Feedback for Second Language WritingSarah Saxer

Fall 2016 – Writing Teacher Workshop

Howard Community College

Ferris, Dana R. Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. 2nd ed. Ed. Diane Belcher and Jun Liu. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2011. Print.

Second Language Learning

If you have studied a second language, what challenges did you face?

What challenges do your ESL students at HCC face?

Groups of L2 Writers

• International students

• Resident immigrants

• Children of resident immigrants (Gen 1.5)

Background questions that may be helpful:

How long have you been in the US? Have you attended any schooling in the US? How strong are your reading and writing skills in your first language?

Contrastive Rhetoric

• Robert Kaplan (1966)

• Reader versus writer responsibility

• Inductive versus deductive (facts first vs theory first)

• Shared knowledge

Definition of Error

“Errors are morphological, syntactic, and lexical forms that deviate from rules of the target language, violating expectations of literate adult native speakers” (Ferris 3).

Error in Whose Mind?

• What‘s worth correcting?

Brief History of Error Correction

• Up to 1970s – controlled

• 1970s to 1980s – process (“benign neglect” Ferris)

• 1996 Truscott – no corrective feedback

• Past twenty years – what and how?

Students –What do they want?

• Want error correction

• Will attend to error correction if

a) have the time

b) understand the codes

c) know how to correct it

Four Ways to Provide Written Feedback

• Conferencing, peer editing, videos = other techniques

1. Focused Versus Comprehensive

• Focused – identifies and treats specific patterns of errors such as word forms

How many patterns to focus on?

• Comprehensive - identities and treats all errors

What about the other errors?

2. Indirect Versus Direct

• Indirect – mark the errors (coded versus uncoded), but don’t correct them

• Direct – mark and correct the errors

3. Global Versus Local

• Global: comprehensibility of the text

• Local: minor errors that don’t impact understanding

Sarah teaches very hard.

Sarah teach very well.

Treatable Versus Untreatable

• Treatable – rule governed

• Untreatable – idiosyncratic (direct feedback)

One Way to Tie It All Together

• Early drafts:• focus on content, rhetorical strategies, organization by providing oral and written

instructor feedback and peer feedback

• point out errors that interfere with comprehensibility

• ask students to read their texts aloud

• Later drafts:• provide direct, comprehensive feedback on a limited section of the paper (e.g., one

paragraph)

• provide coded or uncoded markings on two patterns of error

• provide students with a mini lesson/ practice on that error or refer them to the writing center

• deduct points on the final draft for that type of error

• keep a log, holding the student responsible for that type of error* for subsequent compositions

Common Areas of Error

• Verb Tense System in English

• Active and Passive Voice

• Basic Types of Nouns

• Subject Verb Agreement

• Articles

• Basic Clause and Sentence Patterns

• Word Forms

• Word Choice

(based on Ferris’ list in Treatment of Error.)

Resources

• Explanations for common writing errors – Bedford handbook

• List of practice Web pages for students (email Christine Sharpe)

• ENGL 121 ESL Instructor Canvas page (Web links and lessons from Robert Panizari, Amelia Yongue, Elisa Roberson, and David Buck)

• Canvas lesson on connection between reading comprehension and sentence structure (email Christine Sharpe)

• Consultations with Christine Sharpe

• ESL Library in DH 140

• ESL sections of ENGL 121

• ELC classes www.howardcc.edu/elc

Bibliography

Ferris, Dana R. Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. 2nd ed. Ed. Diane Belcher and Jun Liu. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2011. Print.

Hinds, John. “Inductive, Deductive, Quasi-inductive: Expository Writing in Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Thai.” Coherence in Writing: Research and Pedagogical Perspectives. Eds. Ulla Connor and Ann M. Johns. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc., 1990. 87-109. Print.

---. “Reader Versus Writer Responsibility: A New Typology.” Landmark Essays on ESL Writing. Eds. Tony Silva and Paul Kei Matsuda. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbuam Associates, Inc., 2001. 63-73. Print.

Kaplan, Robert B. “Cultural Thought Patterns in Inter-Cultural Education.” Landmark Essays on ESL Writing. Eds. Tony Silva and Paul Kei Matsuda. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbuam Associates, Inc., 2001. 11-25. Print.

Panetta, Clayann Gilliam. “Understanding Cultural Differences in the Rhetorical and Composition Classroom: Contrastive Rhetoric as Answer to ESL Dilemmas.” Contrastive Rhetoric Revisited and Redefined. Ed. Clayann Gilliam Panetta. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 2001. 3-13. Print.