Journal of Response to Writing Oct 2019 RSS Open Access

Simultaneous Oral-Written Feedback Approach (SOWFA): Students’ Preference on Writing Response

Hu, Jim

Abstract

This paper reports beliefs and preferences of second-language (L2) students regarding effective writing feedback strategies, especially conferences for oral and written feedback. Guiding the study were these questions: 1) Do L2 university students prefer to receive direct or indirect teacher feedback on written-language problems? 2) Do the students prefer to receive (a) written feedback (WF) only or (b) oral feedback (OF) in one-on-one conferences as well as WF? 3) In the case of 2(b), do the students prefer to receive OF during or after WF? The study employed mixed methods involving quantitative surveys of 30 Canadian university students from two English for academic purposes (EAP) writing classes and qualitative interviews with 11 of those surveyed. Results demonstrate that the students preferred direct feedback more on grammar, vocabulary, register, and clear expressions than on spelling, punctuation, and mechanics. They also preferred direct feedback more at the course beginning than at the end. More importantly, the students preferred coursework-based conferencing (Eckstein, 2013), particularly simultaneous oral-written feedback (SOWF), a conferencing format that allows students and teachers to negotiate and dialogue while teachers mark assignments. This paper details the reasons for student preferences and discusses the advantages and feasibility of a simultaneous oral-written feedback approach (SOWFA).

Journal
Journal of Response to Writing
Published
2019-10-01
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Gold
Topics
writing pedagogy teacher development revision empirical research grammar and mechanics
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Citation data not yet available for this article.

Citation data is not available for Journal of Response to Writing. This journal's publisher does not deposit reference lists with CrossRef.

Related Articles

  1. Journal of Response to Writing Apr 2026
    Examining Automated Writing Evaluation Error Coverage in Relation to Uptake and Retention ↗
    Mehrzad, Mohaddeseh; Rahimi, Mohammad; Link, Stephanie
    genre theory writing pedagogy teacher development revision assessment artificial intelligence multilingual writers grammar and mechanics
  2. Written Communication Jan 2026
    The Contributions of Student-Level and Classroom-Level Factors for Australian Grade 2 Students’ Writing Performance ↗
    Anabela Malpique; Mustafa Asil; Deborah Pino-Pasternak; Debora Valcan
    writing pedagogy teacher development revision grammar and mechanics literacy studies gender and writing
  3. Journal of Academic Writing Dec 2020
    Evaluating Academic Literacies Course Types ↗
    Caroline Anne Dyche; Jessie Antwi-Cooper
    writing pedagogy writing across the curriculum teacher development argument empirical research quantitative research grammar and mechanics literacy studies gender and writing editorial matter
  4. Writing and Pedagogy Jun 2019
    Revising revising and a focus on double vision in drafting ↗
    Tara Hembrough
    first-year composition writing pedagogy teacher development revision assessment empirical research qualitative research
  5. Journal of Response to Writing Jan 2017
    Editorial Introduction ↗
    Gilliland, Betsy; Eckstein, Grant
    first-year composition writing pedagogy teacher development revision digital rhetoric grammar and mechanics book reviews editorial matter