Feeding forward with feedback
at an Australian university
Richard Warner
Julia Miller
Academic Learning and Language
Centre for Learning and Professional Development
University of Adelaide
Outline
Introduction
 Literature review

◦ Transiting to a new academic culture
◦ Feedback as an intercultural issue
Methodology
 Findings
 Discussion
 Conclusion

2
Introduction

Transiting to a new academic environment
(wemedia.com, 2011)

But language ain’t the only issue!
3
The complexity of transition



Functioning in different learning scenarios with inherent cultural
presumptions of the autonomous/self-motivated learner, and
changes in discourse patterns and differences in learning format
and delivery.
Expansion of inter/multi-disciplinary degrees necessitating EAL
student management of academic discourse and register practices
[academic literacies] and expectations (UWS 2009, p. 38).
English proficiency often seen as underlying source of the problems
faced by EAL students yet transition issues to a Western academic
environment can be seen as adaption based (Sinclair, 2000, p. 1) rather
than indicative of linguistic capacity.
(healthcareitnews.com, 2011)
4
Importance of acculturative transition



Such transitional challenges for EAL students should
remain acculturative rather than assimilative.
HE institutions need adaptive pathways to academic
literacies allowing students to maintain separate cultural
identity (Castro-Abad 1995).
EAL student acculturation requires staged access to
these pathways, if academic literacies are to be
developed. It is important to remember that:
◦ …language proficiency, like academic literacy, is …best viewed as
a contextually-specific continuum, along which language users
move at varying rates (Dunworth 2010, p. 7).
mpalac21.blogspot.com,2011

EAL students’ development of academic literacies not
necessarily in a binary lockstep with language
development.
5
Feedback in the acculturation process



Development of contextual academic literacy does
provide focal point for meta-linguistic growth.
Constructive feedback can play a vital role in EAL
student academic literacy - a scaffold to ‘best practice’.
However, such feedback is a complex issue within the
bigger picture of L2 [and metalanguage] development
(Nazif et al. 2004-5, p. 166).
(englishworks.com.au, 2011)
6
Feedback as an intercultural issue
Increasing internationalisation requires changing roles:
• Students to be managers of own intercultural learning
• Teaching staff to manage environment for intercultural
development
• Contextualised feedback to students can help in the
management of their own learning
(bw.edu 2011)
7
Adding to the mix

echarcha.com, 2011
Nazif et al. (2004-5, p.166) point out :
‘the importance of feedback and the influence it has on
the learning process is a multifaceted and complex
process … and may be different for different learners in
different contexts’.

Perhaps context is key driver for understanding
feedback (p.166) , detailed marking schemes
context specific- not easily generalisable (Adcroft
2011, p. 417).
Foregrounded for EAL students with growth in
inter disciplinary courses in HE institutions, with
increasing genre variations (Swales & Feak 2004).
 Scant recognition of a priori social
processes/human experiences in giving/receiving
of feedback (Adcroft 2011, p. 406).

8
Cultural presumptions and
expectations
(iranreview.org 2011)
Some examples:
 Feedback only the real thing if it takes the form of
the ‘teacher’s red penned periodic notations…’
and is from teachers not from peers (Rollinson 2005, p. 23).
 Unsolicited e-mails apologising for low marks;
the students seeing ‘feedback as a sign of their
failure to meet teacher expectations’ (Enomoto 2010, p.5)
rather than as a tool to inform future learning.
 ‘the elliptical nature of much written feedback’
(Ridsdale 2000, p. 272) to EAL students not ‘raised on a
feedback diet of…questions like Sooo…?’ (p. 273).
9
More cultural presumptions and expectations
Indirectness of rhetorical questions not
recognised by students (Hyland & Hyland 2001).
 Strong suggestion (in US study) that
feedback principally valued for error
correction (Leki 1991) rather than as a tool for
developing the:

‘highly culturally marked organisational patterns
of the appropriate target discourse’ (Warner 2010, p.
358).
10
Differences between what students want

A NZ study involving student interviews
found significant differences between what
students wanted from feedback:
◦ Some highly valued positive comments
◦ Others saw them as a sop
◦ Similar variations were found regarding negative
feedback (Hyland & Hyland 2006).


Imperative that comments best received if
tailored to individual student rather than one
size fits all model.
This is the feedback amalgam of teacher/EAL
student intercultural learning contexts (Leask
2004 in Oxley 2010).
11
Feedback and the Introductory
Academic Program



The IAP is a biannual 5 week pre-semester program for
postgraduate EAL students from developing countries
(sponsored by AusAID).
Focus of the program is on acculturation to their new
academic environment through a variety of experiences,
both in generic and discipline specific contexts.
By their wide demographics, IAP students have
experienced a variety of academic feedback
domestically and are a rich source of research based
information.
12
Methodology





53 international students enrolled in an Introductory Academic
Program
◦ 48 postgraduate coursework
◦ 3 undergraduate
◦ 2 PhD
Demographics: 13 female, 35 male, 5 did not specify gender.
Ages ranged from 19 to 46, with an average age of 32.
Countries: Bangladesh (4), Cambodia (3), Fiji (1), India (1),
Indonesia (11), Iraq (12), Lao PDR (1), Liberia (1), Maldives (1),
Mongolia (1), Mozambique (2), Nigeria (3), Papua New Guinea
(5), Solomon Islands (1),Vietnam (3), Zambia (3)
First languages represented: Arabic (11), Bangla (2), Bengali (2),
Dhivehi (1), English (3), Hausa (1), Indonesian (11), Khmer (3),
Kurdish (1), Lao (1), Mano (1), Mongolian (1), Pidgin (5),
Portuguese (2), Punjabi (1), Tonga (a Zambian language) (1),
Tumbuka (1),Vietnamese (3),Yoruba (2)
13
Findings
1. What do you think the term ‘feedback’ means?
 Error correction (15%)
 Advice to improve my work (most
students)
 Information interchange between lecturer &
students which the lecturer uses to adjust his
teaching methods. (Nigeria)
14
Findings (continued)
2.
Where do you think feedback fits in the process of
producing an assignment?
 Every stage (15%)
 During an assignment (45%)
 Draft stage (15%)
 After an assignment (43%)
 ‘Feedback’ should be at the end of each period in
the process of producing an assignment: feedback
(1) for the study question, (2) for the outline, (3) for
the draft or parts of assignment, (4) and finally for
the official assignment. (Vietnam)
15
Findings (continued)
3. Feedback on academic assignments before you
came to Australia
d) What is the purpose of feedback in your
academic culture?
 Improving or developing skills (58%)
 Only error correction (11%)
 just to evaluate one's performance. The process
was not so fair most of the time as partiality
often took place. (Bangladesh)
16
Findings (continued)
3
e) Is a colour traditionally used to give
written feedback in your culture? If so, please
give details.
 Red (32%) – correction or bad mark
 Green – Nigeria and India
 Blue – Indonesia and Iraq
f) Is there a colour which would offend or
upset you if it was used to give written
feedback on your work?
 No findings established
 I have never faced a COLOUR! (Bangladesh)
17
Findings (continued)
3 g) What kinds of feedback have you received before
coming to Australia?
Grade – 79%
Comments at the end of the assignment – 66%
Comments throughout the assignment – 51%
Corrections – 72%
Verbal in person – 68%
Electronic: written – 34%
Electronic: verbal – 1%
18
Findings (continued)
3 h) Now think of one particular example of academic
feedback you remember. It can be positive, negative
or neutral. When did you receive this feedback?
Before an assignment (9%)
During an assignment (21%)
After an assignment (64%)
i) Who gave you the feedback?
Lecturer/teacher/tutor (85%)
Peers (4%)
j) How important was that person to you?
Very important (62%)
Most important, I consider them like my parents.
(Iraq)
19
Findings (continued)
3
k) How did the feedback make you feel?
Happy/encouraged (64%)
Unhappy/upset (11%)
honoured and cared for (PNG in Australia)
l) Did you share the feedback with other
students? Yes – 83%
m) How did you use the feedback?
Improvement – 68%
n) Did your performance improve as a result of the
feedback? Yes – 92%
20
Findings (continued)
4. Feedback on academic assignments in Australia
(part 1)
c) Do you expect your experiences of
feedback here to be similar to your
previous feedback-related
experiences?
Better – 68 %
My previous experience is that master-slave.
You don't ask or contribute until you are told
to. (Nigeria)
21
Expectations in Australia

I expect it would be better. I grew up in a conservative
society, where positive feedback is not common. I think it
[Australia] has an open and positive feedback system.
(Bangladesh)

. . . more improved than previous, given then the access of
computers and a more advanced society. (Liberia)

I expect it to be more personalised. (Zambia)

I don’t expect corrections as a feedback. Because Australian
academic culture is based on independent learners.
(Mongolia)

I expect it to be more critical and blunt, given the high
standards of Australian universities. (Papua New Guinea)
22
Findings (continued)
4. d) How important do you think feedback
on your assignments is in Australian
academic culture? Very important
e) How often do you expect to receive
feedback? Every step/End of term
f) How often would you like to receive
feedback? Very frequently
g) Who do you expect to receive feedback
from? Lecturers
h) Who would you like to receive
feedback from? Lecturers (Peers)
23
Findings (continued)
5. Previous feedback on academic assignments
in Australia
a) If you have studied in Australia before,
what kinds of feedback did you
receive? Written/verbal
6. Concerns
Do you have any concerns about receiving
feedback while studying for your degree at
the university?
If so, please give details.
24
Concerns
Feedback is crucial for study, but feedback should be
improve persons not upset them. (Iraq)
 Feedback should be mean to encourage and not
discourage learners. (Zambia)
 Might not be able to understand and if it is too
critical and too blunt maybe disappointed and
discouraged from asking for further feedback. (Papua
New Guinea)
 I do not have any serious concern. Because, ‘Feedback
Process’ must be fair here. It is a matter of quality
education and my university has no ‘culprit’ to make
the process an ‘waste’. (Bangladesh)

25
Concerns (continued)
Written feedback that is not followed up with a
verbal feedback, as parts of written feedback may
not be properly understood. (Papua New Guinea)
 There is a kind of fluidity on the part of the
teachers that make me uncomfortable. The teacher
seems to have room for all kinds of suggestions
from the student. I think this leaves the student
without any benchmarks. It looks like the teacher is
not assessing the contribution of the student before
accepting it. (Nigeria)

26
Focus group






Australian lecturers need to be more critical
Some things are a bigger issue here. Feedback is
transferable beyond the task. (Ghana)
In Iraq, the course is an end in itself. Here,
people keep learning.
Indonesian lecturers have a formal consultation
schedule.
Lecturers in Ghana have informal, unscheduled
consultations.
Written and face to face feedback both
valuable.
27
Discussion

Feedback purely as error correction (Leki 1991)
◦ Only 15% agreed with this.

Clarity (Ridsdale 2000)
◦ All students wanted clarity, preferably via
personal interaction with the lecturer.

Feedback from peers (Rollinson 2005)
◦ Only 4 students mentioned peer feedback.

Frequency
◦ Students wanted as much feedback as possible.
28
Discussion (continued)

Forms of feedback
◦ Students wanted verbal, face-to-face feedback
combined with written feedback.

Colours
◦ Students associated red with negative
comments.
29
Conclusion

Complexities of intercultural/interactional nature
of feedback pose challenges for EAL students.

Only by gaining understanding of philosophical
underpinnings can EAL learners best acculturate
to the idiosyncracies of given feedback scenarios.

Strategy provision requires intercultural
understandings of the roles/types of feedback and
expectations, which demands the EAL students’
voices be heard in informing the process.
30
References
Adcroft, A 2011, ‘The mythology of feedback’, Higher Education Research and Development, vol.
30, no. 4, pp. 405-419.
Castro-Abad, C 1995, ‘A human development workshop on cultural identity for international
students’, Princeton University, Mid-Career Fellowships Program, Princeton, NJ. Available:
ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 384 382.
Dunworth, K 2010, ‘Clothing the Emperor: addressing the issue of English language
proficiency in Australian universities,’ The Australian Universities' Review, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 510.
Enomoto, K 2010, ‘Promoting self-regulated learning: a feedback-based study skills action plan
for students from diverse cultural, linguistic and disciplinary backgrounds’, in E.Morrel &
M Barr (eds), Crises and opportunities: Proceedings of the 18th Biennial Conference of the ASAA,
2010, Adelaide, ASAA, Inc., Canberra.
Hyland F & Hyland K 2001, ‘Sugaring the pill: praise and criticism in written feedback,’ Journal
of Second Language Writing, vol.10, pp. 185-201.
Hyland K & Hyland F 2006, ‘Interpersonal aspects of response: constructing and interpreting
written teacher feedback’, in K Hyland & F Hyland (eds), Feedback in second language
writing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 206-224.
Leki 1991, ’The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing
classes’, Foreign Language Annals, vol. 24, pp.203-218.
Nazif, A, Biswas, D & Hilbig, R 2004-5, ‘Towards an understanding of student perceptions of
feedback’, Carleton Papers in Applied Language Studies, vols XXI/XXII, pp. 166-192.
31
Oxley, L 2010, ‘Academic acculturation for international students: how can we help?
Proceedings of Teaching Matters 2010, Cultures of Learning, University of Tasmania, November
24-25 2010, viewed 12 October 2011,
<http://www.utas.edu.au/teachingmatters/2010/Presentations/Session2b-FS2-Oxley.pdf>.
Ridsdale, ML 2000, ‘“I’ve read his comments but I don’t know how to do”: international
postgraduate student perceptions of written supervisor feedback’, in K Channock (ed.),
Sources of Confusion. Proceedings of National Language and Academic Skills Conference, La
Trobe University, 27-28 November, pp. 272-282.
Rollinson, P 2005, ‘Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class’, ELT Journal, vol. 59, no. 1, pp.
23-30.
Sinclair, A 2000, ‘When I say “describe” I don’t mean that you should just describe…’ , in K
Channock (ed.), Sources of Confusion. Proceedings of National Language and Academic Skills
Conference, La Trobe University, November 27-28, pp. 304-312.
Swales, J & Feak, C 2004, Academic writing for graduate students: essential tasks and skills, 2ndedn,
University of Michigan Press, AnnArbor, Michigan.
University of Western Sydney. 2009, Preparing students for learning through written
assessment: A toolkit for Learning Guides, viewed 10 May 2009, <http://www.uws.edu.au>.
Warner, R 2010, ‘Giving feedback on assignment writing to international students - the
integration of voice and writing tools’, in WMChan, KN Chin, M Nagami & T Suthiwan
(eds), Media in foreign language teaching and learning, Centre for Language Studies, National
University of Singapore, pp. 355-381.
32