STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON TEACHERS’ WRITTEN

FEEDBACK

A Thesis Submitted to the Department of English Education

In Partial Fulfillment for the Master of Education in English

Submitted by
Puspa Raj Joshi

Faculty of Education
Tribhuvan University
Kirtipur, Kathmandu
2011

1
 STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON TEACHERS’ WRITTEN
FEEDBACK

A Thesis Submitted to the Department of English Education

In Partial Fulfillment for the Master of Education in English

Submitted by
Puspa Raj Joshi

Faculty of Education
Tribhuvan University
Kirtipur, Kathmandu
2011

T.U. Reg. No. : 9-2-59-96-2004 Date of Approval of the

Second Year Examination Thesis Proposal: 2067-09-09
Roll No. : 280649/2066 Date of Submission: 2067-12-09

2
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that to the best of my knowledge this thesis is original; no part of it
was earlier submitted for the candidature of research degree to any university.

Date: 2067-12-08 Puspa Raj Joshi

i
 RECOMMENDATION FOR ACCEPTANCE

This is to certify that Puspa Raj Joshi has prepared this thesis entitled Students’
Perceptions on Teachers’ Written Feedback under my guidance and supervision.

I recommended the thesis for acceptance.

Date: 2067-12-09

………………………………………
Mr. Prem Bahadur Phyak (Guide)
Teaching Assistant
Department of English Education
T.U., Kirtipur.

ii
 RECOMMNDATION FOR EVALUATION

This thesis has been recommended for evaluation from the following ‘Research
Guidance Committee’.

Dr. Chandreshwar Mishra ………………. .

Professor and Head Chairperson
Department of English Education
T.U., Kirtipur

Dr. Bal Mukunda Bhandari ………………….

Reader Member
Department of English Education
T.U., Kirtipur

Mr. Prem Bahadur Phyak (Guide) …………….....

Teaching Assistant Member
Department of English Education
T.U., Kirtipur

Date: 2067-12-10

iii
 EVALUATION AND APPROVAL

This thesis has been approved by the following ‘Thesis Evaluation and Approval
Committee’.

Dr. Chandreshwar Mishra ……………………..

Professor and Head Chairperson
Department of English Education
T.U., Kirtipur

Dr. Jai Raj Awasthi ……………………..

Professor Member
Department of English Education
Chairperson
English and Other Foreign Languages
Education Subject Committee
T.U., Kirtipur

Mr. Prem Bahadur Phyak (Guide) ………………………

Teaching Assistant Member
Department of English Education
T.U., Kirtipur

Date: 2067-12-13

iv
 DEDICATION

Dedicated to

My parents Chandra Dev Joshi and Jalu Devi Joshi who devoted their lives
making me what I am today.

v
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my respected Guru, my

thesis guide, Mr. Prem Bahadur Phyak, for his continuous guidance, supervision
and invaluable suggestions. Without his inspiring help and constructive feedback
from the very beginning, I would not be possible to come up with this thesis in this
form. I feel myself very lucky to have worked under his guidance and supervision.

I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Chandreshwar Mishra,

Professor and Head of the Department of English Education and Chairperson of the
Research Guidance Committee, for his inspiration and constructive suggestions to
carry out this research.

Likewise, I would like to extend my heartiest gratitude to Dr. Jai Raj Awasthi,
Professor and Chairperson of English and Other Foreign Languages Education
Subject Committee, for his influential class lectures on ELT, inspiring words and
supportive ideas.

I am also grateful to Prof. Dr. Govinda Raj Bhattarai, Mr. Vishnu Singh Rai,
Dr. Anjana Bhattarai, Dr. Bal Mukunda Bhandari, Dr. Laxmi Bahadur
Maharjan and other faculty members of the Department of English Education who
taught and suggested me to complete this thesis. I am also grateful to librarian Mrs.
Madhavi Khanal, for her kind cooperation.

I am also thankful to all the respondents and informants for providing me with
valuable information while carrying out this research. Likewise, I am indebted to
my elder brothers Netra and Tirtha for their inspiration, assistance and financial
support for the study. I cannot remain without giving sincere thanks to my spouse
Mrs. Laxmi Ghimire (Joshi), who helped and continuously encouraged me to
complete the research in time.
Puspa Raj Joshi

vi
 ABSTRACT
The present study entitled ‘Students’ Perceptions on Teachers’ Written Feedback’
was an attempt to analyze students’ perceptions towards their teachers’ written
feedback. This study was carried out using both the primary and secondary sources
of data. For primary data, sixty students were randomly selected from two higher
secondary schools of Doti district namely; Shree Janta Janardan and Shree Bhawani
Higher Secondary Schools which were selected through purposive/ judgemental
non-random sampling procedure. I used both close and open-ended questionnaire to
elicit the required data. It was found that most of the students would like to get
positive feedback from their teachers. About forty three per cent (43.33) of them
perceived teachers’ written feedback is extremely important as the main
improvement tool of learning writing as well as whole learning.

This thesis consists four chapters along with references and appendices at the end.
The first chapter deals with the introduction part which mainly includes general
background, language skills, factors affecting the language learning, feedback and
perception along with the review of related literature, objectives and significance of
the study. The second chapter deals with the methodology used in the study. The
sources of data, sample and sampling procedures, tools for data collection, data
collection procedures and limitations of the study are included in this chapter.
Chapter three includes analysis and interpretation of the data. The final chapter
encompasses with the findings and recommendations made after the analysis of the
data.

vii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Declaration i
Recommendation for Acceptance ii
Recommendation for Evaluation iii
Evaluation and Approval iv
Dedication v
Acknowledgements vi
Abstract vii
Table of Contents viii-ix
List of Table x
List of Abbreviations xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1-20

1.1 General Background 1
1.1.1 Language Skills 2
1.1.2 Stases of Writing Process 4
1.1.3 Factors Affecting Language Learning 8
1.1.4 Feedback 10
1.1.5 Written Feedback in Writing 14
1.1.6 Feedback Timing 15
1.1.7 Approaches to Feedback 15
1.1.8 Defining Perception 17
1.2 Review of Related Literature 18
1.3 Objectives of the Study 20
1.4 Significance of the Study 20

CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY 21-22

2.1 Sources of Data 21
2.1.1 Primary Sources of Data 21

viii
 2.1.2 Secondary Sources of Data 21
2.2 Sampling Procedure 21
2.3 Tools of Data Collection 22
2.4 Process of Data Collection 22
2.5 Limitations of the Study 22

CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 23-33

3.1 Analysis of the Students’ Perception 23
3.1.1 Importance of Written Feedback 23
3.1.2 Frequency of Teachers’ Response to Students’ Writings 24
3.1.3 Focus of Written Feedback 24
3.1.4 Kinds of Written Feedback 25
3.1.5 Location to write Feedback 25
3.1.6 Types of Feedback 26
3.1.7 The Forms of Feedback 26
3.1.8 Understanding of Feedback 27
3.1.9 Strategies in Solving the Problems 28
3.1.10 Teachers’ Role in Giving Feedback 29
3.1.11 Teachers’ Feedback to Improve English 29
3.1.12 Instruction in Feedback 30
3.1.13 Attention to Teachers’ Feedback 31
3.1.14 Forms of Providing Feedback 31
3.1.15 Students’ Suggestions 32

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 34-35

4.1 Findings 34
4.2 Recommendations 35

REFERECES 36-37

APPENDICES

ix
 LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table No. 1: Importance of Written Feedback 23
Table No. 2: Teachers’ Response to Students Writing 24
Table No. 3: Focus of Feedback 24
Table No. 4: Kinds of Feedback 25
Table No. 5: Location of the Feedback 26
Table No. 6: Types of Feedback 26
Table No. 7: Forms of Feedback 26
Table No. 8: Understanding of Feedback 27
Table No. 9: Reasons of not Understanding Feedback 28
Table No. 10: Strategies in Solving Problems 28
Table No. 11: Teachers’ Role in Giving Feedback 29
Table No. 12: Teachers’ Feedback to improve English 30
Table No. 13: Instruction in Feedback 30
Table No. 14: Attention to Teachers’ Feedback 31
Table No. 15: Forms of Providing Written Feedback 32

x
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Dr. – Doctor
Ed. _ Education
ELT – English Language Teaching
et al. – and others
etc. – etcetera
Exam – Examination
i.e. – id est (that is to say)
M. Ed. – Masters in Education
Mr. _ Mister
No. _ Numbers
Prof. _ Professor
S.N. – Serial Number
SLA _ Second Language Acquisition
T.U. _ Tribhuvan University
Viz. _ Vide Licet (namely)

xi
 CHAPTER – ONE
INTRODUCTION

The present study is an attempt to investigate the students' perceptions on teachers’

written feedback. This is a descriptive and analytical study. This chapter includes
general background, the review of related literature, and objectives and significance
of the study.

1.1 General Background

Feedback itself is always viewed as an important aspect in teaching, learning and

writing. In recent years, the use of written feedback in English as second language
(ESL) classrooms has received great importance due to its social, cognitive,
affective and methodological benefits. In language teaching and learning, feedback
can be provided either orally or in written form. In most of the cases, oral feedback
is used and provided to the learners. But, in the present day written feedback is also
an important measure for the betterment of language learning.

Feedback is one of the key factors in language learning which may encourage or
discourage the learners in order to overcome mistakes and errors. In the case of
positive feedback, the learners are encouraged to do better in their written or oral
work. Mere positive feedback is not enough. The teachers should not just encourage
but say which aspects are good and why, successes as well as failures should be
reported and diagnosed. Isaacs (1999) says “good feedback tells what was right,
what was wrong and how to right wrongs without wronging the right” (p. 68).
Giving feedback is not simply correcting learners' errors but it is the way of
encouraging learners to come up. To be very specific, the term feedback is the
response given to learners' mistakes and the response given to them after the
evaluation of their work. Moreover, feedback is related to correction and assessment
i.e. feedback has two main distinguishable components: assessment and correction
(Isaacs, 1999). In assessment, the learner is simply informed how well or badly he

1
or she has performed, whereas in correction, some specific information is provided
on various aspects of learners' performance through explanation or alternatives or
elicitation.

1.1.1 Language Skills

Language is basically used in real life situation in order to receive and share
information. To grasp information, we need to listen to someone or something, or
read a written text. So, language is used to express our thoughts, feelings, emotions
etc. It is expressed through oral or written mode. There are four language skills:
listening, speaking, reading and writing. These four skills are related to each other
by two parameters.

- The mode of communication - oral or written

- The direction of the communication - receptive and productive

The four language skills are briefly described below:

a) Listening skill

Listening is the first language skill which is the ability to identify and understand
what others are saying. Underwoood (1989) defines “listening is the activity of
paying great attention to and trying to get meaning from something we hear”
(p.117). Listening skill involves understanding or speakers' accent or pronunciation,
his grammar, vocabulary and grasping his meaning. It is the source or input of
language learning since language learning starts from listening to others or hearing
something.

b) Speaking skill

Speaking skill is one of the important skills in language learning which involves
thinking of what is to be said. It is the production of speech sound in an audible and

2
a meaningful form. Harmer (2008) says “speaking activities are those tasks in which
students try to use any or all of the languages they know provide feedback for both
teacher and students” (p.123). Teaching speaking means making the learners able to
express fluently in a foreign language. The main purpose of teaching speaking is to
make students learn some of the features of spoken English which includes rhythm,
pronunciation, stress, intonation etc.

c) Reading skill

Reading is an important aspect of teaching or learning a foreign language which

involves the process of decoding, i.e. converting language into message. It refers to
perceiving a written text in order to understand its contents. According to Grellet
(1982) “reading as understanding involves extracting the required information from
the text as efficiently as possible” (p.1). Reading is an active and a receptive skill. It
is the combination of visual and non-visual experience or behavior as well. It helps
to recognize and comprehend the knowledge and information contained in a text.
Reading involves recognition of printed letters, words, phrases, clauses and
sentences with meaning.

d) Writing skill

Among the four language skills, writing is advance and most difficult skill of
language learning which involves the encoding of a message of some kind, that is,
we translate our thoughts into language. Harmer (2008) says “writing is used as an
aidememoire or practice tool to help students practice and work with language they
have been studying” (p.112). Writing skill includes creation, modifying,
summarizing and so on. It is a skill associated with the productive aspect of
language. It is immensely important because it is the permanent and powerful
medium of expression. So, it is very much essential part of language learning.

3
While teaching writing, the learner must be familiar with different skills of writing
so that they can compose or create a concrete and good writing. According to
Munby (1979) the sub-skills of writing are:
- manipulating the script of a language
- expressing information implicitly
- expressing information explicitly
- expressing the communicative value of sentences and utterances
- expressing relations within a sentence use
- expressing relations between parts of a text through lexical cohesion devices.

While writing, we need to arrange the words, sentences, and paragraphs to develop
a strong and impressive product. In order to compose a text, conscious mental
effort of the writer is essential. The students, as the learners of writing, make
various mistakes and errors in their writing. So the teachers need to correct them
very often with appropriate feedback.

Traditionally, researchers focused mainly on the final product of writing, while

contemporary researchers emphasize on the composing process and the strategies
which are utilized by the writers to attend the final product. Writing, firstly, can be
seen as an "act of forming graphic symbol", that is, letters or the combination of
letters (Byrne, 1991, p. 1).

1.1.2 Stages of Writing Process

Writing skill is a more complicated skill than the rest of the other skills because it
involves recursive mental effort. Regarding stages in the writing skills, there exist a
number of conflicting theories of planning and teaching a course in writing. We are
to be sure which theoretical stands, we are going to adopt.

On the basis of the process approach to teaching writing, there are mainly four
basic stages: planning, making an outline, preparing the first draft, and revising,

4
editing and producing the final draft. These stages are neither sequential nor
ordered. In fact, as research has suggested "many good writers employ a recursive,
non-linear approach - writing of a draft may be interrupted by more planning and
revision may lead to reformulation with a great deal of recycling to earlier stages"
(Krashen, 1984, p. 17).

In Hedge’s (1990) view, the process contains a lot of stages which can be
illustrated in the following way:

Being motivated to write  getting ideas together  planning and outlining

making notes  making a first draft  revising,  re-planning, redrafting
editing and getting ready for publication.

However, Reid (1993) offered a more complete description. Process writing as a

classroom activity incorporates the four basic writing stages: planning, drafting,
revising, and editing – and three other stages are given by the teachers, namely,
responding, evaluating, and post-writing. These stages as mentioned by Dung
(2004, p.10) are briefly presented in the following sub- sections.

a. Pre-writing

Pre-writing is any activity in the classroom that encourages the students to write. It
stimulates thoughts for getting started. It moves the students away from having to
face a blank page or what researchers often call the “writer’s block” and transit
them smoothly onto another stage (Nudelman and Troyka, 1994). It includes
understanding the purpose of writing, discovering the topic, and thinking about the
audience, gathering information or inventing possible content. Once the possible
content for writing has been explored, the writers feel more confident to move to
the second stage, which is called the planning stage.

5
b. Planning

In the planning stage, the students organize the ideas they have generated. The most
efficient way to do this is to make an outline. An outline is a plan in which the
writers write down the main points and sub-points in the order in which they plan to
write about them. Outline can be either simple or detailed. However, even when
quite elaborate outlines are prepared, good writers change their ideas as they write
and reshape their plans. Hedge (1990) noted this tendency by saying, “in writing
one so frequently arrives at a destination not originally envisaged, by a route not yet
planned for in the original itinerary”(p.22).

c. Drafting

Once sufficient ideas have been gathered and plan already drawn, the first attempt
at writing – drafting may proceed quickly. At the drafting stage, the writers focus
on the fluency of writing and are not preoccupied with grammatical accuracy or the
neatness of the draft but a conscious visualization of audience is vital here since it
can influence the choice of organization and language to be used.

d. Responding

Responding to students’ writing has a central role to play in the successful

implementation of process writing. It is a kind of oral or written intervention by
teachers or peers or other possible readers after the writers have finished drafting.
This activity is intended to provide the students with useful information to improve
the content of their writing. However, in doing this job, the teachers may encounter
many problems. Some problems are practical: the class size is too large, there is not
enough time, or the syllabus is too rigid to implement other responding techniques
such as conferencing or peer reviewing. Other problems may reflect the teaching
climate or culture, for example, in Vietnam a lot of red marks on students’ paper are

6
associated with working hard, but just carry a lot of face value since it produces
little or no effects on student rewriting (Nudelman and Troyka, 1994).

These problems are relevant to the context of Nepal and cannot be dismissed
lightly. Therefore, a movement towards the process orientation must require
teachers, among other things, knowledge and commitment to teaching to help the
students to make actual progress in their writing skills.

e. Revising

When the students revise, they review their texts on the basis of the feedback given
in the responding stage. They re-examine what was written to see how effectively
they have communicated their meanings to the reader. Revising is not merely
checking for language errors. It is done to improve the global content and the
organization of ideas so that the writers’ intent is made clearer to the readers.

f. Editing

At this stage, the students are engaged in tidying up their texts as they prepared the
final draft for evaluation by the teachers. This activity is very important in that no
matter how interesting or original the students’ ideas are, an excess of linguistic
errors may distract and frustrate the readers, which may result in negative
evaluation of their overall writing abilities. In addition, editing within process
writing is vital because it is not done for its own sake but as a part of the process of
making communication as clear and unambiguous as possible to the reader. Ferris
(1995) recommends that teachers should teach the students to edit their own writing
because they “will not succeed outside of the sheltered world of the class unless
they can learn how to reduce their errors” (p.41).

In short, although revising and editing concentrate on different aspects of the

student writing, they share a common purpose of improving the overall quality of

7
the students’ texts. Learning how to revise and edit is thus central to the process of
learning how to write in a foreign language (Nudelman and Troyka, 1994).

g. Evaluating

Very often, teachers under the pretext of time restraint, compress responding,
editing and evaluating into one. This would, in practice, deprive the students of a
vital link between drafting and revision, that is, responding will often make a big
difference to a kind of writing that the students finally produce (Nudelman and
Troyka, 1994).

In evaluating the students’ writing, teachers normally assign scores, which may be
analytical (based on specific aspects of writing ability), or holistic (based on a
global interpretation of the effectiveness of that writing). In order to be effective,
the criteria for evaluation need to be made known to the students in advance.
Students, once they have become a skillful independent editor, may be encouraged
to evaluate their own and other’s tests. In this way, they are made to be more
responsible for their writing.

h. Post-writing

Post writing constitutes any classroom activity that the teachers and the students can
do with the finished products. It may be publishing, sharing, reading aloud, and
transforming the texts for stage performances. The post – writing stage is a platform
for recognizing students’ works as important and worthwhile. It may be used as a
motivation for the coming assignment or as a termination of the student’s finding
excuse for not writing next time. The students must be made to feel that they are
writing for a very real purpose.

8
1.1.2 Factors Affecting Language Learning

Teaching and learning the English language takes place in a formal academic
setting in Nepal. As learning of English takes place in formal situations within
limited time. It is affected by different environmental and psychological factors.
Brown (1987) mentions “second language learning is not just learning the language
rather than learning its culture and society where the language exists” (p.130). So, it
is very important to understand the culture of the society in which we are learning
language. The language is highly interrelated with the living style, beliefs, ideas and
customs of the related society. Therefore, if one is learning a language indirectly he
is learning the culture of that society to get acculturate with that language.

On the other hand, personality factors within a person contribute to some way for
the successful language learning. Understanding how human beings feel and
respond to and believe in the values is exceeding important aspect of theory of a
second language learning. Brown (1987, p.134) records that self- esteem, inhibition,
risk – taking, anxiety, empathy, extroversion and motivation are important factors
for affecting language learning. Among these factors, Brown (1987) considers
motivation as the most important factor.

Motivation refers to a person’s desire to do something in language learning. It is

some kind of internal derives that encourages somebody to pursue a course of
action. If we “perceive a goal (that is something we wish to achieve) and if that goal
is sufficiently attractive, we will be strongly motivated to do whether is necessary to
reach that goal” (Harmer, 1991, p.3). So, we can say that the more and better the
motivation better the learning.

Gardener and Lambert (1995) divide motivation into two types: extrinsic and
intrinsic motivation. The first is concerned with factors outside the classroom and
the second which takes place inside the classroom. Intrinsic motivation which is
related to inside the classroom happenings can have an important effort on learners

9
who are already extrinsically motivated. The factors that affect it are physical
condition, methods, teacher’s role and success of students.

1.1.4 Feedback

Feedback has emerged in the literature as a means to facilitate both the learning
process and teaching performance. The term feedback is, though common to all,
very difficult to define. It is the information or statement of opinion about
something, such as a new product that provides an idea of whether it is successful
or liked. Keh (1989) defines feedback as “any input for revision” (p.18). In
language teaching, feedback is supposed to show learners what is wrong or right for
better learning in future.Guentee (2007) concludes,

Any type of feedback that does not take the crucial variable of motivation to

consideration is perhaps doomed to fail. If the students are not committed to

improving their writing skills, they will not improve, no matter what type of

corrective feedback is provided (p.12).

Likewise, Deheram (1995) defines “feedback is interestingly linked to the two

bullocks. In order for the cart to move in the right direction, its two bullocks need to
understand not only the purpose of their efforts but also each other” (p.160). This
means teachers and students should adopt a collaborative approach to the mentoring
and processing of feedback in order for the teachers’ feedback to become an
effective tool for student’s revision. According to Ramaprasad (1983) feedback as
“information about the gap between the actual level and the reference level of a
system parameter which is used to alter the gap in some way” (p.4). This definition
gives primacy in filling gap between reference and actual level.

Similarly, Richards et al. (1999, p. 137) define feedback as “any information which
provides a report on the result of behavior” (p.137). This shows that feedback is any

10
comments given by listener, reader or viewer for the improvement and betterment
of the writers’ or speakers’ output. Feedback helps to improve the writing.
Especially, when feedback is combined with instruction in the writing process, the
dialogue between students and teachers is strengthened. Giving and receiving
feedback also helps students to develop readers sensitizing and their own writing
style.

In the same way, Sadler (1989) argues that formative assessment is “specifically
intended to prove feedback on performance to improve and accelerate learning”
(p.77). Feedback is an essential part of the educational process but one which
cannot be approached in a random manner. The important role of feedback in
improving student performance has long been recognized by educational
researchers and has viewed the issue of feedback from cognitive perspective,
mastery of learning and assessment. Feedback comes to be understood by students
according to their individual learning objectives. It describes the nature of outcomes
and the qualities of cognitive processing that led to those states. The effectiveness
of feedback is determined by anticipated outcome. The qualities of cognitive
processing required to achieve these outcomes are further defined as a set of criteria
generated by the learner which assist them to monitor their own performance as
they work toward the desired outcome.

Butler and Winne (1995) divide feedback into two types: internal and external.
Internal feedback is performed by the students themselves whereas external
feedback is generated by the teachers or other than students. While teacher may
give feedback on student work regularly; this feedback can only be incorporated
into student learning when it is sort by them and related specifically to their
individual learning goals and objectives. But if the learner does not possess or has
not developed the goals or objective with respect to desired learning outcome then
feedback can do little to assist them in learning process. It is necessary that learners

11
need to define their own objective and understand the feedback provided by
teachers.

i. Types of feedback

Feedback plays a vital role in language learning. It is feedback that produces

effective second language communicators by planting in them the seeds of self
confidence (Dung 2004). It has a great intuitive appeal and makes sense that an
individual who is provided feedback makes sense that individuals who are provided
feedback will learn a language faster and to a greater degree.

Gattullo (2000) and Harmer (2001) (as cited in Al-Fahdi, 2006) divided feedback
into corrective, evaluative and strategic. Corrective feedback is one which focuses
on helping learners notice and correct responses which are wrong. In language
learning, corrective feedback is primarily concerned with accuracy aspect. It aims
to provide a judgment on the learners’ performance. But on the other hand,
evaluation feedback is related with the performance of the learners which is
dominant in second and foreign language classroom. The teachers use different
words or phrases in giving evaluative feedback. Finally, strategic feedback aims to
offer learners an advice on what to do to improve their performance. In other words,
the teachers try to suggest ways of helping learners to overcome their mistakes by
themselves. It can help learners to become self – reliant. Roger (1996) divides
feedback into the following five types:

a. Evaluative feedback

Evaluative feedback makes a judgment about other person, evaluating worth or

goodness. There is a great difference between judging person and their actions. A
personal evaluation judges the whole person and implies that this is a personal and
unchangeable attribute. Negative personal evaluation can be very uncomfortable for
the other person. Positive personal evaluation, on the other hand, is very flattering.

12
For example, when you say “you are not a very nice person”, people will be
offended but when you say “you are a lovely person”, people will be happier.

b. Interpretive evaluation

In interpretive evaluation, we seek to test our understanding of what has been said
by interpreting and paraphrasing back to other person what we think has been said.
This is typically followed by a question to allow other person to agree with our
interpretation or after a correction.

c. Supportive evaluation

In supportive evaluation, we seek to support other person in some way. In flattery,

we support other person’s ego by telling them, they are good in some way (whether
or not this is true). For example, that was truly awesome! Can you sing it again,
please? You look wonderful! On the basis of this example one is encouraged to do
better in future.

d. Probing feedback

In probing feedback, we seek to find more information by asking deeper question

that seek specific information. For example, could you tell me more about what
happened? What happened next? What size was it? Why do you think that
happened? This example shows that one is asked about any particular content until
getting its ultimate information.

e. Understanding feedback

At the understanding level, we are seeking to understand not just what was said, but
the whole person underneath. In understanding feedback, we ask questions not only
shows that we are listening to the inner person, but also that we truly understand.

13
ii. Importance of feedback

Feedback is a key factor which plays a pivotal role in learning the English
language. According to Ur (1996), “feedback is information that is given to the
learners about his or her performance” (p.242). So, it has such a power which
modifies learners, teachers, reviewers or writers in order to move them in right
direction. As with the help of compass, ship moves, so is the case with feedback in
learning.

Feedback is not only a key element in learning language but also for all individuals
who want to attempt any work successfully. Highlighting the importance of
feedback, Nicol and Farlace (2006, pp. 207-214) provide the following points.
- Helps clarity what good performance is , (goals, criteria, expected, standards)
- Facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning; when
well organized, self-assessment can lead to significant improvement in
learning, especially if integrated with staff feedback.
- Encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning.
- It can encourage students to persist and it is sometimes easier to accept critique
from peers.
- Encourages positive motivational belief and self-esteem.
- Provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired
performance.
- Provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape teaching.

1.1.5 Written Feedback in Writing

Feedback in written work can be given through writing as well as through speech.
The way to give feedback on written work depends on writing task. According to
Harmer (2001), “written feedback techniques are responding and coding” (p.109).
The teacher may respond how their texts appear, how successful they are and how

14
they could improve their writing. Such responses help students to improve their
writing regarding grammar, handwriting, style and so on. Another technique of
written feedback is coding. Different symbols are used to correct their writing,
through coding, learners can identify the mistakes they have made and they correct
them. But the teacher should be careful that the given feedback should have positive
outcome. Teachers’ written comments not only indicate the strengths and
weaknesses of the learners’ writing but they may also assist learners in monitoring
their own writing skill and specific language areas to develop further.

1.1.6 Feedback Timing

Feedback is given to the learners through correction and assessment during oral
work or on written work. The teacher should take care of time while giving
feedback, whether correction facilitates the language learning or disturbs it. There
should be considerable time to give feedback to the students. On the basis of
feedback timing, there are immediate feedback and delayed feedback. Depending
upon the learning task these types of feedback are beneficial. In typical classroom
setting, immediate feedback is more effective, for example in accuracy work, so
that the learner remembers what should be there instead (Draper, 2005). Where as if
the learner is given feedback after the event then there is more chance to forget
what the learners have said. As we know, feedback timing depends on the type of
feedback, type of knowledge, type of errors and present learners’ skill level, for
example, delayed feedback is more effective under the condition of procedural
knowledge, elaborative feedback, non-critical errors and learners’ low skill level.

1.1.7 Approaches to Feedback

Approaches refer to the correlative assumptions and way of doing to get something.
Here the approaches to feedback refer to the way of providing feedback to the
students’ mistakes in their writings. There are various approaches to give feedback

15
to the students’ writings. The two basic approaches are used for providing feedback
to the students which are briefly discussed below.

i. Single-draft approach

This approach was quite popular before the advent of the process orientation. At
that time, teachers’ responding to the students writing was fairly straightforward.
The students would write a paper; the teachers would return it with a few notes on
students performance; and then they switched to a new lesson, the students would
write a new paper and repeat the process. The question is “if we, composition
teachers, choose to respond to the students writing in this way, can we really help
them write better?” A great deal of research done into this area suggested that such
practice does little or nothing to improve the student writing, either in the short or
long term.

Some strategies show the opposite of what is discussed above. According to

Sommers (1982), “feedback fails to prioritize suggestions in terms of their relative
importance and that it can be interchanged, rubber stamped from text to text” (p.
152). She criticizes that those responses as too general, too insensitive, confusing,
arbitrary, and idiosyncratic. Similarly, Chenoweth (1987) points out that this
commentary only cracks the surface of the student writing, but does not “directly
address the writers’ main problems, which are more related to the way in which
they accomplish a given writing task” (p. 25). Keh (1989) is also critical in his
opinion. He expresses that such one-shot commentary provides little information
for students to improve their papers in terms of coherence or content.

In short, the traditional practice of one-shot commenting on the students writing

proves to be ineffective to the students’ revision. Therefore, a new approach-the
process approach to feedback giving seems to be a better alternative (Dung, 2004,
p. 13).

16
ii. The multiple-draft approach

In much the same way as the process approach to teaching writing encourages
students to write multiple drafts, the process approach to responding requires
teachers as part of their instructional role to respond to students’ writing as a
process, to lead students through several revision cycles before asking them to
submit the final piece for evaluation. One advantage of this method is that it gives
the writers more chance to develop and present their ideas effectively. Another is
that it helps avoid turning each paper into a miniature test on which teachers
simultaneously comment and evaluate. It thus, shows the students that writing is the
process of improving through revision based on teacher feedback, rather than a
single act of providing one and also the final draft for teacher evaluation. To sum
up, the introduction of the process approach to teaching writing has changed the
teachers’ responding method from a single-act to a process for the benefit of the
student writer (Dung, 2004, p. 14).

1.1.8 Defining Perception

The word perception is derived from Latin word ‘perceptio’ which was in turn
derived from the Latin word ‘percepere’ meaning observation. Literally, it means
deeper or natural understanding of something or the way of understanding or
interpreting something. According to Hochberg (1964) ‘it refers to both to the
experience of gaining sensory information about the world of people, things and
events and to the psychological process by which this is accomplished’ (p.660).

Similarly, Sanford and Capaldi (1964) define it as ‘the awareness or the process of
becoming aware, of extra, of the extra-organic or intra-organic objects or relations
or qualities by means of sensory process and under the influence of set and of prior
experiences’(p.175).

17
On the basis of these definitions, we can say that perception refers to awareness,
understanding, interpretation and the process involved in it. Normally, it is
considered difficult to measure. Regarding the measurability of perception, the
perceptual process is indirectly observable but the relation can be found between
the various types of stimulation and their associated experiences and the percepts.’
In this study, I tried to find out the perception of 11th Graders on teachers’ written
feedback on their writing on the basis of survey questionnaire.

1.2 Review of Related Literature

Though a great number of studies have been carried out on various aspects or
factors related to English language teaching and learning, there are negligible
researches carried out on the area of perceptions on written feedback. So, this
research is the first venture in this area in the Department of English Education TU.
In order to gather some ideas and information, I have gone through some of the
related previous researches and reviewed them as follows:

Al-Mandhari (2006) conducted a research on 'Learners' Response to Different Types

of Feedback on Writing'. The purpose of the study was to investigate which
approach to giving feedback is the most suitable for Omani learners’ writing. The
data were collected through sample of texts on which feedback had been given and
through a questionnaire. The four approaches to giving feedback: peer correction,
teacher correction, using a coding system and using guiding lines are conducted in
the study and each approach is done in the three phases. His study has shown that
peer correction in all phases showed the highest score reaching to hundred percent
in phase three. It seems to have been the approach which best allowed learners to
remember the errors which were corrected.

Mackey et al. (2007) also conducted research on 'Teachers Intension and Learners
Perception about Corrective Feedback in the L 2 Classroom'. In the study, it was
found out that learner’s perception and teachers’ intension about the linguistic target

18
of the corrective feedback overlapped the most when the feedback concerned lexis
and was provided explicitly. Also, the linguistic targets of the feedback were
perceived more accurately when feedback was directed at the learners themselves
rather than at their classmates.

Similarly, Bhandari (2008) carried out a research on 'Role of Feedback in Teaching

English Language’. Her objective was to explore the way of giving feedback in
teaching English at secondary level by the English teacher. She applied simple
random sampling to conduct semi-structure interview and non-participant
observation in this study. The study found out that most of the secondary level
English teachers take feedback as a support for the teaching and learning process
and take it as a means of motivating the learners, encouraging them in learning,
giving advices and suggesting them.

In the same way, Singh (2008) conducted a research on 'Role of Motivation in the
English Language Proficiency'. The objective of the study was to find out the role of
motivation in language teaching and learning. He has used random sampling to
conduct interview and questionnaire as research tool in the study. The result of his
study showed that the motivation status has some sort of positive and directive role
in language proficiency. The strongly instrumentally motivated students have higher
proficiency in reading and writing.

Finally, Lamichhane (2009) conducted research on 'Teachers Written Feedback on

the Writing of Grade - 9 Students'. He aimed to investigate the teachers’ feedback
giving practice in the 9th grade students. In this study, simple random sampling was
used to administer the questionnaire as research tool. The result of his study showed
that most of the teachers are found giving feedback to the students' writing more
frequently and most of the students wanted to get feedback at the end of exercise
rather than on the margin. They thought all the forms of feedback have a role to
devise their draft.

19
While reviewing the related literature I found that no research work has been
conducted in the area of how students perceive the role of feedback provided by
teachers.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The objectives of the present study were as follows:

(i) To analyze students' perceptions towards teachers’ written feedback on their
writing.
(ii) To suggest some pedagogical implications.

1.4 Significance of the Study

This study will be useful for those who are interested in ELT and learning
language, language teachers and students because the study provides the
information about feedback and the students’ perceptions on teachers’ written
feedback in their writing. Written feedback has such a power which modifies
learners, reviewers or writers in order to move them in right direction. So, it is
necessary for them to be familiar with how feedback has been perceived by the
students.

Written feedback is the tendency or overall characteristic of the factor of teaching

and learning employed by the teachers and the students. The teachers cannot get
their students’ positive responses unless they use proper written feedback on their
writing. Likewise, the students cannot get mastery over good writing skill unless
they get constructive feedback from the teachers. Getting feedback is the way of
improving skills to learn language. This study will also be significant for the
prospective researchers in the field of approach, method and technique of giving
feedback. Especially, English teachers who teach writing skills can take help from
the findings of this research.

20
 CHAPTER – TWO
METHODOLOGY

To achieve the objectives of the study, the following methodology was adopted:

2.1 Sources of Data

The researcher had used both primary and secondary sources of data which have
been discussed as follows:

2.1.1 Primary Sources of Data

The primary sources of data for proposed study were the responses provided by 60
students from two Higher Secondary Schools of Doti district who were studying at
Grade - XI.

2.1.2 Secondary Sources of Data

The researcher studied books, theses, articles and journals to facilitate the present
study. Some of them were Celce-Murcia (1991), Ur (1996), Harmer (2001),
Richards and Rodgers (2005) and Borg (2006).

2.2 Sampling Procedure

Two higher secondary schools namely Shree Janta Janardan Higher Secondary
School and Shree Bhawani Higher Secondary Schools were selected using
judgmental non-random sampling procedure from Doti district. Thirty students of
Grade-XI from each higher secondary school were randomly selected as the
primary sources of data. Altogether, there were 60 students having equal
representation of girls and boys.

21
2.3 Tools for Data Collection

The researcher designed a set of questionnaire for the students to elicit the required
data. The framework of questionnaire was both open-ended and close-ended. The
questionnaire was designed to get the perceptions of the students on teachers’
written feedback in their writing .Therefore, most of the questions were students
oriented.

2.4 Process of Data Collection

I collected the data from the primary source by forming a set of open-ended and
close-ended questionnaire. For this purpose, I adopted the following steps:
- At first, I went to the concerned schools and talked to the authority to get
permission and explained them the purpose and process of the research.
- After getting permission from the authority, I consulted the students of Grade -
XI and requested them to take part in the study.
- After that, I distributed the questionnaires and requested them to fill them
within half an hour.
- Then, I collected the questionnaire distributed to the students.

2.5 Limitations of the Study

The study had the following limitations:

i. The study was limited to only the two schools of Doti district.
ii. Only the 11th graders were included as the sample of the study.
iii. The study was limited to only the students’ responses on written feedback.
iv. Only questionnaire was the tool of data collection.
v. The study included only 60 students represented from two schools.

22
 CHAPRER - THREE
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This section deals with the analysis and interpretation of the data collected from
primary as well as secondary sources. The main focus of the study was to explore the
students’ perceptions on teachers’ written feedback at higher secondary level. For this
purpose, the researcher collected 60 informants from two different higher secondary
schools of Doti district. The analysis of the collected data is carried out in subsequent
sub-units below:

3.1 Analysis of the Students’ Perceptions

This section mainly deals with the 11th grade students’ perceptions on teachers’
written feedback they receive on their writing. As mentioned in the previous chapter,
I distributed a set of questionnaire with 16 different questions for the data collection.

3.1.1 Importance of Written Feedback

The students were asked how important teachers’ written feedback was to improve
their writing. The perceptions of the students are given in the table below.

Table No. 1
Importance of Written Feedback
S.N. Perception Frequency Per cent
1 Not important -
2 Important 16 26.67
3 Very important 18 30
4 Extremely important 26 43.33

From the table, it is clear that 43.33 per cent of the participants said that written
feedback is extremely important whereas 30 per cent responded that it is very
important. Likewise, 26.67 per cent of them replied that it is important. This shows

23
that almost all of the students perceive that teachers’ written feedback is important to
their writing.

3.1.2 Frequency of Teachers’ Response to Students’ Writings

The table below shows that half of the informants (i.e. 50 per cent) said that their
teachers asked them to revise their writing two times whereas 18.33 per cent and
31.67 per cent of the students were asked once and three times respectively.
Table No. 2
Teachers’ Response to Students Writing
S.N. Responses Frequency Per cent
1 Once 11 18.33
2 Twice 30 50
3 Thrice 19 31.67

From the table it is clear that the majority of the teachers wanted to revise their
students’ writing more than once. It seems that the revision of writing feedback based
on teachers’ writing is needed for better writing.

3.1.3 Focus of written Feedback

The following table shows the focus of teachers’ written feedback:

Table No. 3
Focus of Feedback
S.N Responses Frequency Per cent
1 Paragraph construction 8 13.33
2 Grammar 25 41.67
3 Vocabulary 11 18.33
4 Content 5 8.33
5 Mechanism(spelling & pronunciation ) 12 20
6 Organization of ideas 13 21.67
7 All of them 27 45

24
The above table shows that forty-five per cent of the students thought that all the
listed aspects were focused by teachers while giving feedback whereas 41.67 per cent
of them focused on grammar. Similarly, 21.67 per cent of students said that the
feedback was focused on organization of the ideas. Mechanics, vocabulary, paragraph
construction and content were also given importance by 20, 18.33, 13.33 and 8. 33
per cent respectively. This shows that students want the teachers’ written feedback to
be focused on almost all aspects of writing.

3.1.4 Kinds of Written Feedback

In this section, the researcher tried to find out whether the students desired negative
or positive or both types of feedback by their teachers. From the responses, it is clear
that no student desired to get only negative feedback. The majority of the respondents
i.e. 63.33 per cent replied that they wanted positive whereas 36.67 per cent of them
preferred both types of feedback according to the seriousness of mistakes. The table
below gives the clear concept on it.
Table No. 4
Kinds of Feedback
S.N Responses Frequency Per cent
1 Negative Feedback -
2 Positive Feedback 38 63.33
3 Both of them 22 36.67

3.1.5 Location to Write Feedback

Students’ responses in the table below show that they like to receive feedback at the
end than in the margin. But 36.67 per cent of them said that they preferred both
according to the error they made.

25
 Table No. 5
Location of the Feedback
S.N. Responses Frequency Per cent
1 In the margin 12 20
2 At the end 26 43.33
3 Both of them 22 36.67

3.1.6 Types of Feedback

Students were also asked what type of feedback they would like to receive. The table
below depicts that 40 per cent of them like both general and specific whereas 35 and
25 per cent of them like specific and general type of feedback respectively.
Table No. 6
Types of Feedback
S.N Responses Frequency Per cent
1 Specific 21 35
2 General 15 25
3 Both of them 24 40

3.1.7 The Forms of Feedback

I had also asked the students about how helpful are the each form of the teachers’
feedback to revise the draft.
Table No. 7
Forms of Feedback
S.N Forms of feedback Not at all Helpful Very helpful
1 Question 3 (5) 25 (41.64) 32 (53.33)
2 Statement 5 (8.33) 25 (41.64) 29 (48.33)
3 Imperative 8 (13.33) 27 (45) 25 (41.67)
4 Exclamation 20 (33.33) 22 (36.67) 18 (30)
5 Marking the error but not 25 (41.64) 20 (33.33) 15 (25)
correcting them

26
The above table shows that most of the students supported that questioning is useful
form of feedback to revise their draft. Among the respondents, 53.33 per cent of them
thought it was very helpful but 41.64 per cent of them thought it was helpful only and
5 per cent of them thought it was not helpful at all. Similarly, 48.33, 41.64, and 8.33
per cent of them thought that the statement is very helpful, helpful and not helpful at
all respectively. Marking errors but not correcting them is the least preferred by a
great number of respondents. Out of total respondents, 41.64 per cent thought it was
not helpful whereas 33.33 per cent of them replied that it was helpful and only 25 per
cent of respondents took it very helpful.

3.1.8 Understanding of Feedback

The following table presents students’ perceptions on whether the teachers’ feedback
was easy to understand.

Table No. 8
Understanding of Feedback
S.N. Perception Frequency Responses
1 Understanding 30 50
2 Do not understanding 30 50

Fifty per cent of the students replied that they understood the feedback given by their
teachers easily whereas the same per cent of them said that they did not understand it
easily.

Regarding the reason as to why the students do not understand the teachers’
feedback, the table below shows the 60 per cent of them supported that teachers use
new feedback strategies time and again whereas other 30 per cent of them agreed the
teachers’ use new vocabulary and structure in the feedback. Similarly, 10 per cent of
them opined that feedback is too general to understand.

27
 Table No. 9
Reasons of not Understanding Feedback
S.N. Reasons Frequency Per cent
1 Feedback is too general to understand 3 10
2 Teachers use new vocabulary and structure 9 30
3 Teachers use new feedback strategy 18 60

3.1.9 Strategies in Solving the Problems

Here, the respondents were asked what strategies they use to solve their problems.
Most of them opined that they asked the teacher or peer for help.

Table No. 10
Strategies in Solving the Problems
S.N. Strategies Frequency Per cent

1 Asking the teacher or peer for help 42 70

2 Consulting a grammar book or dictionary 14 23.33

3 Doing nothing 2 3.33

4 Others 2 3.33

The table displays the strategies used by the students to solve their problems. Seventy
per cent of them replied that they ask the teacher or peer if they faced any problems
whereas 23.33 per cent of them liked to consult the grammar book or dictionary.
Some of the students do nothing whereas some of them suggested some new
strategies for solving their problems. They suggested the following:
- Study harder
- Look at the previous model

28
3.1.10 Teachers’ Role in Giving Feedback

I also tried to know whether the teacher must correct the students’ written work. The
table below presents the detail.
Table No. 11
Teachers’ Role in Giving Feedback
S.N. Perceptions Frequency Per cent
1 Strongly like it 41 68.33
2 Like it 13 21.67
3 Do not know 4 6.67
4 Dislike it 1 1.67
5 Strongly dislike it 1 1.67

The table clarifies that most of the students were in favor of the idea that teacher
should correct their mistakes. Most of them i.e. 68.33 per cent said that they strongly
like the idea. Similarly, 21.67 per cent of them simply like it. On the other hand, 6.67
per cent replied they did not know. The minority of them (i.e. 1.67 per cent) and the
same per cent of them dislike it and strongly dislike the idea respectively. The result
showed that most of the students want their teacher to correct their written work.

3.1.11 Teachers’ Feedback to Improve English

Students were also asked whether the teachers’ correction help them to improve their
English or not. The table below shows that the teachers’ correction is must to
improve English.

29
 Table No. 12
Teachers’ Feedback to improve English
S.N. Perceptions Frequency Per cent
1 Strongly like it 49 81.67
2 Like it 11 18.33
3 Do not know - -
4 Dislike it - -
5 Strongly dislike it - -

The table shows that 81.67 per cent of the respondents strongly like the idea whereas
81.33 per cent of them just like it. It means almost all of them think that teachers’
correction is very helpful to improve their English.

3.1.12 Instruction in Feedback.

The following table shows students’ perception on whether they need clear
instructions or correction technique from their teachers.
Table No. 13
Instruction in feedback
S.N. Perceptions Frequency Per cent
1 Strongly like it 28 46.67
2 Like it 28 46.67
3 Do not know 2 3.33
4 Dislike it 2 3.33
5 Strongly dislike it - -

The table above shows that 46.67 per cent of students strongly like and just like idea
that they need clear instruction but not correction technique. But 3.33 per cent of
them said that they do not have any idea. Similarly, a minority of the students i.e.
3.33 per cent show their disagreement towards the idea. It is found that students

30
want clear and direct instruction before doing the mistakes rather than the correction
technique after the errors.

3.1.13 Attention to Teachers’ Feedback

Students should pay attention to teachers’ feedback if they want to improve
themselves. Students were asked to give their opinion on whether they like to pay
attention to the teachers’ feedback on their writing not to repeat the mistakes. The
table displays the detail information on it.
Table No. 14
Attention to Teachers’ Feedback
S.N. Perceptions Frequency Per cent
1 Strongly like it 34 56.66

2 Like it 19 31.67
3 Do not know 5 8.33
4 Dislike it 2 3.33
5 Strongly dislike it - -

The table depicts that 56.66 percent of students strongly support the idea of paying
attention to teachers’ feedback. Similarly, 31.67 per cent of them simply like it. On
the other hand, 8.33 per cent of them said that they did not have any idea. Similarly,
3.33 per cent of them totally disagree towards the idea. In general, it is found that the
most of the students are in the favor of paying attention to teachers’ feedback.

3.1.14 Forms of Providing Feedback

Students were asked what forms their teachers use while giving written feedback. The
table below shows the responses of the students.

31
 Table No. 15
Forms of Providing Feedback
S.N. Forms Never Sometimes Frequently
1 Question 1 (1.67%) 47 (78.33%) 12 (20%)
2 Statement 4 (6.67%) 45 (75%) 11 (18%)
3 Imperative 1 (1.67%) 20 (33.33%) 39 (65%)
4 Exclamation 10 (16.67%) 27 (45%) 29 (48%)
5 Marking the errors 28 (46.67%) 26 (43.33%) 6 (10%)

The table illustrates that there is the variation in the use of forms according to the
question and the purpose they are used for. Questions, imperatives and the statements
are found to be used more frequently than other forms.

3.1.15 Students’ Suggestion

At the end, the researcher tried to collect students’ suggestion on what they want their
teachers to do to help them revise their writing more successfully. The perceptions of
the students are listed below:
- Give more ideas from the lesson.
- Explain it again and give some questions to practice.
- Give more questions on the related chapters and explain them.
- Do not correct directly, give students a chance to think about the mistakes.
- Share his ideas with the colleagues.
- Revise difficult words, spelling and meaning.
- Help in grammar.
- Help revise the lesson.
- Focus on meaning.
- Revise question answer.
- Be friendlier to the students.
- Take tests time to time.

32
- Encourage the creativity of the students.

Though the students suggested some solutions, these did not seem very useful for the
purpose. It may be because of the lack of the students’ knowledge on it.

33
 CHAPTER - FOUR
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter includes findings and recommendations or pedagogical implications of

the study.

4.1 Findings

On the basis of the analysis and interpretation of the data, the following findings have
been derived.
i. Teachers’ written feedback is important to improve the students’ writing. So
most of the students (50 per cent) wanted to revise the task more than once
following the teachers’ feedback.
ii. Forty five per cent of the students wanted to focus on all the aspect of
language in teachers’ written feedback. They liked to be informed about their
mistakes rather than readymade answers by the teachers.
iii. None of the students wanted to get negative feedback. They wanted positive
feedback and sometimes both simultaneously to improve themselves.
iv. About forty three per cent (43.33) of the students wanted to get feedback at the
end of each page rather than on the margin. They thought all the forms of
feedback have a role to revise their draft.
v. Fifty per cent of the students did not understand the feedback given by the
teachers because of new strategies used by them and the lack of explanation
about them.
vi. Seventy per cent of the students ask their teachers or peers whenever they have
problems. They suggested studying harder and looking at the previous model
as some of the good strategies for this.
vii. Majority of the students were (56.66 per cent) found paying attention to the
teachers’ feedback. They also suggested some tips for helping them to revise
more successfully.

34
4.2 Recommendations

On the basis of the findings, some recommendations or pedagogical implications

have been suggested as follows:
i. Teachers should explain their feedback strategies before applying them
because many students may have problem in understanding what teachers
actually say.
ii. It is better to ask the student how they are feeling about the feedback strategies
which are used to comment on their written works. They help the teachers to
change their responding strategies according to feeling of the students.
iii. Teachers should provide their students an opportunity to revise their task at
least two times so that they can improve themselves.
iv. Students liked to be informed about their mistakes to get a chance to correct
themselves. So, the teachers should not give them the readymade answer. Give
them a chance to correct themselves.
v. Teachers should focus on all the aspects of language (grammar, vocabulary,
etc) while providing feedback on students’ written work.
vi. Teachers should be friendlier with the students and they should not use any
new strategies while giving feedback before explaining them to the students.
vii. Teachers should encourage the students providing positive feedback to
improve their written work.
viii. Students take teachers’ feedback as a way to success. Therefore, the English
language teachers should frequently give feedback to the students.
ix. Teachers should praise and encourage peer correction so that the students can
correct each others’ mistakes and can do better in learning the English
language.

35
 References

Al-Fahdi, H. M. (2006). English language teachers’ use of oral feedback. Oman:

Oriental Press.

Al-Mandhari, S. A. (2006). Learners’ responses to different types of feedback on

writing. An Unpublished Thesis, Ministry of Education. Sultanate of Oman.

Awasthi, J. R. (2003). Teacher education with special reference to English language

teaching in Nepal. Journal of NELTA, Vol. 8: pp, 17-28.

Bhandari, S. (2008). Role of feedback in teaching English language. An Unpublished

M.Ed. Thesis, T.U. Kathmandu.

Bhattarai, A. (2001). Writing a research proposal. Journal of NELTA, Vol.6,

No.1: pp, 45-51.

Borg, S. (2006). Classroom research in English language teaching in Oman. Oman:

Oriental Press.

Brown, H.D. (1987). Principle of language learning and teaching. London: Prentice
Hall.

Byrne, D. (1991). Teaching writing skills. London: Longman.

Capaldi, E. (1964). Research in perception, learning and conflict. Advance in

psychological science, Vol.2: pp 21-26.

Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Teaching English as a second language. Boston: Heinle

and Heinle.

Chenoweth, N. A. (1987). The need to teach rewriting. ELT Journal, Vol.41: pp, 25-
29.

36
Draper, S. W. (2005). Feedback: A technical memo. Retrieved June 2, 2007 from:
http:// www. psy.gla. ac.uk/-steve/feedback.html

Dung, P. T. (2004). A study on teacher’s written feedback on the writings. An

Unpublished M.A. Thesis. Vietnam National University, Hanoi.

Ferris, D. (1995). The case for grammar correction in second language writing
classes: A response to truscott. Journal of second language writing, Vol.8: pp,
1-11.

Gardner, D. and Lambert, L. (1995). Establishing self-access: From theory to

practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gattullo, F. (2000). Researching into English teaching for young learners. Pecs:
University of Pecs Press.

Grellet, F. (1981). Developing reading skills. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Guenette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in

studies of feedback on writing. Journal of Second Language Writing.Vol.16,
No.1: pp, 40-53.

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.

Harmer, J. (2008). The practice of Enlish language teaching. London: Longman.

Hedge, T. (1990). Writing: Resource books for teachers. New York: Oxford
University Press.

Hochberg, J. (1994). Perception in Corsini, R, J. and Auerbach, A. J. (Ed.) Concise in

Encyclopedia of psychology. USA: John Willy and Sons.

37
Isaacs, E. A. and Clark, H. H. (1999). References in conversation between experts
and novices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol.116: pp, 26-
37.

Keh, C. L. (1989). Feedback at the product stage of writing: Comments and

corrections. Guidelines, Vol. 11: pp, 18-24.

Krashen, S. D. (1984). Writing: Research, theory and application. Oxford:

Pergamon Institute of English.

Kumar, R. (1981). Research methodology. London: Sage Publication.

Lamichhane, G. (2009). A study on teachers’ feedback on the writing of grade nine

students. An Unpublished M.Ed. Thesis, T.U. Kathmandu.

Mackey, et al. (2007). Teachers’ intentions and learners’ perceptions about

corrective feedback in the second language classroom thesis. Washington.
Georgetown University.

Munby, J. (1979). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambbridge

University Press.

Nudelman, J. and Troyka, L. (1994). Steps in composition. London: Prentice Hall.

Reid, J. (1993). Change in the language classroom: Process and intervention. English
Teaching Forum, Vol.32: pp, 8-15.

Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback: Behavioral science, Vol.28,

No.1: pp, 4-13.

Richards, J.C. &. Rodgers, S.T. (2005). Approaches and methods in language
teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards et al. (1999). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied

linguistics. London: Longman.

38
Rogers, E. M. (1996). A history of communication study: A biographical approach.
New York: Free Press.

Sadler, D.R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems.
Instructional science, Vol.18, No.2: pp, 119-144.

Sharma, B.K. & Phyak, P. (2007). Teaching English language. Kathmandu:

Sunlight Publication.

Singh, A.B. (2008). Role of motivation in the English language proficiency. An

Unpublished M.ED. Thesis, T.U. Kathmandu.

Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to students’ writing. College Composition and

Communication.Vol. 33: pp, 148-156.

Stevic, E.W. (1982). Teaching and learning language. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Underwood, M. (1989). Teaching listening. London: Longman.

Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

39
 APPENDIX I

Survey Questionnaire

This questionnaire has been prepared to have the authentic data to achieve the
objectives of the study entitled ‘Students' Perceptions on Teachers’ Written
Feedback' which is conducted under the supervision of Mr.Prem Bahadur
Phyak, Teaching Assistant, Department of English Education, Faculty of
Education , T .U., Kirtipur, Kathmandu. The researcher hopes that your invaluable
co-operation will be a great contribution in the accomplishment of this work for
M.ED dissertation.

Instructions

The questionnaire is in two parts, please put a tick in the appropriate or give short
answer in the space provided.

I Personal information

Your gender: male female

Name :
Age :
Class :
School's name :

II. Your perceptions on the teachers’ written feedback you received

1. How important is teachers’ written feedback to your writing?

a. Not important b. important
c. Very important d. extremely important

40
2. How many times do you want your teacher to respond to each of your
writing assignment?
a. once/assignment b. twice/assignment c. three times/assignment

3. Which aspect(s) in the writing would you prefer teacher written feedback to
focus on? (You can tick more than one answer)
a. paragraph construction b. grammar c. vocabulary
d. content e. mechanics (spelling and punctuation)
f. organization of ideas g. all of them

4. Teachers’ written feedback: locating the error by underlying it and spelling.

a. strongly like it b. like it c. do not know
d. dislike it e. strongly dislike it.

5. What kind of feedback would you prefer to receive?

a. negative b. Positive c. both of them

6. Where would you prefer your teacher to put the feedback in your paper?
a. In the margin b. at the end c. both of them

7. Would you like your teachers’ written feedback to be………….

a. specific? b. general? c. both of them?

8. How helpful is the teacher written feedback in the following forms to your
revision?
a. question b. statement c. imperative d. exclamation
e. making the errors, but not actually correcting them.
I) Forms of feedback not helpful at all II) helpful III) very helpful

9. Do you find it easy to understand your teacher feedback?

a. Yes b. No

41
 If No, can you give the reason why?
- Feedback is too general to understand
- Teachers use new vocabulary and structure in feedback
- Teachers use new feedback strategies
- Others (please specify)…

10. What strategies do you use to solve your problem?

a. asking the teacher or peers for help
b. consulting a grammar book or dictionary
c. others (please specify):……………………..
d. doing nothing

11. Teacher must correct students’ written errors.

a. strongly like it b. like it c. do not know
d. dislike it e. strongly dislike it.

12. Teachers’ corrections help me learn and improve my English.

a. strongly like it b. like it c. do not know
d. dislike it e. strongly dislike it

13. It is more helpful to give clear, direct instruction on my writing errors than
suggesting a correction technique.
a. strongly like it b. like it c. do not know
d. dislike it e. strongly dislike it

14. I always pay attention to my teachers’ written feedback on my writing and I

do not make the same error once the teacher corrects it.
a. strongly like it b. like it c. do not know
d. dislike it e. strongly dislike it

42
 15. How often does your teacher use the following forms to provide
written feedback to your writing?

Forms of feedback
a. never b. Sometimes
c. Frequently, please write any of these types against the following
alternative
- Question (why don’t you use capital letters at the beginning of a sentence?)
- Statement (I really like your ideas and organization)
- Imperative (change the preposition; correct the spelling)
- Exclamation (excellent! Nonsense!)
- Marking the errors, but not actually correcting them

16. What do you want your teacher to do to help you revise more successfully?
………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………

Thank you very much for your cooperation!

43