback on poor writing
•
Subcorpus: Feedback: negative news
•
Research on negative news in different institutional settings (hospital,
business settings, consultations etc.) (Bührig & Meyer 2007, Böttger & Bührig
2010)
•
Highly complex communicative task
•
Helps identify specific learner needs (retrospection)
•
At the same time must encourage learner (foreward-looking)
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
Background
Pilot project on business writing
Methodological considerations
Discussion of examples
Next steps
Communicative pattern of negative news
Buffer
- Opening with
general comment.
Reasons for
negative news
- Explaining
the causes for
negative news.
Naming the
negative news
- Describing
the negative news.
Closing
- Announcing
future steps;
foreward looking
statement.
Argumentative moves for communicating negative news effectively
(Swales & Feak 2009a, 2009b; Guffey 2010)
Communicative pattern in feedback on
poorly written work
Buffer
Reasons for
- Opening with
general comment
or retrospective on-skills.
marking it as
mistake
- Explaining
the causes for
marking it as
mistake.
Naming the
mistake
- Describing
the mistake.
Closing
- Announcing
future steps;
foreward looking
statement.
Argumentative moves for communicating negative news effectively
(Swales & Feak 2009a, 2009b; Guffey 2010)
Feedback to poor work
Buffer:
Genuine praise;
retrospection
Reasons:
explains why
result is poor
Giving
recommendations
Closing:
Foreward looking
statement &
words of encouragement
Dear Ms Lauder,
Here are the results of your test. As you can see you are moving up the
ladder step by step, which is very rewarding.
The vocabulary exercises in tasks 2 and 4 were your biggest problem. For
practice I would suggest you take the vocabulary from task 2 and try to put
the words into sentences of your own. As to task 4, practice for this could be
looking at the article on p. 4 again. Your letter fulfilled the task and stayed
well within the parameters for the number of words. Also your use of
register fitted the task in hand. There were, however, a few grammar and a
couple of spelling mistakes.
This easily happens when one is writing online, I know. Check out the
present perfect to see if it is 100% clear.
You are working really hard and I am sure you will be going onto the next
step soon. As always please do not hesitate to contact me, should you have
any queries.
Yours sincerely, Penny
Feedback to poor work
Buffer:
Regret &
assessment
Reasons:
explains why
result is poor
Recommen
dation
Closing:
Invitation to
maintain
dialogue
Dear Mr Smith,
Thank you for your exam paper. I am sorry to say it is not quite such a good
result as last time, but well within the pass range. As you can see by the
marks on the right, two of the tasks (2 & 4) presented quite a problem
although you received full marks with task 1.
The ‘word family’ exercise was much more difficult this time, so you should
not take it too hard. (...) It might, however be an idea to look at the exercise
again and work out all the derivations of the stem words.
The content and the register of the letter were fine, however, there were
several grammar mistakes this time. Could you check out the use of the
gerund and the verbs which take it?
Please do not hesitate to contact me, should you have any queries.
Yours sincerely,
Penny
Communicative pattern in feedback on
poorly written work
Buffer
Reasons for Recommendations
marks
Giving
- Opening with
marks
general comment - Explaining
Offering advice
or retrospective - the reasons for & recommen- - Giving
mark.
dations
on-skills.
marks.
Closing
- Announcing
future steps;
foreward looking
statement.
Corpus-based findings on rhetorical moves for communicating negative
news effectively
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
Background
Pilot project on business writing
Methodological considerations
Discussion of examples
Next steps
Outlook
•
•
•
•
•
•
Undertaking more corpus based research
Considering culturally determined conventions of conveying negative news in
feedback
Providing feedback to tutors on students‘ reception of feedback and peer
discussion
Organizing special topic workshop for tutors
Discussing how to make students aware of potential of using feedback for
autonomous learning
Integrating audio feed-back
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bhatia, V. K. (2004): Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View. London: Continuum Publishers.
Chetwynd, F. & C. Dobyn (2011): Assessment, feedback and marking guides in distance education. Open learning:
The Journal of Open and Distance Learning. Vol 26, Issue 1, 67-78.
Connor, U. (2004): Intercultural rhetoric research; Beyond texts. English for Academic Purposes, p. 291-30
Hyland, K. (2005:) Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.
Martin, P. M. (2003): A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental Social
Sciences. English for Specific Purposes, v. 22, n. 1, p. 25-44.
Nicol, D. (2000): Principles of good assessment and feedback: Theory and practice Retrieved 31 October 2009 from
http://www.reap.ac.uk/resources.html
Rehbein, J. (1984): Beschreiben, Berichten und Erzählen. In: Ehlich, Konrad (ed.): Erzählen in der Schule. Tübingen:
Narr, 67-124.
Swales, J.M. (1990): Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1990.
Swales, J. M. & C. B. Feak (2009a): Abstracts and the Writing of Abstracts. Ann Arbor: Michigan Series in English for
Academic & Professional Purposes.
Swales, J. M & C. B. Feak (2009b): Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills: A Course for
Nonnative Speakers of English (English for Specific Purposes. Ann Arbor: Michigan Series in English for Academic &
Professional Purposes.
.
Tait, A. (2000): Planning student support for open and distance learning. Open Learning,15(3), 287-299