Most foreign/second language (L2) teachers invest a significant amount of time and effort in responding to student writing by providing written feedback. Despite the considerable number of experimental studies in the field of L2 writing on effectiveness of written feedback, correction of grammar errors in particular, our understanding of the nature of teacher feedback on student writing or on teachers’ attitudes toward providing feedback is limited. The descriptive studies which have been undertaken in the field of L2 written feedback predominantly investigated teacher feedback from student perspectives. Therefore, little is known about the perceptions of L2 teachers on written feedback. Since most studies on the topic have been conducted in the English as a second language context, studies conducted in foreign language contexts are rare. Recently, research in the field of L2 writing has increasingly acknowledged the influence of contextual factors on teacher feedback, in turn creating a need for comparative studies on written feedback involving multiple populations with different linguistic/cultural backgrounds in diverse settings to fill a gap in the current research base.
This comparative study explored teacher feedback on college L2 student writing from the teacher perspective by investigating the similarities and differences in perceptions of written feedback between teachers of a foreign language (Korean) and teachers of a second language (ESL) in North America. Using an online survey, the study investigated the perceptions of a total of 153 college instructors of ESL and of KFL (Korean as a foreign language) across North America. The 46-item questionnaire inquired about perceived types of written feedback, perceptions of the use of written feedback, perceptions of selected approaches to responding to student writing, and perceived written feedback practices. Descriptive and correlational statistics were used for the data analysis.
Major differences between the two groups were found in terms of aspects, locations, focus of feedback, error treatment, number of drafts, and follow-up methods. The relationships among those characteristics suggested that written feedback practices of L2 teachers might be affected by a number of factors, including culture, context, student proficiency, and training opportunities. KFL teachers favored comprehensive, direct feedback on local aspects of student writing on a single draft. The study suggested that many distinctive feedback practices of KFL teachers in comparison to ESL teachers were due mainly to time management issues as well as a lack of training opportunities on providing writing feedback. In contrast, ESL teachers favored the process approach to writing instruction with feedback on global aspects in early drafts and feedback on local aspects in later drafts. They preferred selective, indirect feedback among various possible types of corrective feedback. The study’s findings showing that the teachers ranked writing as low in terms of importance in foreign language learning and in preference for teaching are also noteworthy. This study demonstrates the value of research that compares L2 teachers in different contexts and sheds light on how teachers respond to student writing and how different aspects of their feedback practices and beliefs interact with each other.