Volume 25, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


In content subjects, university teachers hope that students find their comments on written assignments useful contributions to student learning of content and disciplinary writing. However, teachers often do not know what effect this form of interaction has on student readers. In this study we investigated student reactions to teacher feedback in a law subject. Data included teacher feedback written on 76 student assignments, responses by 72 students to a questionnaire about the feedback and interviews with 9 students. Responses from two groups were compared. One group (Group A) comprised students born in Australia or another English-speaking country and those born in non-English speaking countries but who had been residents in Australia for over seven years. The other group (Group B) comprised students born in non-English speaking countries and who had been resident in Australia for less than seven years. The students from both groups were most interested in specific comments on content matters and only half were interested in comments on written expression. Students from Group B were more likely than Group A students to find teacher comments useful for subsequent assignment writing. The responses from all students indicate that although they found teacher comments useful, they were not necessarily totally satisfied with the nature of the feedback.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Ashwell, T.
    (2000) Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method?Journal of Second Language Writing, 9 (3), 227–258. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(00)00027‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00027-8 [Google Scholar]
  2. Beason, L.
    (1993) Feedback and revision in writing across the curriculum classes. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 395–422.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Boud, D.
    (1990) Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101–111. doi: 10.1080/03075079012331377621
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079012331377621 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, S. & Knight, P.
    (1994) Assessing learners in higher education. London: Kogan Page.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ferris, D.
    (1997) The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315–340. doi: 10.2307/3588049
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588049 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ferris, D. , Pezone, S. , Tade, C.R. & Tinti, S.
    (1997) Teacher commentary on student writing: descriptions & implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6 (2), 155–182. doi: 10.1016/S1060‑3743(97)90032‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90032-1 [Google Scholar]
  7. Johnstone, R. , Patterson, J. & Rubenstein, K.
    (1998) Improving criteria and feedback in student assessment in law . Sydney: Cavendish.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Leki, I.
    (1990) Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response, In B. Kroll (Ed) Second language writing: research insights from the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524551.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524551.008 [Google Scholar]
  9. Loacker, G.
    (1988) Faculty as a force to improve instruction through assessment. In J.H. McMillan (Ed) Assessing studentsy learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. doi: 10.1002/tl.37219883404
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219883404 [Google Scholar]
  10. Mclnnis, C. , James, R. with McNaught, C.
    (1995) 1st year on campus: diversity in the initial experiences of Australian undergraduates. Commissioned project of the Committee for the Advancement of University Teaching. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne: AGPS.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Mahalski, P.A.
    (1992) Essay-writing: do study manuals give relevant advice?Higher Education, 24, 113 – 132. doi: 10.1007/BF00138621
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138621 [Google Scholar]
  12. Nightingale, P. , Te Wiata, I. , Toohey, S. , Ryan, G. , Hughes, C. & Magin, D.
    (1996) Assessing learning in universities. Sydney: University of NSW.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Powers, J. K. & Nelson, J. V.
    (1995) L2 writers and the Writing Center: a national survey of writing center conferencing at graduate institutions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 113–138. doi: 10.1016/1060‑3743(95)90003‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(95)90003-9 [Google Scholar]
  14. Radecki, P. M. & Swales, J.
    (1988) ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16, 355–365. doi: 10.1016/0346‑251X(88)90078‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(88)90078-4 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ramsden, P.
    (1992) Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203413937
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203413937 [Google Scholar]
  16. Sadler, J.D.
    (1983) Evaluation and the improvement of academic learning. Journal of Higher Education, 54, 1: 60–79. doi: 10.2307/1981645
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1981645 [Google Scholar]
  17. Storch, N. & Tapper, J.
    (2000) The focus of teacher and student concerns in discipline-specific writing by university students. Journal of Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia, 19 (3), 337–355. doi: 10.1080/758484345
    https://doi.org/10.1080/758484345 [Google Scholar]
  18. Straub, R.
    (1997) Student reaction to teacher comments: An exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 97–119.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Tapper, J. & Storch, N.
    (2000) Writing in the disciplines: teacher feedback in a business law subject. In C. Beasley (Ed) Third Biennial Communication Skills in University Education (CSUE) Conference "Making the Critical Connection" (pp.197–207). Murdoch, WA: Teaching & Learning Centre, Murdoch University.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Turner, K.
    (1993) An investigation of how students respond to feedback on coursework. Paper presented tothe Measure for Measure Act II conference. Cited in Brown & Knight (1994).
    [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error