0010

CHAPTER 8

»    Involve thc students: teachers tan correct sonie of the Scripts and students can look at some

of the othcrs. As we saw in D4 abovc, pcer correction has cxtremely beneficia! rcsults.

We arc not, of course, suggesting abandoning teacher feedback. But we need to be able to think creativcly about how it can best be done in the interests of both students and teacliers.

Chapter notes and further rsading

*    Analysingcrrors

On interlanguage and analysing errors, see H D Brown (2007: Chapter 9).

® Teachers’attitudes to feedback and correction

In a fascinating teacher training actmty, R Tanner (1992) shows how teachcrs do not necessarily enjoy the feedback methods which they ttse in class when they themselves are beingcorrected.

» Using transcripts for self evaluation

Paul Mennim (2003) reports on a speaking‘process’ approach to student presentations; students recorded their presentations, transcribed and corrected them, tlien gave a new transcription to the teacher who suggested changes. Only then did they give the presentation.

e Correcting written work

See ] Harmer (2004: Chapter 7). For altcrnative feedback ideas, see K Hyland (1990).

*    Written teacher feedback

In a small-scale study, Yoshihito Sugita (2006) fountl tliatimperative comments from teacliers were far niore effective on revisions than questions or statements, which suggests tliat students need training to undersland what to do when teachers respond by asking questions and making suggestions.

® Pcer correction

K Hyland (2002: Chapter 6.2) reports on the beneficial results of peer-response training.

*    Online feedback

I Kannan and P Towndrow (2002) suggest that giving feedback Online is somcwhat probiematicaL Students make strong demands and teachers have to be careful not to spend morę time than is reasonable.    ŚS;