Abstract

This study aims at analyzing the perceptions and practices of written feedback in English classes at an intermediate level in public sector colleges in district Bagh, Azad Jammu, and Kashmir. Precisely, the study analyzes English teachers' perceptions and actually written feedback practices employed in classrooms. Further, it examines the perceptions students have about written feedback; and explores the similarities and differences between students' likenesses and actual practices of written feedback. This study applies a mixed-method research approach, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative methods. Findings of this study reveal that though both teachers and students prefer to have the provision of Specific Feedback with direct correction, in practice, General Feedback is given with indirect correction. Teachers and students perceive the provision of Content Feedback and Form feedback both as more beneficial, and teachers also give both types of feedback, but they lend a bit more emphasis on Content Feedback. Similarly, Negative Feedback is supplied more. However, teachers and students like to enjoy Positive Feedback in actual provision.

Key Words

Written Feedback, Feedback Practices, Teachers’ Perceptions, Students ‘Perceptions

Introduction

Feedback is the most important aspect of the teaching and learning processes. Written feedback from teachers helps students to solve all potential problematic aspects in their language learning processes. Particularly, it assists students in improving their writing skills; and ultimately, it leads towards effective and meaningful written communication that is the prime objective of language learning and teaching activities. The research work in the last few decades has revealed that both students and teachers consider feedback as a critical element of writing instruction (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2014; Goldestin, 2004; Leki, 1990). 

The way written feedback is given to and received by the students is a very important feature of English learning. Poulos & Mahony (2008) say that when feedback is given time, with precise detail, and keeping in view the learners' needs and likenesses, is known as effective written feedback. Effective written feedback is a very influencing factor in the development of English students' writing skills, but many factors could cause to reduce its efficacy, such as, the way it is given, it's timing, quality and quantity etc., consequently, feedback doesn't produce desire results. But, the most important of all these reasons is the mismatch between teachers' perceptions, students' likenesses, and actual practices of written feedback, which makes the given feedback ineffective. Hyland and Anan (2006) study stress that English teachers’ choices concerning the type of written feedback given to the learners are greatly affected by their beliefs and perceptions about feedback. However, a mismatch is found regarding teachers' viewpoint and the actual providence of written feedback that defuses the efficacy of given feedback. A mismatch between perceptions and actual practices of written feedback is also pointed out by the research study conducted by Corpuz (2011). The study finds that though both the teachers and the students prefer the provision of direct corrective feedback, in actual practices, teachers provide direct and indirect feedback with codes, underling, and circling. 

From researcher’s ten years experience of English teaching, he observes that feedback is not a popular concept with respect to the development of English teaching and learning in AJK context. There could be many reasons for students poor learning performances, particularly, lack of good and trained English teachers, less motivated students, infrastructure issues, and many more yet to be discovered, could be the causes, which impact students' learning, negatively. But lack of feedback provision, giving of low quality feedback, or the supplying of feedback in a traditional way might be the important reasons that affect students learning generally, and their performances in English examination, specifically. 

Keeping in view the poor learning performances of the English students at an intermediate level, in government colleges of District Bagh, this study is carried out to examine the beliefs and perceptions of English students and teachers have about written feedback, and the types they think beneficial for the students. Further, the current study investigates the practices of written feedback, which are actually employed frequently in the ENGLISH classroom. Finally, this study also explores the convergences and divergences of beliefs and perceptions of the English students and teachers and the real practices of written feedback. 

Significantly, the context and reason to undertake this study is that though a lot of research works have been conducted to examine the written feedback practices, their focus and influences on the teaching and learning processes, little efforts have been carried out to bring into light these issues in the AJK context. Therefore, the study explores these issues in the context of AJK Public sector colleges.




Research Question

The present study aims to investigate the research questions given below: 

a). What beliefs and perceptions, do English teachers have about written feedback, and what feedback practices they employ in English classrooms? 

b). What beliefs and perceptions, do English students have about written feedback, and what kind of feedback practices do they actually receive in English classrooms?

Literature Review

Feedback is the most important aspect of English teaching and learning processes. Lewis (2002) defines feedback as; it provides information to the teachers about the learning progress of the students and also an evaluation of their own teaching techniques. While, the ongoing process of feedback highlights strengths and weaknesses for learners in their learning progress. Feedback in a classroom can be as simple as writing a few notes on a student’s written composition, correcting a paper or guiding a learner to find the right answer. It helps the student to better understand the given task and to know why they get something wrong and how they can correct it. 

The usefulness of the feedback, and the appropriateness of the way the feedback is given, cannot be overstated. Juwah et al. (2004) and Nicol and M-Dick (2006) state some principles of good feedback practices. Good feedback provides minute facts and mighty details related to the students learning, positive motivational beliefs, self-esteem, develops self-regulation and the active construction and acquisition of knowledge and skills in the learners, and it also helps teachers to shape their teaching techniques on the required modern lines. Further, feedback should focus on both positive and negative points of the students learning, and it should contain guidelines on how to improve, and it should evade association with other learners (Nicol, 2010). 

Feedback is classified into two main types, oral feedback, and written feedback. Feedback in a classroom is either to write comments on the student's written work, i.e., quizzes, assignments, papers, etc., or oral comments, questions or suggestions, etc. Based on the most frequent practices of feedback by the scholars, written feedback is classified as corrective feedback, which is further divided into two important types, ‘direct feedback and indirect feedback’ (Glover and Brown, 2006) 

Direct feedback indicates the errors and provides their correct form to the learner. It brings accuracy, which plays a vital role incomprehensibility of the written message, and it also reduces the exasperating impacts that inaccuracy can have on the listeners or on the readers (Bitchener & Knoch, 2008). Many recent research studies criticize the direct feedback practices and in comparison, favor indirect feedback (without giving the correct forms or structures). They point out that less explicit, indirect feedback perhaps allow students to revise their work through self-correction, and as a result, give them confidence in their ESL learning (Liu, 2008, Shine, 2008). 

Corrective feedback is also classified as specific or focused feedback and general or unfocused feedback. Specific or selective feedback provides information related to a certain number of discrepancies in a given task. On the other hand, unfocused feedback brings in the correction of almost all mistakes, despite of the error category (Mohebbi, 2013). The need to provide specific or focused feedback, in the form of more evaluative information by the teachers, is stressed. Students like the provision of comprehensive general feedback, which identifies all the error their type and also provides the ways to correct them. Bitchener & Knoch (2008) argue that students value the comprehensive general feedback on their language issues (form), as they think it very important for them because English is not their first language. 

Various research studies found divided opinions on the commonly asked question regarding written feedback, i.e. whether one must spotlight the type of material. It is found that teachers have different views with respect to the focus of written feedback. They are divided whether one should spotlight writing style, vocabulary, rules, and conventions of grammar, or on form and content in general. It is seen that even the teachers who believe that content and form are equally important, and corrections are as crucial as suggestions (Straub, 2000, and Ferris, 2006). Though, teachers perceive feedback both on form and content more beneficial for the learners but practically, they pay most of the attention on grammar and mechanics. As a result, learners see writing as the robotic task of accuracy and pay no attention to content and organization of ideas, and ultimately fail to make a creative communication (Gul & Rodrigues, 2012). General, feedback has two major properties with respect to learning, the informational and hedonistic properties. The informational component encourages in learners the ability to modify, adapt, and improve their learning, whereas hedonistic component deals with the leaner’s motivation, where positive and negative feedback, and their sequencing play an important role. It is further observed that positive feedback encourages positive action while negative feedback can cause self-devaluation, and may lead to denial which diminishes the objectives of feedback, and it may cause anxiety in learners (Hyland & Hyland, 2001; Nicol & M- Dick, 2006; Sadler, 2010; Iqbal et al., 2014; Spivey, 2014) 

The above discussion indicates that exploring different aspects of written feedback (its description and its effects) has been the focus of much language research in the past. But, in recent times the investigation concerning students’ viewpoint on the feedback given by teachers has come forward as one of the most important facets of research in this field (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2014). The investigation of students’ views and opinions about teacher feedback indicates that some learners wanted to get attention to almost all aspects of their writing, some were interested to improve form, and some were concerned about content (Cohen, 1987; Ferris, 1995; Hedgcock & Lefkowitz, 1996; Leki, 1991). Moreover, the review of the aforementioned studies has shown that students’ stance should not be treated singlehandedly, secluded from the context, mainly from the teachers’ thinking and performance. Hence, the present work is an effort in this regard, which considers the beliefs of students as regard to the actual providence of written feedback by the teachers.




Methods

The research work tries to explore the perceived and actual practices of written feedback through survey, in the English classrooms in District Bagh Azad Kashmir. Aiming at, the present study employs mixed-method research design using both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The qualitative part was comprised of Teachers’ Questionnaire (Appendix B), and Document Analysis. While, the quantitative data was gathered through Students’ Questionnaire (Appendix C) and Teachers’ Background Survey Questionnaire (Appendix A).




Population 

The population used in this study was comprised of two groups, English Students ( male and female) of Intermediate Part-II and English teachers (male and female) often selected Government Colleges (Five Female Colleges and five Male Colleges), from three Tehsils of District Bagh. 




Sampling 

The present study employed the common and the most practical sampling strategy on the basis of ease and availability, namely convenience sampling. 




Sample 

Out of the overall study population, 10 English teachers (Five female and five male ) and 110 students (Fifty-nine female and fifty-one male) of intermediate part-II, were chosen from 10 government colleges. 

In the process of selection of the participants, Gay et al (2011)’s recommendations, in accordance with the participants, were kept in mind Though, 110 (35%) students, out of total 314 students, were taken through systematic random sampling method, but teachers were selected on the basis of availability, as most of the colleges had only one English teacher. 




Data Collection Procedure 

For data collection purposes, the permission of the principals of the each nominated college was obtained first, by explaining the purpose and possible advantages of the present research. Then meetings with English teachers were arranged in their respective colleges, purpose, benefits, urgency of the present research work, and importance of their participation were also explained to them. In the first meeting, concerned English teachers were requested to provide students’ marked English papers to the researcher. In the second visit, teachers were given the questionnaire related to their beliefs and perception about feedback, and researcher responded to any queries raised by the teachers. In a similar visit, student's questionnaire was administered to the chosen students by the researcher. 




Data Collection Tools 

For data collection, four research tools were used. The purpose was to collect the most useful information using different instruments.




Document Analysis 

In order to analyze the teachers’ written feedback practices, one hundred and ten English papers of students of intermediate part-II were selected through systematic random sampling method.




Teachers’ Background Survey Questionnaire 

The researcher used the Background Survey Questionnaire  for the teachers, as the first research instrument, in order to collect background information about the participating English teachers, concerning their age, their highest academic qualification, their teaching experience, the level of the students taught by them, and to know whether English is their first or second language. 




Teachers’ Questionnaire, Related to the Teachers’ Perceptions about Written Feedback 

The open-ended questionnaire, related to the English teachers’ perceptions about the written feedback was used as second data collection research instrument. This questionnaire was comprised of the following categories of written feedback: Direct, Indirect, Specific, General, Content, Form, Positive and Negative Feedback.

Students’ Questionnaire, Related to the Students Perceptions and Preferences about Written Feedback 

Students’ questionnaire was administered, in order to know the perceptions of the students about written feedback. It was used to see, how they experienced the actual feedback on their texts, whether it was helpful for their learning or not, and also to know which type of feedback students liked to have. The categories of written feedback included in the student questionnaire were, Direct Feedback, Indirect Feedback, Specific Feedback, General Feedback, Content Feedback, Form Feedback, Positive Feedback and Negative Feedback.

Data Analysis and Discussion

The current research study aims to look at the perceived and the actual written feedback practices of English teachers and students in District Bagh AJK. Section 4.1 presents the findings from Documents Analysis with respect to the teachers’ actual practices of the written feedback in comparison to the Teachers’ Questionnaire with respect to English teachers’ and preferences regarding the provision of written feedback. Then it examines the results of the Students’ Questionnaire related to the likenesses of the English students with respect to written feedback. Section 4.2 discusses the convergences and variances between English teachers’ perceptions, students’ likenesses, and the actual practices of written feedback.

 

Results

Following Creswell and Clark (2007), the mixed-method research design was employed at the data collection and data analysis stage




Table 1. Statistics of Document Analysis

Written Feedback	Specific Feedback	General Feedback	Direct Feedback	Indirect Feedback	Content Feedback	Form feedback	Positive Feedback	Negative Feedback
	1440/4401 33%	2961 67%	644/4401 15%	3757 85%	2340/4401 53%	2061 47%	1394/4401 32%	3007 68%

 




The above table shows the results of document analysis, which can be compared with the findings of English teachers' and students' questionnaires presented in the following tables.




 

Table 2. English Teachers views with Respect to the Provision of Specific and General Feedback

		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Valid	Specific	4	40.0	40.0	40.0
	General	3	30.0	30.0	70.0
	Both	3	30.0	30.0	100.0
	Total	10	100.0	100.0

 

Table 3. T-test Students’ Likenesses in the Provision of Specific and General Feedback

	Mean	St. Deviation
Specific Feedback	3.78	.892
General Feedback	2.31	.832

 




Documents analysis indicated that English teachers preferred general feedback to specific feedback. It showed that 67 % of errors were corrected employing general feedback, while only 33 % of errors were corrected through specific feedback. These results were not aligned with the results of the Teachers' Questionnaire and Students' Questionnaire. Teachers' Questionnaires revealed divided opinions, where specific feedback, general feedback and the provision of both specific and general feedback were equally stressed by the English teachers. Whilst, the Questionnaire of the Students showed that the English students have a preference for specific feedback, as it was more helpful in their English learning.




 

Table 4. English Teachers views with Respect to the Provision Content and Form Feedback

		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Valid	Form	1	10.0	10.0	10.0
	Content	2	20.0	20.0	30.0
	Both	7	70.0	70.0	100.0
	Total	10	100.0	100.0

 




Students’ perceptions and preferences are also obtained with respect to the provision of content and form Feedback, which can be seen in the following.




 

Table 5. T-test Students’ Likenesses in the Provision of Content and Form Feedback

	Mean	St. Deviation
Content Feedback	2.18	.979
Form Feedback	3.40	.994

 

Table 6. T-test Students’ likenesses in the provision of both Content and Form Feedback

	Mean	St. Deviation
Feedback both on Form and Content	4.35	.934

 




Results regarding the provision of form feedback and content feedback, analysis of documents manifested that in actual practices, though the feedback was given on both contents and on form, content feedback was given a bit more than the form feedback. Questionnaires analysis also illustrated that the great majority of both the English teachers (70%) and English learners (83%) asserted that one should focus in feedback on both content and form.




 

Table 7. English Teachers views with Respect to the Provision of Direct and Indirect Feedback

		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Valid	Direct	7	70.0	70.0	70.0
	Indirect	1	10.0	10.0	80.0
	Both	20	20.0	20.0	100.0
	Total	10	100.0	100.0

 

Table 8. T-test Students’ Likenesses in the Provision of Direct and Indirect Feedback

	Mean	St. Deviation
Direct Feedback	3.77	.925
Indirect Feedback	2.21	.825

 




Results, regarding the mode of errors’ correction, i.e., direct or indirect correction of the given errors, results of Documents Analysis showed that English teachers used indirect feedback far more than the direct feedback, as 85% of errors were corrected through indirect feedback, and only 15% errors were corrected using direct feedback. These results were sharply contrasted with the results concluded from the analysis of both types of questionnaires, where the majority of both the English teachers (70%) and the students (80%) preferred direct correction of errors.




 

Table 9. English Teachers views with Respect to the Provision of Positive and Negative Feedback

		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Valid	Praise	7	70.0	70.0	70.0
	Both	3	30.0	30.0	100.0
	Total	10	100.0	100.0

 

Table 10. English Students’ views with Respect to the Provision of Positive and Negative Feedback

	Mean	St. Deviation
Positive Feedback	4.24	.947
Negative Feedback	2.32	1.049




As long as the provision of positive or negative feedback was concerned, analysis of documents revealed that in the actual practice of feedback, English teachers gave more preferences to the negative feedback, as roundabout 68% given feedback was negative in tone. But these results were not aligned with the results of the Teachers' Questionnaire and the Students' Questionnaire, where a larger number of both the English teachers (70%) and the ENGLISH students (89%) preferred positive feedback over the negative feedback.

Discussion

The purpose of current research work is to investigate the convergences and divergences of teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, and their actual practices of written feedback. This study also aims to see whether English teachers’ perceptions and practices align with the students' likenesses regarding the provision of written feedback.

Statistics of the current study illustrate that English teachers consider specific feedback more effectual than general feedback. They think that it would be easy and convenient for the students to concentrate on a limited and specific number of errors at one time that would help them to bring accuracy in their written works. Teachers’ preferences are also in line with the students' likeness, as the great majority of the students also like to have specific feedback on their written assignments. Yet, in the actual provision of written feedback, more significant numbers of the errors are corrected through general feedback. 

Results related to the choice of content feedback and form feedback reveal that a large number of both English teachers and the students like the provision of both the content and form feedback. Teachers consider the provision of both content and form feedback equally important for successful written communication. They opine that for successful and meaningful communication, both the correct language and the logical arrangement of the required information are equally important. These results are in line with the actual provision of written feedback, where English teachers give feedback both on form and content but with a bit more emphasis on content feedback.

Results of the present study reveal that English teachers remark direct feedback more useful than indirect feedback. They find direct feedback more useful for the learners on the grounds that English is not their first language; provision of the correct form of the errors would help students to enhance their English learning. 

In this respect, English students also prefer to have direct correction of their errors. Students are of the view that to find the types of all potential errors, and to correct those errors by their own, is a much more difficult task for them at the early stages of their English learning. But, contrary to the above-mentioned views and perceptions about the provision of direct and indirect feedback, in actual practice, English teachers employ indirect strategy to correct the greater number of potential errors. They employ direct feedback only to correct a limited number of errors, and a large portion of these errors are generally related to the English tenses. 

  With reference to the provision of positive and negative feedback, the teachers in this study stress that provision of positive feedback gives students motivation and encouragement in the development of their ENGLISH learning. They are of the view that the provision of positive feedback also mitigates the negative impacts of criticism in feedback. Similarly, the provision of positive feedback is also liked by the students, on the grounds that positive feedback plays a very constructive role in the difficult process of English learning. It encourages and helps them to look back and re-work on the weak areas of their English learning. 

On the subject of the provision of negative feedback, English teachers and students are of the same view. They say that negative feedback in the form of criticism, underlining, circling, deleting the text, etc., discourages, creates reactions, and makes learners less confident, and in consequence, they  may ignore the written feedback altogether. Nevertheless, in contrast to all this, in actual practices, ENGLISH teachers prefer the provision of negative feedback to a greater extent where students are criticized, and generally students’ texts are full of red circles, underling, deleting etc. 

The final section of this study triangulates all the collected data to see the convergences and divergences in ENGLISH teachers and students’ perceptions, and actual provision of written feedback. This data indicates a big difference between the perceptions and actual practices of written feedback. Found results manifest that, though teachers' perceptions and students' likenesses of feedback are strongly matched, these are in sharp contrast with the actual practices of given feedback. 

Only one match is found between teacher’s preferences, students’ likeness, and the actual practices of written feedback, that is, the provision of both content and form feedback.

Analysis of the study illustrates that almost in all instances of given feedback; English teachers give written feedback in a conventional way and contrary to their own preferences and likenesses of the students. 

Second, teachers adopt an indirect strategy for the correction of errors to a greater extent; roundabout 85% errors are corrected through indirect feedback.

Third, content feedback, in particular, is very important to help students to make a meaningful written communication, and it needs enough and explicit information on why something is wrong, and how it could be corrected. Though ENGLISH teachers give content feedback slightly more than the form feedback, but in tackling content-related errors, teachers use only indirect strategy for correction, and even not a single error is corrected with direct feedback.

Fourth, the tone of a larger part of the given

feedback is negative in nature; nearly 68% of given

feedback is negative.

Above mentioned factors illustrate that written feedback is given in a traditional and old-fashioned way. The wide divergences between perceptions and actual practices of written feedback, the prevalent use of indirect feedback, and the trend to point only the weakness of the learners’ work, could cause the written feedback to lose its effectiveness. This type of written feedback may have negative impacts on the students’ ENGLISH learning in general, and on the results of their ESL board examinations, specifically.

Conclusion

This study investigates the perceived and actual practices of written feedback in the English classroom in public

sector colleges in district Bagh Azad Kashmir. The research examines the beliefs and perceptions English teachers have about written feedback and the feedback practices employed in the English classroom. It searches out the perceptions and likenesses of English students have about written feedback. This study also explores the convergences and divergences between perceptions and likenesses of English teachers and students have about written feedback and the actual practices of written feedback.  

Participants in this research are 110 English students and 10 English teachers selected from 10 public sector colleges. Document analysis and questionnaire methods are employed for the collection of the required data. A mixed-method research approach including both quantitative and qualitative methods are used, which increases the validity of the study.

Teachers’ Questionnaire and Students’ Questionnaire reveal that majority of both English teachers and students perceive direct feedback with a concentration on a limited number of errors related to both form and content more helpful in the development of English learning. They also stress the provision of positive feedback; it would help learners to boost their courage and give them credence in their

learning.

Documents analysis indicates that in actual practice, English teachers exercise indirect feedback to correct the great majority of the errors with general feedback, where the tone of the given feedback is outwardly negative. Provision of both content and form feedback is the only area where English teacher's and students' perceptions and preferences are matched with actual practices of the given feedback.

Analysis of given data indicates a big mismatch between perceptions of written feedback and the actual provision of written feedback in the English classroom. These variances illuminate that feedback is given in a casual and customary way irrespective of its positive or negative effects on the students’ learning s’ outcomes. Though the provision of both content and form feedback matches the realization and likenesses of English teachers and students, the indirect approach in its provision may cause to neutralize its possible positive impacts.

Appendix-A

Teachers’ Background Survey and Teachers’ Questionnaire 




Teachers’ Background Survey 

Name: ........................ Gender: Age.......yearsHighest Academic Degree: .......................... 

Male/Female Sign......... Institute Name: ................................... 

Teaching Experience.......Years English is my: 1st / 2nd language currently teaching: grade 11th / 12th 

87 




Appendix-B 

Teachers’ Questionnaire 

Each question is designed to get your very precious, valuable and detailed views about various aspects of written feedback, so please shed light on the following questions. 

1. Which types of problems students face while writing English, that you have observed so far? 

2. What is your perception and experience about the role of written feedback in the progress of students’ ENGLISH (English as a foreign language) learnings? 

3. What are the factors due to which you provide only written feedback or only oral feedback or both oral and written feedback, or which factors prevent you from the provision of any feedback to the ENGLISH students? 

4. Teachers and students should have a shared understanding about the learning goals for the better utilization of feedback, what is your opinion? 

5. In your opinion, could there be any possible role of written feedback for the improvement of teachers’ own teaching performances or not? ?

6. Personal relation between individual learner and the teacher has impacts on the nature and quality of feedback. What’s your opinion & experience about this view? 

7. It is believed that there is not always a fit or correlation between teacher’s beliefs and perceptions of feedback and their actual practices of written feedback in the classroom. Do you agree with this narrative? 

8. How do the students respond to the written feedback? How does a teacher determine whether or not his feedback is successful? 

9. Do you agree with the view that, while providing written feedback, one should keep in mind the likeness and preferences of students with respect to the types of feedback? 

88 

10. Which types of written feedback, specific or general feedback would be more beneficial for the students’ ENGLISH learning outcome ? 

11. Should teacher focus on form (language, ) or content (message and its organization) while providing feedback? Your precious views and experience in this regard? 

12. Some people say direct feedback (i.e. direct correction or detailed corrective feedback) is more effective and others favour indirect feedback (i.e. just to point out ,underline or circle the errors and leave them for students to identify and correct by themselves), what are your views in this respect? 

13. In which form written feedback should be given, suggestion or request or praise, or criticism? And which form in your opinion is more frequently provided in the class? 

14. Teacher feedback, self-correction, peer correction, which one could be more effective? Which type is generally preferred in class? 

15. Do you think competency and training of the teachers matter in the provision of good quality feedback? 

16. Do you agree that there should be training workshops for the teachers in the techniques of provision of feedback before they start to provide the feedback to the students? Did you have any such training? 

17. Do you think institutions should have a policy about the provision of feedback or not? And what's your experiences so far? 

18. How do you learn about providing the written feedback? 

That’s all! But in case you would like to add something below, please feel free to add anything you wish.Thank you for your help in answering these questions! 




Appendix-C 

Questionnaire.2 

Name: Gender: Male / Female Age:... years Name of institution: Class: FSc / FA / ICS 

The following questionnaire will be used to get insight about your perceptions and beliefs of written feedback in general and about received feedback in particular. 




Section-I 

Circle the appropriate options to indicate your level of agreement with each statement. (Strongly disagree=1, Disagree=2, Neutral=3 Agree=4, and Strongly agree= 5) 

1. We always receive written feedback on our written assignments 1 2 3 4 5 

2. Teachers give only oral feedback on the written assignments 1 2 3 4 5 

3. Both oral and written feedback are given on the written tests 1 2 3 4 5 

4. Teacher provides Specific Feedback and focuses only majors types of errors 1 2 3 4 5 

5. Teacher provides General Feedback and focuses all potential errors 1 2 3 4 5 

6. I like Specific Feedback because it focuses only limited number of errors at one time 1 2 3 45 

7. I like General Feedback, as it deals all types of errors in my assignment 1 2 3 4 5 

8. Teacher provides Direct Feedback, where he corrects all the errors 1 2 3 4 5 

9. We receive Indirect Feedback, where teachers only points out all the potential errors 1 2 3 45 

10. I like Direct Feedback, as it tells about the errors and also provides their correct form 1 2 3 45 

90 

11. I like Indirect Feedback, as it only points out the errors and provides the opportunity to correct the errors 1 2 3 4 5 

12. Teacher provides the written feedback only on the content 1 2 3 4 5 

13. I like the provision of feedback on content, it helps me to arrange my ideas and information logically, rather than grammatical correction 1 2 3 4 5 

14. Teacher focuses only on form, the grammatical correction, content is all together neglected 1 2 3 4 5 

15. Feedback on form, helps me to write correctly and fluently 1 2 3 4 5 

16. I like to have written feedback both on form and content 1 2 3 4 5 

17. Teacher provides positive feedback in the form of praise 1 2 3 4 5 

18. I like Positive feedback, as indication and appreciation of strong aspects of learning, ?gives me confidence and encourages me in my ENGLISH learning 1 2 3 4 5 

19. Teachers provide negative feedback in the form of criticism 1 2 3 4 5 

20. Negative feedback, the focus only on the negative aspects of learning, underlining, circling and deleting the errors in the text, discourages me 1 2 3 4 5 

21. I like the feedback that highlights the weak areas of my learn 

References

• Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The value of written corrective feedback for migrant and international students. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 409-431.
• Cohen, V. B. (1985). A re-examination of feedback in computer-based instruction: Implication for instructional design. Educational Technology, 25(1), 33-37.
• Corpuz, V. F. (2011). Error correction in second language writing: teachers' beliefs, practices and students' preferences. Masters by Research thesis, Queensland University of Technology
• Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student Reactions to Teacher Response in Multiple-Draft Composition Classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 33.
• Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland and F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81-104). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2014). Teaching L2 Composition: Purpose, process, and practice (3rd). New York: Routledge.
• Ghazal, L., Gul, R., Hanzala, M., Jessop, T., & Tharani, A. (2014). Graduate Students' Perceptions of Written Feedback at a Private University in Pakistan. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(2).
• Goldstein, L. M. (2004). Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 63-80.
• Gul, M., & Rodrigues, S. (2012). Unveiling the Focus of a Teacher's Written Feedback on Students' Composition Writing in Pakistan. International Research Journal, 1(3), 59- 66
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of eedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
• HEDGCOCK, J., & LEFKOWITZ, N. (1996). Some Input on Input: Two Analyses of Student Response to Expert Feedback in L2 Writing. The Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 287-308.
• Hyland, F., & Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 185- 212.
• Hyland, K., & Anan, E. (2006). Teachers' perceptions of error: The effects of first language and experience. System, 34(4), 509- 519.
• Iqbal, S., Gul, R., Lakhani, A., & Rizvi, N. F. (2014). Teachers' Accounts of Their Perceptions and Practices of Providing Written Feedback to Nursing Students on Their Assignments. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(3).
• Juwah, C., Macfarlane-Dick, D., Matthew, B., Nicol, D., Ross, D., & Smith, B. (2004) Enhancing student learning through effective formative feedback. York: UK. Higher Education Academy, 140, 1-40.
• Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In. B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 57-68.
• Lewis, M. (2002). Giving feedback in language classes. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre
• Liu, Y. (2008). The effects of error feedback in second language writing. Arizona Working Papers in SLA & Teaching, 15, 65-79
• Mohebbi, H. (2013). Written corrective feedback in L2 pedagogy: Claims and counter-claims, recent finding, and future research directions. International Journal of Innovative Ideas, 13(2), 29-36.
• Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
• Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501-517.
• Poulos, A., & Mahony, M. J. (2008). Effectiveness of feedback: the students' perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(2), 143-154.
• Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144.
• Shine, E. A. (2008). Written feedback in a freshman-writing course in the UAE: Instructors' and students' perspectives on giving, getting and using feedback. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massey University, Palmerstone North, New Zealand.
• Straub, R. (2000). The student, the text, and the classroom context: A case study of teacher response. Assessing Writing, 7(1), 23-55.