1887
Volume 139, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This article reports on the findings of an investigative study on teacher feedback at a lower-secondary class in a Singaporean school. Involving an observation of the writing lessons and interviews with several respondents, the study reveals a misfit between desired and actual feedback The potential for such mismatches becomes greater if the writing lesson is set rigidly as a unilateral transfer of knowledge from teacher to student This study argues that the writing lesson should not be viewed as a mere pedagogic event but as a social event as well, allowing room for teacher-student interaction and the provision of personal, substantiated feedback In such an environment, students are guided to discover writing as a process of finding and structuring ideas, and the responsibility that comes with searching for a way to express them (GAGE 1986:25),

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.139.0.2003198
2003-01-01
2018-11-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ALSAGOFF, L.
    (1998) The grammar of Singapore English. In L. Alsagoff , Z. Bao , A. Pakir , I.S. Talib & L. Wee (Eds.), Society, Style and Structure in Language (pp. 215–246). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BEACH, R.
    (1989) Showing students how to assess: Demonstrating techniques for response in the writing conference. In C.M. Anson (Ed.), Writing and Response (pp. 127–148). Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BRlTTON, J.N. , BURGESS , T. , MARTIN , N. , MCLEOD , A. & ROSEN , H.
    (1975) The Development of Written Abilities (11–18). London: Macmillan Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BURKLAND, J. & GRIMM , N.
    (1986) Motivating through responding. Journal of Teaching Writing5, 237–247.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CARNICELLI, T.A.
    (1980) The writing conference: A one-to-one conversation. In T.R. Donovan and B.W. McClelland (Eds.), Eight Approaches to Teaching Composition (pp. 101–132). Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. CARSON, J.G. & NELSON , G.L.
    (1994) Writing groups: Cross-cultural issues. Journal of Second Language Writing3(1), 17–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. COHEN, A.D. & CAVALCANTI , M.C.
    (1990) Feedback on compositions: Teacher and student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 155–177). Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. COOPER, C. & ODELL , L.
    (1976) Considerations of sound in the composing process of published writers. RTE13, 121–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. DAIKER, D.A.
    (1989) Learning to praise. In C.M. Anson (Ed.), Writing and Response (pp. 103–113). Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. DEAN, T.
    (1994) Multicultural classrooms, monocultural teachers. In G. Tate , E.P.J. Corbett & N. Myers (Eds.), The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook (pp. 105–118), 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. EMIG, J.
    (1971) The composing process of twelfth graders. NCTE Research Report13. Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. English Language Syllabus
    English Language Syllabus (1991) Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education, Singapore.
  13. English Language Syllabus
    English Language Syllabus (2001) Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education, Singapore.
  14. FATHMAN, A.K. & WHALLEY , E.
    (1990) Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 178–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. FERRlS, D.R. , PEZONE , S. , TADE , C.R. & TINTI , S.
    (1997) Teacher commentary on student writing: Descriptions and implications. Journal of Second Language Writing6(2),155–182.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. FLORIO, S. & CLARK , C.
    (1982) The functions of writing in an elementary classroom. Research in the Teaching of English, 16, 115–130.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. FLOWER, L. & HAYES , J.R.
    (1980) The cognition of discovery: Defining a rhetorical problem. College Composition and Communication31(1), 21–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (1981) A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication31(5), 311–324.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. FREEDMAN, S.W.
    (1987) Response to student writing. NCTE Research Report23. Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. GAGE, J.T.
    (1986) The teaching of writing: Theory and practice. In A R. Petrosky and D. Bartholomae (Eds.), The Teaching of Writing (pp. 8–29). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. GRAVES, D.
    (1975) An examination of the writing processes of seven-year-old children. Research in the Teaching of English, 9(3), 227–241.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (1983) Writing: Children and Teachers at Work. Exeter: Heinemann Educational Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. GUPTA, A. F.
    (1992) The pragmatic particles of Singapore colloquial English. Journal of Pragmatics18,31–57.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. JONES, N.
    (1982) Design, discovery, and development: A case study. DAI, 43(04A).
    [Google Scholar]
  25. KINKEAD, J.A. & HARRIS , J.G.
    (Eds.) (1993) Writing Centers in Context: Twelve Case Studies. Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. KNOBLAUCH, C.H. & BRANNON, L.
    (1984) Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing. New Jersey: Boynton/Cook.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. LEKI, I.
    (1990) Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 57–68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. MANGELSDORF, K. & SCHLUMBERGER, A.
    (1992) ESL student response stances in a peer-review task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1 (3), 235–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. MORGAN, M.
    (1988) The Composing Process of Student Collaborative Writers. PhD dissertation. Purdue University.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. MURRAY, D.M.
    (1968) A Writer Teaches Writing. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (1978) Internal revision: A process of discovery. In C.R. Cooper and L. Odell (Eds.), Research on Composing: Points of Departure (pp. 85–103). Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. (1980) Writing as process. In T.R. Donovan and B.W. McClelland (Eds.), Eight Approaches to Teaching Composition (pp. 3–20). Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. ODELL, L. GOSWAMI, P.
    (Eds.) (1986) Writing in Nonacademic Settings. New York: Guildford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. RAIMES, A.
    (1987) Exploring through Writing: A Process Approach to ESL Composition: Instructor's Manual. New York: Saint Martin's Press, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. ROSKELLY, H.
    (1994) The risky business of group work. In G. Tate , E.P.J. Corbett , and N. Myers (Eds.), The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook (pp. 141–146), 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. RUBIN, L.
    (1985) Uneven performance: What students do and don't know about their own writing. The Writing Instructor, 4, 157–167.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Singapore Department of Statistics
    Singapore Department of Statistics (2000) Statistics Singapore www.singstat.gov.sg/FACT/SIF/sif3.htm1#pt3
    [Google Scholar]
  38. THOMAS, D. THOMAS , G.
    (1989) The use of Rogerian reflection in small-group writing conferences. In C.M. Anson (Ed.), Writing and Response (pp. 114–126). Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. TSUI, A.B.M. & NG, M.
    (2000) Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147–170.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. WHITE, E.M.
    (1994) Teaching and Assessing Writing. 2nd edition. California: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.139.0.2003198
Loading
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