Chapter 8
does not adequately address students’ individual needs (Biber, Nekrasova, & Horn, 2011). To understand how feedback can be optimized for learning purposes, the present study investigates teachers’ feedback practices in more detail. Dimensions of effective feedback Effective feedback answers three questions: where am I going (i.e., what is the goal of writing), how am I going, and where to next (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). When feedback provides specific information that answers these three questions on the level of the text, it is easier for students to revise their texts. However, when feedback is too specific and too detailed, students might become overwhelmed. As a consequence, students either neglect the feedback or copy suggestions without further learning (Brannon & Knoblauch, 1983; Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Therefore, teachers have to direct their attention to the most essential problems in the text, instead of commenting on every feature in the text that can be improved (cf. Biber et al., 2011; Underwood & Tregidgo, 2010). Further, teachers have to frame their feedback in such a way that they do not take over the ownership of the text (e.g., Straub, 1996; Underwood & Tregidgo, 2010). It is therefore important to analyze the content of teachers’ feedback (i.e., aspects of the text on which the feedback is focused) as well as its form (i.e., how the feedback is communicated). This results in four dimensions on which teachers’ feedback can be evaluated: (1) higher versus lower order, (2) positive versus negative features in the text, (3) directive versus facilitative, and (4) corrections in the text versus comments next to the text. Higher versus lower order feedback Feedback that teachers provide on students’ texts can be focused on different aspects that underlie text quality (Huot, 1990b; McColly, 1970). For instance, a text can be well written on a higher level regarding content, structure or style, but at the same time it can be poor because of errors in lower order aspects such as grammar, spelling, punctuation or conventions (or vice versa). Previous studies have proposed that feedback should initially be focused on higher order aspects instead of lower order aspects (Underwood & Tregidgo, 2010). The reason for this is that beginning writers do not yet possess the knowledge and skills to reflect on higher order issues by themselves (cf. Chanquoy, 2001). For instance, Sommers (1980) showed that beginning writers, who are less proficient in writing a coherent and understandable text, when asked to revise their text, mainly are concerned with rewording and punctuation. They do not pay attention to higher order concerns yet, as they believe that their first ideas are already well described and need no further modifications. However, when feedback is about higher order concerns, students’ attention moves from lower to higher order aspects, which makes higher order revisions more likely. This is in line with findings from other studies showing that higher order feedback increases the time that students spend on revising the content and organization of their text (Covill, 1996; Matsumura, Patthey-Chavez, Valdes & Garnier, 2002) and
160