Item Details

Supporting Independent Construction Online: Feedback in the SLATE project

Issue: Vol 7 No. 1-3 (2011)

Journal: Linguistics and the Human Sciences

Subject Areas: Writing and Composition Linguistics

DOI: 10.1558/lhs.v7i1-3.101


This paper presents a topology of feedback based on an analysis of feedback given by the SLATE tutors to one class over a semester. In doing this, the paper both critically reviews the current research on feedback and attempts to create a place for feedback within the Teaching-Learning Cycle. The analysis of feedback presented in this paper identifies a range of feedback strategies used by the tutors. In particular, the paper identifies two main criteria for categorizing feedback: (1) extent of explicitness, and (2) level of rationale provided. These two factors allow us to categorize feedback as ‘hand holding’, ‘carrying’, ‘bridging’ and ‘basejumping’. The paper provides examples of each of these types of feedback, relates them to the current literature on feedback, and discusses their role in students’ language development. The findings of this paper will be of use to both classroom teachers as well as researchers interested in understanding the nature, role, and impact of feedback.

Author: Ahmar Mahboob, Devo Y. Devrim

View Original Web Page

References :

Black, P. and William, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education 5 (1): 7–74.
Carless, D. (2006) Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education 31 (2): 219–233.
Chanock, K. (2000) Comments on essays: Do students understand what tutors write? Teaching in Higher Education 5 (1): 95–105.
Ellis, R. (2009) A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal 63 (2): 97–107.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
Heift, T. and Rimrott, A. (2008) Learner responses to corrective feedback for spelling errors in CALL. System 36 (2): 196–213.
Hounsell, D., McCune, V., Hounsell, J. and Litjens, J. (2008) The quality of guidance and feedback to students. Higher Education Research & Development 27 (1): 55–67.
Humphrey, S., Dreyfus, S., Martin, J. and Mahboob, A. (2010) The 3X3: Setting up a linguistic toolkit for teaching academic writing. In A. Mahboob and N. Knight (eds) Appliable Linguistics, 185–199. London/New York: Continuum.
Hyland, F. (2001) Providing effective support: Investigating feedback to distance language learners. Open Learning 16 (3): 233–247.
Hyland, K. (2007) Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing 16 (3): 148–164.
Kregar, S. (2011) Relative Effectiveness of Corrective Feedback Types in Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Unpublished PhD thesis. The Florida State University.
Lantolf, J. P. (2006) Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28 (1): 67–109.
Li, S. (2010) The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 60 (2): 309–365.
Mahboob, A (ed.) (2010) The NNEST Lens. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Mahboob, A. and Devrim, D. Y. (2011) Providing effective feedback in an online environment. SPELT Quarterly 28 (2): 17–30.
Mahboob, A. and Knight, N. (2010) Appliable Linguistics. London/New York: Continuum.
Mahboob, A., Humphrey, S., Webster, J., Wong, E., Wong, C., and Chan, A. (2010) Genre pedagogy meets e-learning: An introduction to the Language Companion Course. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Teaching English at Tertiary Level. Hong Kong: Polytechnic University of Hong Kong Press.
Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Martin, J. R. and Rose, D. (2008) Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. London: Equinox.
Milton, J. (2006). Resource-rich Web-based feedback: Helping learners become independent writers. In K. Hyland and F. Hyland (eds) Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues, 123–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Norris, J. M. and Ortega, L. (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50 (3): 133–164.
Rezaei, S. (2011) Corrective Feedback in Task-based Grammar Instruction. Saarbrücken, Germany: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Rothery, J. (1994) Exploring Literacy in School English (Write it Right Resources for Literacy and Learning). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.
Russell, J. and Spada, N. (2006) The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris and L. Ortega (eds), Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching, 131–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sheen, Y. (2007) The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 41 (2): 255–283.
Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. London: Harvard University Press.
Yorke, M. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education 45 (4): 477–501.