Teacher written commentary in second language writing classrooms

By Lynn M. Goldstein. 2005

107 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Although second language writing instructors know that providing effective written feedback is essential to any good composition course, beginning and seasoned teachers alike struggle with this challenging task. In "Teacher Written Commentary in Second Language Writi"ng "Classrooms," Lynn M. Goldstein uses ample research and experiential evidence to explain both how and why teachers should comment on their students' writing assignments. Among the problems that Goldstein addresses are how to attend to the product without slighting the process, how to intervene in process without appropriating product, how to facilitate student comprehension and use of teacher feedback while promoting student independence, and how to respond efficiently while remaining attentive to individual student needs. While it may not necessarily reduce the time spent on commenting, the book will enable teachers and teachers-in-training to provide written commentary that will help their students to become stronger and more independent writers in English. This volume is the only source that contains such in-depth consideration of the issues and the range of practices within teacher written commentary and the only resource that focuses solely on issues of rhetoric and content in multilingual writing students' texts. Teachers and teacher educators will appreciate the Goldstein's thorough and well-grounded analysis. Lynn M. Goldstein is Professor, TESOL and Applied Linguistics, Monterey Institute of International Studies (CA).

Subfields: Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fac64511c6d4cd201f174ebb49d9fe883eb33988

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Language and Linguistics

1. Icy Lee
2. Shulin Yu
3. N. Storch
4. Ken Hyland
5. F. Hyland
6. Gillian Wigglesworth
7. L. Waller
8. Zhe Zhang

Citations in the corpus

• LEARNERS’ PROCESSING, UPTAKE, AND RETENTION OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON WRITING (2010, methodology): “…targeted CF can be effective, extensive reviews of the available empirical research (e.g., F. Hyland & K. Hyland, 2006; K. Hyland & F. Hyland, 2006; Goldstein, 2004 , 2005 ) conclude that the fi ndings about the effi - cacy of CF are mixed and thus inconclusive (see also the debate between Ferris,…”
• Motivation and feedback: How implicit theories of intelligence predict L2 writers’ motivation and feedback orientation (2017, methodology): “Goldstein (2005), for instance, argued that lack of motivation is one reason students may not be paying enough attention to WCF.”
• Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing (2018, background): “Feedback on second language writing is widely acknowledged to offer considerable learning benefits, providing writers with a sense of audience and an understanding what readers’ value in a text (Goldstein, 2005; Hyland, 2016).”
• Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014) (2016, background): “As such, peer feedback does not take place in a vacuum but it is embedded in the specific sociocultural context in which culture plays a pivotal role (Goldstein 2005, 2006; Hyland & Hyland 2006; Lee 2008).”
• Responding to student writing: Teachers’ philosophies and practices (2014, background): “…(see, e.g., Anson, 1989; Brannon & Knoblauch, 1982; Ferris, 1995, 1997, 2003; Ferris, Brown, Liu, & Stine, 2011; Ferris, Liu, & Rabie, 2011; Goldstein, 2005; Hyland & Hyland, 2006; Leki, 1990; Liu & Hansen, 2002; Sommers, 1982; Straub & Lunsford, 1995; Straub, 1999, 2006; White, 2006;…”
• Feedback on second language students' writing (2006, background): “student relationships within which it occurs (see F. Hyland & K. Hyland 2001; Goldstein 2005).”