Paper Example. The Effectiveness of Feedback on Second Language (L2) Writing

Excellent academic writing practices necessitate cognizant practices and efforts in developing, composing, and assessing ideas. When students use the second language to write their academic papers, they occasionally experience cognitive and social challenges related to the acquisition of the second language (Lei, 2008). Therefore, second language writing defines the study of writing completed by non-native writers or speakers of a language that is considered a foreign language. Engaging second language writers with useful feedback throughout their writing processes has presented sensitive approaches that help address the interests of the people (Flower & Hayes, 1981). The input is extensively viewed as the critical issue used in consolidating and encouraging the writers. The importance of the feedback is accredited in a classroom's contexts and where it creates the central element of the student's growth in composition skills. Therefore, this paper presents the evaluation of the effectiveness of feedback on the second language.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Effective Kind of Feedback

When correcting the second language speaker when composing the paper, various types of feedbacks are applied. The kind of feedback used are classified using strategies or ways used when providing feedback. For instance, the direct and indirect feedbacks are the most appropriate feedback types used. Also, the focused and unfocused are used in categorizing the types of feedback used to direct the second language writers (Ferris, 1999). Therefore, the use of Direct corrective feedback is identified as excellent feedback that promotes improvement.

Direct corrective feedback is shown as the most effective kind of feedback used to drive improvements in the second language writing practice. The immediate corrective feedback is known as providing correct linguistic structure or for near or above the possible linguistic errors that the writers make when engaging the second language.

Direct corrective feedbacks might be used in a way that shows the avoidance of using another unnecessary phrase, word, or morpheme in the second language structure (Lee, 2010). Feedback might also be used with other feedback formations that include oral metalinguistic explanations or metalinguistic explanations. For instance, the metalinguistic description is used to show the proof that provides grammar rules in the second language when giving feedback. The examples are also attached in the input with the references where the student has made the errors in composing the essay in the second language (Derewianka, 2012). On the other hand, the oral metalinguistic explanation shows a small lesson outline where the examples and rules are practiced, presented, and evaluated in an individual conference between the small groups of the second language students and the teachers. Therefore, the direct corrective feedback application is essential when the instructor aims to help the students gain the relevancy in speaking and writing the second language.

Benefits of Feedbacks

When giving useful feedback to the second language writer, the teachers provide helpful criticism or information on the student's written paper. Both the teachers and the students benefit from the presented feedback in different measures. Encouraging input in the second language learning process has registered as a significant effect on learning the new writing. Therefore, in terms of understanding the second language writing, the feedback is beneficial to the teachers and students in the presented structures (Ellis, 2009). For instance, the feedbacks make the students understand the goals and sound performances. The students would perform excellently if they realized the fundamental ways to write foreign languages. Students need to feel the new language's ownership and a full assessment of how it is used in writing (Hyland & Tse, 2004). Therefore, when the feedback is used to dictate the student's requirements to fix the second language paper, a specific objective is achieved.

Also, useful feedback on second language writing has benefits the teachers to have a position in providing quality information to the student about their learning of the second language writing process. The teachers play a significant role in increasing student-owned abilities to understand the self-regulation process through feedback (Taplin, 2017). Therefore, the students would excellently evaluate their progress in foreign language writing. They also consider their internal evaluation progression through the teacher's feedback that supports their interests in knowing more about the issue of interest in second language writing (Abbas & Tawfeeq, 2018). Therefore, feedback contains quality and extremely essential shreds of information that improves the teacher's and students' interests in enhancing new language writing performances.

Shortcomings of Feedbacks

Despite the wide range of benefits, the value of useful feedback on second language writing presents a wide range of shortcomings to both the teachers and students involved. For instance, time consumption is one of the leading factors in the feedback provided on a second language paper's composition. Since the students are less familiar with the foreign language requirements, the ideas presented for the input might be considered time-consuming (Hyland & Hamp-Lyons, 2002). The process of reading through the drafts written in the second language, either collaborating between the teacher and the student and engaging in oral or writing comments in the feedback cycle, will consume a significant amount of time when the teacher and the students go through the paper to make substantial comments.

In other contexts, providing useful feedback might be disadvantaged when the student's information is less understood; thus, the teacher cannot withdraw the article's satisfactory conclusion or mean (Hyland, 2002). The process would limit the abilities to engage the necessary details and impressions needed to dictate the paper's real required information (Fithriani, 2017). The feedback might lose the article's actual meaning since the teacher might have a different idea, or they might have understood the composed paper differently.

Potential Developments in Providing Feedback

To provide useful feedback, the teachers encourage using different potential current and future developments in giving feedback that is used in driving the second language writing. For instance, applying the process, such as focusing on the process rather than the product and engaging the student’s minds, has been approved as the potentials principles and developments that can be used extensively to provide feedback to comprehensively stabilize second language writing.

Engaging the student’s mind includes the significant ways of providing feedback on the form of students writing in the second language that applies the indirect marking used in engaging the student's mind. The indirect error feedback concept can be applied in benefiting the student more than the direct feedback that they apply in the long run marking (Truscott, 1996). The research mainly indicates that the overt error correction by the teacher's des does not satisfy the feedback purposes, thus might affect the progress of the student and fail to promote the student’s abilities to learn on their own. Therefore, engaging the student's mind and coming up with the actual presentation or desired feedback would be much more encouraging than the initial context that had no meaning in the paper written initially.

Also, the idea's application, focus on the process rather than the product in the provision of the feedback, describes the guided or controlled composition of the academic paper written in the second language.

The principle shows the formation that encourages the teacher to consider following the process used instead of depending on the outcome (Fan & Ma, 2018). The procedure of how the student develops the paper shows the actual process of how the student understands the second language (Zhang & Hyland, 2018). Therefore, through realizing the process, the feedback given would be specific, thus promoting the student's ability to continue with the unique nature of composing the paper in a foreign language. After understanding the process, the outcome would be interesting as all the simple mistakes were noticed.

Conclusion

In conclusion, useful feedbacks are much necessary for understanding the second language writing process. There are various types of feedback applied in correcting the students and encouraging them to work in a specific style to compose a second language paper. The direct corrective feedback is the most applicable since it effectively describes the critical condition used o structure the article's requirements in detail. Also, useful feedback is associated significantly with wide variations of benefits and shortcomings that dictate the success or failure to give feedback to the second language student. However, to encourage current and future developments, specific principles have also been applied to improve the actual process of improving second language writing.

References

Abbas, M. A., & Tawfeeq, H. M. (2018). The effects of direct and indirect corrective feedback on accuracy in second language writing. English Language Teaching, 11(6), 33-37. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Abbas_Mustafa_Abbas/publication/343381429_The_Effects_of_Direct_and_Indirect_Corrective_Feedback_on_Accuracy_in_Second_Language_Writing/links/5f266123a6fdcccc43a24ad3/The-Effects-of-Direct-and-Indirect-Corrective-Feedback-on-Accuracy-in-Second-Language-Writing.pdf

Derewianka, B. (2012). Knowledge about language in the Australian curriculum: English. https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1128&context=sspapers

Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT journal, 63(2), 97-107. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.514.8196&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Fan, N., & Ma, Y. (2018). The Role of Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Writing Practice. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(12), 1629-1635. http://www.academypublication.com/ojs/index.php/tpls/article/download/tpls081216291635/1769

Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11.

Fithriani, R. (2017). Indonesian students' perceptions of written feedback in second language writing. https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1085&context=educ_llss_etds

Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College composition and communication, 32(4), 365-387. https://www.academia.edu/download/15597300/Flowers-Hayes-1981-Cognitive-Process-Theory-of-Writing.pdf

Hyland, K. (2002). Specificity revisited: how far should we go now?. English for specific purposes, 21(4), 385-395. https://www.academia.edu/download/35803100/hyland_specificity.ESPJ.pdf

Hyland, K., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). EAP: Issues and directions. Journal of English for academic purposes, 1(1), 1-12. http://www.academia.edu/download/35803141/Hyland_HL.pdf

Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied linguistics, 25(2), 156-177.

Lee, I. (2010). Writing teacher education and teacher learning: Testimonies of four EFL teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 143-157.

Lei, X. (2008). Exploring a sociocultural approach to writing strategy research: Mediated actions in writing activities. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 217-236. https://ww...