Home
Resource
Generation 1.5 students' perceptions of written feedback on their essays from multiple sources
PDF
PDF format is widely accepted and good for printing.
Plug-in required
PDF-1(5.14 MB)
Citation & Export
View Usage Statistics
Staff View

Citation & Export
Hide

Simple citation

Peleg, Janet. Generation 1.5 students' perceptions of written feedback on their essays from multiple sources. Retrieved from https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/T3FT8K0G

Export

Click here for information about Citation Management Tools at Rutgers.

Statistics
Hide

Description

TitleGeneration 1.5 students' perceptions of written feedback on their essays from multiple sources
NamePeleg, Janet (author); Belzer, Alisa (chair); McCune, Lorraine (internal member); Weisz, Carole (outside member); Rutgers University; Graduate School of Education
Date Created2011
Other Date2011-10 (degree)
SubjectLiteracy Education, English language—Study and teaching (Higher)--New Jersey, Basic writing (Remedial education)--New Jersey
Extentix, 161 p. : ill.
DescriptionThis study employed a qualitative methodology combined with a practitioner research approach to examine how a group of Generation 1.5 students understood and used the written teacher commentary they received on their in-class writing assignments within the context of an academic ESL program at a large community college in central New Jersey, across three different error correction feedback types. The sample population in this study consisted of three groups of Generation 1.5 students (with four participants per group) who were enrolled in a high intermediate ESL intensive writing class. Data analysis was conducted in two phases and focused primarily on the rich data gathered from the two transcribed open-ended interviews conducted with each participant, as well as an examination of the first and second drafts of one of their essays. The findings of the first phase of analysis revealed, as expected, that error correction feedback type had a direct effect on student understanding, and that the more explicit the feedback, the greater the likelihood that students would understand the feedback. However, some of the students who received the least explicit feedback were the most successful in incorporating that feedback into the second drafts of their essays, while some of those who had received the most explicit feedback produced some of the most unsuccessful second drafts incorporating that feedback. The second phase of the data analysis used a grounded theory approach to build upon the results of the first phase, and was designed to explain the counter intuitive pattern of student corrections that was found, by exploring the nexus of teacher feedback and student variables. The findings suggest that there is no one “silver bullet” approach to feedback that works for all students in all situations because who the students are, their experiences in dealing with error correction feedback, and what they bring to the revision process may influence the success of a second draft.
NoteEd.D.
NoteIncludes bibliographical references
Noteby Janet Peleg
Genretheses, ETD doctoral
Persistent URLhttps://doi.org/doi:10.7282/T3FT8K0G
Languageeng
CollectionGraduate School of Education Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Organization NameRutgers, The State University of New Jersey
RightsThe author owns the copyright to this work.
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024