Skip to content
2018
Volume 48, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 0098-6291
  • E-ISSN: 1943-2356

Abstract

This study’s findings suggest that question-based pedagogy has the potential to address a gap in the research on feedback and response while also transforming the labor of feedback, benefiting student writers, and mitigating common feedback concerns for both students and instructors.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.58680/tetyc202131349
2021-05-01
2024-05-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abbasian Gholam-Reza, Bahmani Poopak. “Retrospective Vs. Prospective Corrective Feedback Impacts on Developing EFL Learners’ Writing Ability and Learner Autonomy.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol.4, no.6 2014, pp.1243–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahern-Dodson Jennifer, Deborah Reisinger. “Moving Beyond Corrective Feedback: (Re)Engaging with Student Writing in L2 through Audio Response.” Journal of Response to Writing, vol.3, no.1 2017, pp.129–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Anson Chris. “Giving Voice: Reflection on Oral Response to Student Writing.” Conference on College Composition and Communication Convention, 8Apr 2011 Atlanta, GA.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Anson Chris. “In Our Own Voices: Using Recorded Commentary to Respond to Writing.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, vol.69 1997, pp.105–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Anson Chris ed. Writing and Response: Theory, Practice, and Research, National Council of Teachers of English 1989.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Anson Chris M.et al.. “‘What Do We Want in This Paper?’ Generating Criteria Collectively.” Teaching with Student Texts: Essays toward an Informed Practice edited by Harris Josephet al.. Utah State UP 2010, pp.35–45.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Auten Jane. “Following the Script: Peer Readers and the Language of Feedback on Writing” The Writing Lab Newsletter, vol.29, no.5 2005, pp.1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bailey Richard, Mark Garner. “Is the Feedback in Higher Education Assessment Worth the Paper It Is Written On? Teachers’ Reflections on Their Practices”. Teaching in Higher Education, vol.15, no.2 2010, pp.187–198. Taylor & Francis, 10.1080/13562511003620019..
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Beaumont Chriset al.. “Easing the Transition from School to HE: Scaffolding the Development of Self-Regulated Learning through a Dialogic Approach to Feedback.” Journal of Further and Higher Education, vol.40, no.3 2016, pp.331–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Belpoliti Flavia, Marta Fairclough. “Inquiry-Based Projects in the Spanish Heritage Language Classroom: Connecting Culture and Community through Research.” Hispania, vol.99, no.2 2016, pp.258–273. Project Muse, 10.1353/hpn.2016.0045..
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Brannon Lil, KnoblauchC. H. “On Students’ Rights to Their Own Texts: A Model of Teacher Response.” College Composition and Communication, vol.33, no.2 1982, pp.157–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Braun Virginiaet al.. “‘A Starting Point for your Journey, Not a Map’: Nikki Hayfield in Conversation with Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke about Thematic Analysis.” Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol.17, no.4 2019, pp.1–22. Taylor & Francis, 10.1080/14780887.2019.1670765..
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bruffee Kenneth A. “Collaborative Learning: Some Practical Models.” College English, vol.34, no.5 1973, pp.634–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Busekrus Elizabeth. “A Conversational Approach: Using Writing Center Pedagogy to Comment for Transfer in the Classroom.” Journal of Response to Writing, vol.4, no.1 2018, pp.100–16.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Carless David. “Differing Perceptions in the Feedback Process.” Studies in Higher Education, vol.31, no.2 2006, pp.219–233. Taylor & Francis 10.1080/03075070600572132.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cho Kwangsuet al.. “Commenting on Writing: Typology and Perceived Helpfulness of Comments from Novice Peer Reviewers and Subject Matter Experts.” Written Communication, vol.23, no.3 2006, pp.260–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chu Samuel Kai Wahet al.. 21st Century Skills Development through Inquiry-Based Learning: From Theory to Practice 2017, https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-10-2481-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Cohn Jenae Druckman, Mary Stewart. “Promoting Metacognitive Thought through Response to Low-Stakes Writing.” Journal of Response to Writing, vol.2, no.1 2016, pp.58–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Coogan David. “Email ‘Tutoring’ as Collaborative Writing.” Wiring the Writing Center edited by Hobson Eric H. Utah State UP 1998, pp.25–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Corbett Steven J. “Learning Disability and Response-Ability: Reciprocal Caring in Developmental Peer Response Writing Groups and Beyond.” Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture, vol.15, no.3 2015, pp.459–75.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Corbin Juliet, Anselm Strauss. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 3rd ed. Sage 2012, pp.1–15. Sage 10.4135/9781452230153..
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Dixon Chris Jennings. Lesson Plans for Teaching Writing, National Council of Teachers of English 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Dixon Helen, Eleanor Hawe. “Creating the Climate and Space for Peer Review within the Writing Classroom.” Journal of Response to Writing, vol.3, no.1 2017, pp.6–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Downs Douglas, Elizabeth Wardle. “Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions: (Re)envisioning ‘First-Year Composition’ as ‘Introduction to Writing Studies .’” College Composition and Communication, vol.58, no.4 2007, pp.552–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Elbow Peter. Writing without Teachers. 2nd ed., Oxford UP 1973 1998.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Elbow Peter, Pat Belanoff. Being a Writer: A Community of Writers Revisited, McGraw-Hill 2003.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Elbow Peter. A Community of Writers: A Workshop Course in Writing, New York: McGrawHill 1995.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Fletcher Anna. “Help Seeking: Agentic Learners Initiating Feedback.” Educational Review, vol.70, no.4 2017, pp.389–408. Taylor & Francis 10.1080/00131911.2017.1340871.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Formo Dawn M., and Kimberly Robinson Neary. “Constructing Community: Online Response Groups in Literature and Writing Classrooms.” Teaching Literature and Language Online edited by Ian Lancashire, Modern Language Association 2009, pp.147–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Formo Dawn M., and Lynne M. Stallings. “Feedback: What Works for You and How Do You Get It? Lesson Plan.” Peer Pressure, Peer Power: Theory and Practice in Peer Review and Response for the Writing Classroom edited by Corbett Steven, et al.Fountainhead Press 2014, pp.255–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Formo Dawn M., and Stallings Lynne M. “Where’s the Writer in Response Research? Examining the Role of Writer as Solicitor of Feedback in (Peer) Response.” Peer Pressure, Peer Power: Theory and Practice in Peer Review and Response for the Writing Classroom edited by Corbett Steven, et al.Fountainhead Press 2014, pp.43–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Geiger Barbara, Kristian Rickard. “Utilizing the Writing Center to Empower Student Writers.” Writing Lab Newsletter, vol.23, no.10 1999, pp.6–8.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Gere Anne Ruggles, Robert D. Abbott. “Talking about Writing: The Language of Writing Groups.” Research in the Teaching of English, vol.19, no.4 1985, pp.362–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Glenn Cheryl, et al.The St. Martin’s Guide to Teaching Writing. 5th ed., Bedford/ St. Martin’s 2003.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Grouling Jennifer. “The Genre of Teacher Comments from Hard Copy to iPad.” Journal of Response to Writing, vol.4, no.1 2018, pp.70–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Hartshorn K. James, Norman W. Evans. “The Effects of Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback: A 30-Week Study.” Journal of Response to Writing, vol.1, no.2 2015, pp.6–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Healy Mary K. “Using Student Writing Response Groups in the Classroom.” Bay Area Writing Project, U of California, Berkeley 1980 ERIC, Resources in Education, ED184122.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Hewett Beth. “Characteristics of Interactive Computer-Mediated Peer Group Talk and Its Influence on Revision.” Computers and Composition, vol.17 2000, pp.265–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hewett Beth. “Synchronous Online Conference-Based Instruction: A Study of Whiteboard Interactions and Student Writing.” Computers and Composition, vol.23, no.1 2006, pp.4–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Higgins Richardet al.. “The Conscientious Consumer: Reconsidering the Role of Assessment Feedback in Student Learning.” Studies in Higher Education, vol.27, no.1 2002, pp.53–64. Taylor & Francis 10.1080/03075070120099368.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Honeycutt Lee. “Comparing E-Mail and Synchronous Conferencing in Online Peer Response.” Written Communication, vol.18, no.1 2001, pp.26–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Horvath Brooke K. “The Components of Written Response: A Practical Synthesis of Current Views.” Rhetoric Review, vol.2, no.2 1984, pp.136–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Inman James A., and Donna N. Sewell. Taking Flight with OWLs: Examining Electronic Writing Center Work, Lawrence Erlbaum 2000.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Inouye Kelsey S., and Lynn McAlpine. “Developing Scholarly Identity: Variation in Agentive Responses to Supervisor Feedback.” Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, vol.14, no.2 2017, pp.1–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Kim Loel. “Online Technologies for Teaching Writing: Students React to Teacher Response in Voice and Written Modalities.” Research in the Teaching of English, vol.38, no.3 2004, pp.304–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Krych-Appelbaum Meredyth, Joanna Musial. “Students’ Perception of Value of Interactive Oral Communication as Part of Writing Course Papers.” Journal of Instructional Psychology, vol.34, no.3 2007, pp.131–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Laflen Angela, Michelle Smith. “Responding to Student Writing Online: Tracking Student Interactions with Instructor Feedback in a Learning Management System”. Assessing Writing, vol.31 Jan 2017, pp.39–52. ProQuest 10.1016/j.asw.2016.07.003..
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Liu Jun, Jette G. Hansen. Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classrooms, U of Michigan P 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Maas Clare. “Receptivity to Learner-Driven Feedback in EAP.” ELT Journal, vol.71, no.2 2017, pp.127–40 10.1093/elt/ccw065..
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Mabrito Mark. “Electronic Mail as Vehicle for Peer Response: Conversations of High-and Low-Apprehensive Writers.” Written Communication, vol.8, no.4 1991, pp.509–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Macklin Tialitha. “Compassionate Writing Response: Using Dialogic Feedback to Encourage Student Voice in the First-Year Composition Classroom.” Journal of Response to Writing, vol.2, no.2 2016, pp.88–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Macrorie Ken. Writing to Be Read, Hayden 1968.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. McGarrell Hedy, Jeff Verbeem. “Motivating Revision of Drafts Through Formative Feedback.” ELT Journal, vol.61, no.3 2007, pp.228–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. McGuire Saundra Yancy. Teach Students How to Learn: Strategies You Can Incorporate into Any Course to Improve Student Metacognition, Study Skills, and Motivation, Stylus 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Moffett James. Student-Centered Language Arts, K–12, Boynton/Cook 1992.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Moore Jessie. “Mapping the Questions: The State of Writing-Related Transfer Research.” Composition Forum, vol.26 2012, pp.1–13. ERIC, EJ985810.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Nicol David. “From Monologue to Dialogue: Improving Written Feedback Processes in Mass Higher Education.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol.35, no.5 2010, pp.501–17. Taylor & Francis 10.1080/02602931003786559.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Palmquist Mike, et al. “Talking across Differences: Building Student/Teacher Dialogue through Instruction in Computer-Supported Writing Classrooms.” Attending to the Margins: Writing, Researching, and Teaching on the Front Lines edited by Hall Kells Michelle and Balester Valerie M. Boynton/Cook 1999, pp.35–55.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. “Palomar College Fact Book 2017-18.” Institutional Research and Planning, 5Feb 2021, https://www2.palomar.edu/pages/irp/files/2020/03/Fact-Book-17-18.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Pham Vu Phi Ho, Siriluck Usaha. “Blog-Based Peer Response for L2 Writing Revision.” Computer Assisted Language Learning: An International Journal, vol.29, no.4 2016, pp.724–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Sanchez Hugo Santiago, Katie Dunworth. “Issues and Agency: Postgraduate Student and Tutor Experiences with Written Feedback.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol.40, no.3 2015, pp.456–70.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Schwab Joseph J. “Inquiry, the Science Teacher, and the Educator.” The School Review, vol.68, no.2 1960, pp.176–95. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1083585.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Seker Hasan, Sevki Komür. “The Relationship between Critical Thinking Skills and In-Class Questioning Behaviours of English Language Teaching Students.” European Journal of Teacher Education, vol.31, no.4 2008, pp.389–402. Taylor & Francis 10.1080/02619760802420784..
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Silver Rita, Sandra Lee. “What Does It Take to Make a Change? Teacher Feedback and Student Revisions.” English Teaching: Practice and Critique, vol.6, no.1 2007, pp.25–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Simple Sue, et al. “Using Audio Response Methods to Enhance the ‘Human Touch’ of Online Writing Instruction.” Conference on College Composition and Communication Convention, 8Apr 2011 Atlanta, GA.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Sommers Jeff. “Spoken Response: Space, Time, and Movies of the Mind.” Writing with Elbow edited by Belanoff Patet al.. Utah State UP 2002, pp.172–86.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Sommers Nancy. “Across the Drafts.” College Composition and Communication, vol.58, no.2 2006, pp.248–57.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Sommers Nancy. “Responding to Student Writing.” College Composition and Communication, vol.33, no.2 1982, pp.148–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Sopina Elizaveta, Rob McNeill. “Investigating the Relationship Between Quality, Format, and Delivery of Feedback for Written Assignments in Higher Education.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol.40, no.5 2015, pp.666–80. Taylor & Francis 10.1080/02602938.2014.945072..
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Spear Karen I. Peer Response Groups in Action: Writing Together in Secondary Schools, Boynton/Cook 1993.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Spigelman Candace, Grobman Laurie editors.On Location: Theory and Practice in Classroom-Based Writing Tutoring, Utah State UP 2005.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Stallings Lynne, Dawn M. Formo. “‘Where’s the Writer?’ Examining the Writer’s Role as Solicitor of Feedback in Composition Textbooks.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.41, no.3 2014, pp.259–77.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Steele Godfrey A. “New Postgraduate Student Experience and Engagement in Human Communication Studies.” Journal of Further and Higher Education, vol.39, no.4 2015, pp.498–533.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Strasma Kip. “‘Spotlighting’: Peer-Response in Digitally Supported First-Year Writing Courses.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.37, no.2 2009, pp.153–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Straub Richard, Ronald F. Lunsford. Twelve Readers Reading: Responding to College Student Writing, Hampton Press 1995.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. “Student Equity Data.”, Mt. San Jacinto College 5Feb. 2021, https://www.msjc.edu/institutionalresearch/student-equity-data.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. “Student Profile.”, California State University, San Marcos 5Feb. 2021, https://www.csusm.edu/ipa/student-profile/index.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. “Student Profile Data [Fall 2017].”, MiraCosta College 6Feb 2021, https://mira costa.edu/office-of-the-president/office-of-research-planning-and-institutional-effectiveness/college-level-data-student-profile.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Taggart Amy Rupiper, Mary Laughlin. “Affect Matters: When Writing Feedback Leads to Negative Feeling.” International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, vol.11, no.2 2017, pp.1–13 10.20429/ijsotl.2017.110213.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Thomas Dene, Gordon Thomas. “The Use of Rogerian Reflection in Small-Group Writing Conferences.” Writing and Response edited by Anson Chris. National Council of Teachers of English 1989, pp.114–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Tie Ylona Chun, et al. “Grounded Theory Research: A Design Framework for Novice Researchers.” SAGE Open Medicine 2019, pp.1–7 10.1177/2050312118822927.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Treglia Maria O. “Teacher-Written Commentary in College Writing Composition: How Does It Impact on Student Revisions?” Composition Studies, vol.37, no.1 2009, pp.67–86.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Underwood Jody S., and Alyson P. Tregidgo. “Improving Student Writing through Effective Feedback: Best Practices and Recommendations.” Journal of Teaching Writing, vol.22, no.2 2006, pp.73–97. Western Washington University, library.wwu.edu/files/wis_tla/UnderwoodTregidgo.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. van Oostrum Ducoet al.. “Taking the Imaginative Leap: Creative Writing and Inquiry-Based Learning.” Pedagogy, vol.7, no.3 2007, pp.556–66. Project Muse, https://muse.jhu.edu/article/222147.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. White Edward M. Assigning, Responding, Evaluating: A Writing Teacher’s Guide. 4th ed, Bedford/St. Martin’s 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.58680/tetyc202131349
Loading
/content/journals/10.58680/tetyc202131349
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error