Treatment Strategies for Language Problems in ESL Academic Writing: Teachers' and Students' Preferences
Aptly put by Dana R. Ferris (2014) the purpose of English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers giving feedback to their students in academic writing courses is "not just about eradicating errors in writing but also about helping their students to develop control of academic language" (p. 69) However, are the present strategies for giving feedback on language problems in academic writing moving towards this goal? Do the end users of these strategies the students see their writing improve over time? If not, what kind of guidance are students looking for? This study aims at addressing these questions by doing a comparative study of the feedback strategies used by teachers and those preferred by students. Their responses are further analyzed to study whether the preferences change with types, frequency, and timing of language problems, and whether there are other modes of feedback that are equally if not more effective. Drawing on the responses received from teachers and students, the study presents critical implications of such a comparison between the preferences on ESL academic writing pedagogy and provides practical suggestions for the teaching faculty. Definitions While the research focuses on language problems and feedback strategies for second language (L2) writers, it is imperative to clearly define what the terms 'language problems, 'feedback strategies, and 'L2 writers' mean in this study's context: L2 or Second Language Writers: Although the meaning of this term might seem apparent, there are three visibly different categories of L2 writers: o "International/visa students" pursuing education in an English dominant country where English is the relevant L2. Also called eye learners, these students have already learnt some part of the L2 in their home country. Their L2 instruction involved formal grammar instruction and an emphasis on grammatical rules and terms. Consequently, they often enjoy a more structured approach to language instruction as this is how it was back home. (p. 4) o "Resident immigrants" arrived in the English dominant country as adolescents or young adults. Also called ear learners, these students have very little knowledge of their first language or L1 and hardly know anything about the L2. They don't know the grammar rules or terms as much as the international students do. They know what sounds right based on their interaction with native residents and not based on what they have read or seen. (p. 5) o "Children of resident immigrants" arrived in the English dominant country at a very young age or who were born in the new country. Known as generation 1.5, these students have lived in the new country from a very young age and hence they have never been educated in a language other than the L2. (p. 5) This diverse background of L2 writers has a bearing on L2 teachers in two major ways: the same feedback strategy might not work for all students; and to be really effective, teachers might have to conduct a comprehensive analysis of their students' previous knowledge of the L2, the mode of instruction they were taught in, and the areas that they are confident in and those that they need more work in. (Ferris, 2014, p. 4 7) "Language Error" Defined by Ferris (2014) as "morphological, syntactic, and lexical forms that deviate from rules of the target language, violating expectations of literate adult native speakers." (p. 3) A morphological error where the student forms and structures words incorrectly would be using the wrong plural suffix (example: childrens) or the wrong form of a past tense (example: putted) and so on (Jamie, 2008, n.p. A syntactic error comprises errors such as incorrect order of subject and predicate in a sentence. (Shoebottom, 1996 2015, n.p. A lexical error is when the student chooses the wrong word in the given context of the sentence. (Ray, 2010, n.p. In this research, analysis has been conducted on morphological, syntactic, and lexical errors, along with errors in spelling, punctuation, and upper/lower cases. Language Problem: This study has gone beyond the realm of the above definition of an error and has included other issues that students have with academic writing. These include using colloquial forms, questions in an essay's body, personal expressions, choppy sentences, and unclear expressions (Hu, 2011) Feedback Strategies: Some of the common error treatment strategies focused on are o "Indirect vs Direct Feedback" When teachers give indirect feedback, they indicate that an error has been made through circling, highlighting, underlining, or otherwise marking its location in a sentence, with or without a verbal reminder or an error code. The students are required to analyze the errors and make corrections themselves. On the other hand, when teachers give direct feedback, they clearly mark out the errors and also give the correction which students can transcribe onto the next draft. (p. 93) o "Error Locating vs Error Labelling" Teachers either locate the presence of an error by circling it, highlighting it, or putting a checkmark in the margin; or label the errors using symbols, codes, or verbal comments. (p. 97) o "Marking Broader vs Narrower Categories of Errors" Teachers have the choice of either marking all types of errors in a student's paper or selectively mark errors based on certain criteria. (p. 100) o "Codes vs Verbal Comments" For more efficient correction, teachers use codes for each type of error, such as 'VT' for verb tense errors. Alternatively, they can use verbal comments in the margin. (p. 101) o "Textual Corrections vs Endnotes" Teachers can either mark errors in the form of labels, codes, or verbal comments exactly where the error lies, or they can write a summary of their comments at the end of the students' papers. (p. 102; Ferris, 2014, p. 93 102) Background This study was conducted at a Canadian university offering English for academic purposes (EAP) at five levels. Based on their performance on the Accuplacer, an English placement test, or TOEFL/IELTS scores, incoming students are categorized into basic level 1, pre intermediatelevel 2, intermediate level 3, advanced level 4, and academic level 5. A brief about the writing content taught at each of these levels is as follows: "Basic Level 1: developing sentence structure; writing basic paragraphs to express the main idea in topic sentences" "Pre intermediate Level 2: recognizing and practicing grammatical structures and sentence patterns; introducing pre writing and revision strategies" "Intermediate Level 3: focusing on academic writing; introducing essay writing Advanced Level 4: planning, developing, and revising of multi paragraph compositions; practicing editing" "Academic Level 5: reading, researching, discussing, and working co operatively as part of the composition process" Once ESL students successfully complete the level 5 course, they can apply for the Academic Writing course required for all academic programs at the university. (Thompson Rivers University [TRU] n.d.