raimes & responses to writing

FND response to writing | Efrosini | July 7th, 2001

Hello, everyone. I am Efrosini from Greece and I have just started the FND.

I am still at the beginning of course, but as I was reading one of the FND articles which is in unit 2 of TDA (ANN RAIMES, OUT OF THE WOODS), I came up with some questions and I would be grateful if anyone could help me.

On page 419 of the article the writer towards the end of the paragraph mentions:

"If the teachers see their response to their students pieces of work as the end of the interaction, then sts will stop there. If, however, the response includes specific directions on what to do next, an "assignment", there is a chance for application of principles."

What kind of directions should the teacher give? Directions presented as guidelines and notes placing emphasis on the mistakes made in the particular piece of writing? Could it be something else? And if the T. provides some guidelines and some kind of feedback, how much will this help? Judging from my own experience both as a student [when I was a teenager] and as a T. teaching composition to adolescents I realized that comments and corrections are read and taken into account only by a small percentage of sts and there is some kind of change in the future. What is meant by "assignment" here? To give sts extra work in the form of a project? And if so, what if the sts don't do it?

Phew!!! I have finished with my questions. I congratulate anyone who was brave enough to read this message to end. I apologize if I was tiresome.

Best wishes,

Efrosini

Re: Raimes article | Alexandra Hamourikou | July 7th, 2001

Hi Efrosini,

I am working on the FND too. I've just started the last part.

I suppose the extract you referred to draws our attention to error correction. According to my diary entry, Raimes supports there is no single recipe a teacher could follow dealing with such matters.

The word 'assignment' could imply that students' attention should be drawn on a specific area, asking them to do a task, making them think about it taking into account all of the four elements Raimes refers to (form, content, reader, writer).

However, what Raimes wanted to stress, as I got it, was that teachers should rely on classroom and action research to find what works for the particular students instead of seeking "universal prescriptions" (Pennycook).

If your question was how other teachers deal with error correction in written texts, here are some of the things I do.

1) I have a code for grammar mistakes and ask them to correct them.

However, it doesn't work with all students. Now, after having read about different learning styles, I sometimes reverse the procedure, correct the mistakes and ask them to justify my corrections. It seems to work with the particular group I am teaching this summer.

2) Dealing with structure, I either give them a pattern to follow and rephrase the sentence or I rephrase it and ask them to recognize the pattern and find out why their option was not correct.

Alexandra Hamourikou

FND response to writing | Colin Graham | July 9th, 2001

Hi Efronsini, welcome to the course (Hell in an envelope! Sorry, bad attempt at a Greek pun).

When I did the FND I thought the point Raimes was making was that the writing and the feedback on it needed to be part of a cycle: that the feedback should be designed to encourage students to think about redrafting or revising their writing.

Some bloke called Julian Edge wrote about this in "Mistakes and Correction", Longman (1989?) in or around Chapter 6/7 where he was suggesting that just this sort of recycling aids language learning- if my memory serves me right, I don't have the book to hand.

I think Raimes is saying the same thing that the teacher should look for opportunities to continually engage students in the learning process and not just to see feedback as one more thing to check off the list before the end of term.

Anyway, enjoy the rest of the course; I'm sure you'll find it very stimulating!

BFN

Colin Graham

FND response to writing | Jerry Talandis Jr. | July 10th, 2001

Hello Elfrosini,

This is Jerry Talandis, from Japan. Thanks for contributing to the list.

About the Raimes article, I have to agree with the other comments you've received. When you give feedback to students, ideally, it should not be the end of a process but a continuation of one. I think you get that. The question comes as to what kind of feedback do you give? That is a much more difficult question.

I currently teach writing to my first year Japanese students. I struggle with error correction all the time. I've tried many approaches (doing a kind of informal Action Research cycle) where I try something, see how it goes, then re-evaluate. For example, I've tried labeling errors with a number code and leaving it up to students to figure out their errors and correct them. That was ok, but I ended up spending too much time on many many grammar points, and I think the students were overwhelmed.

This year I decided to focus on only 10 grammar points and then give the students a lot of practice on these. I've developed evaluation sheets that point out the types and frequency of errors they made and ask them to fill out work sheets for points they need more practice on.

For other kinds of mistakes, I write, "Ask me" by the error and encourage students to see me after school so that I can give them a mini private lesson. That was a total bomb as only a few of the best students ever came to see me! Oh well.

I'm still not happy with my error correction system and hope to learn more about doing it better from this course. I think the key is just giving your students your time and energy. The way you do it is not as important as showing you care about their effort.

Good luck!

Jerry Talandis

Re: error correction in writing | Francesca | July 10th, 2001

To join the discussion that is developing on error correction, I'd like to share my own techniques.

For errors which I think students can correct alone, I write a word such as spelling or tense as a clue next to the error, I don't use symbols like sp for spelling as I've found students find them confusing.

For errors which I think students can't self-correct, I write numbers and then have footnotes with the correction and a brief explanation. I always try to comment on the content / message as well as correcting errors. This form of error correction is time consuming, but I've found that students value it. I give time in class for them to read my comments and self correct with me available to verify or explain further if necessary. I always finish the correction with a general comment, usually indicating main areas they should focus on next time they write according to their difficulties. In this way, correction becomes more of a process.

Recently, I've been giving taped feedback as our tutors sometimes do. I read the text, recording my voice on a blank tape students give me. As I read, I stop and comment on both content and errors. Students have reacted very well to this form of correction and are keen to go home and listen to their tapes. I don't mark their original texts at all; they change them as they listen. This system is also faster than giving written feedback.

My only 'problem' with error correction is the urge I still have to correct everything. I manage to control it with lower levels, but for FCE and above, I really don't like leaving written errors uncorrected even though I know that focusing on a few would be more beneficial to students and more motivating. What do the rest of you think about this ? As a language learner, I prefer having all my written errors corrected.

Francesca

Re: error correction in writing | Simon Cole | July 11th, 2001

It's been great to read about this recently as I'm having exactly the same problems you've all been talking about. Jerry, (we're both in Japan doing the same thing and, believe me, having the same experiences, I'd be delighted if you contacted me personally)...

I went through the same hoops ...it amazes me how similar our experiences have been ...overwhelming corrections, ...student skills lists (designed to raise awareness of strengths and areas that need improvement) ...peer correction, etc, teaching writing can be SO much work... Now I limit what I correct to just a few points. At the start of each assignment I give students a grading sheet that lists components (Admin/Layout, Paragraphing, Completeness, Grammar, Citations..) with indicative questions (Does the header have name, number, date, ...? Do the paragraphs have one main idea?- Are all the questions answered?- Is the 3 rd person singular correct?). This starts out very basic and gradually, as the students acquire the skills, becomes more high-level. There's a lot to it... I've been doing the same class for 6 years, so if anyone's interested, I'll share more...

To return to Efrosini's original point about feedback, I'm in a quandary about it now, because the students only seem to take note of my corrections if they have to do a 2 nd draft (and even then not!). I think I'll tell them to rewrite their final draft (without submitting it, give time in class to do it with my help) and if that doesn't work I'll just limit the feedback on it. It'll probably end up being a mix of both.

There's very little point in wasting hours on feedback if it's going to be ignored. I like Francesca's idea of taped feedback ...but I doubt my students' are at that level.

Simon Cole

Re: error correction | Alexandra Hamourikou | July 11th, 2001

Hello,

This has been a very enlightening discussion! I've found a lot of new ideas I haven't thought of (like taped feedback) and I can't wait using them in class. Here is another one.

After having read about concordances I decided to try it with my students as a follow up activity. If, for example, the student fails to use a tense correctly I ask him to spot ten sentences with that tense in a book or a magazine and explain why it is used. Concordances will bring up a lot of other structures and collocations that the students might not know and improve both fluency and accuracy. Apart from that, it is an easy task that can be motivating for the weak ones. I've tried it once or twice and it worked particularly well with the weak students. Some of them came with more than ten sentences and with an expression of satisfaction and confidence on their faces.

Besides, when students fail at a production stage that could mean that the amount of input given was not enough for them. What do you think?

What about correcting them during classroom interaction? Should we seek accuracy or fluency? How can we combine both? What about meaning? Some of the interactions (in my classrooms) turn to be boring and meaningless because the students are afraid of improvisation. Does this happen in your classes? How do you deal with it?

Alexandra Hamourikou

FND response to writing | Efrosini | July 12th, 2001

Hello everyone and thank you to Efrosini for posting the question about the Raimes article and starting this interesting discussion. I'm also working on the FDN module (Unit 4) but this issue of responding to writing and error correction is one I've been struggling with too. My situation sounds strikingly similar to Jerry's and Simon's (teaching writing to college students in Japan). I'd like to hear more of your ideas Simon as I've tried most of the things that have been mentioned so far.

I go over common errors after each assignment at the moment, usually just focusing on one or two major errors. My correction code didn't work last year, possibly because it was too complicated. I encourage students to spot the errors in their own and each other's work in class. I don't like to correct every mistake as it really discourages the students and inhibits their writing.

On the other hand, the students are writing more and faster. We do freewriting in class and journal writing at home which I don't correct at all (unless a student asks me too). I usually respond with a variety of questions to the journal writing: emotive, content, suggestions for future topics, etc. Most students have improved but still make the same common errors.

Sometimes I feel like I'm just going round in circles but perhaps that's what is meant by a cyclical approach and it's not such a bad thing.

Now for a general question about the FDN: How long in general do people spend on it? I'm worried about rushing through it too quickly on the one hand or going too slowly and doing too much background reading at this point on the other. Any advice?

Thanks for reading,

Karen Masatsugu

Thanks!! | Efrosini | July 12th, 2001

Hi, everyone!!

It's me, Efrosini, again. I was really glad to get your emails and read them. {Though, I must admit that at first I was hesitant to the idea writing to you because I thought that nobody would bother answering me and that you would find my questions naive. Of course, I realized that this is CERTAINLY not the case}.

I would like to thank you all - Aleka, Jerry, Francesca, Colin and Simon - for answering back. Thank you all for your useful pieces of advice, your valuable contribution and for sharing your experiences and ideas. You certainly gave me food for thought and you have helped me approach this issue from a different point of view. I particularly liked Jerry's, Francesca's and Simon's ideas and I am thinking of adopting and experimenting with some of these methods in September when schools start again.

Once again, thank you all. It was great to hear from you all. You are all wonderful!!!!!!

Efrosini

Some suggestions, thank you Karen | Efrosini | July 12th, 2001

Hi, Karen!!!

It was nice to hear from you.... Thank you for replying to my email.

I was thinking about your problem of the sts about making the same mistakes and I have come up with an idea but I don't know if it will help you or not.

I suggest that you spot the most common mistakes that take place among the written assignments and isolate those specific fragments. Then, you can rewrite them as they are on a piece of paper that you will photocopy and distribute to your sts. In class, you can discuss the mistakes with your sts either by asking them to spot the mistake in each sentence, discuss the problems and try to work out in common the right answer.

Another possible solution could be to photocopy the fragments with the mistakes together with the correction. I suggest that the fragments are typewritten and the mistakes are corrected in your own handwriting so that the difference between right and wrong clashes.

I hope that something useful will come out of all this and that I have helped you in some way.

Bye,

Efrosini

Editor's note: For more on correcting students' written work, check out the "Written Writing Feedback" discussion in the MET category.

 

Archive Categories