Providing feedback

1
HOW TO PROVIDE
MEANINGFUL FEEDBACK
TO ESL STUDENTS
University of Alberta: EDPY 413
By Naomi, Katie and Angela

2
OVERVIEW
 Meaningful assessments and feedback:
 Are valid
 Are individualized
 Are understandable
 Communicate high expectations
 Lower emotional barriers
 Assessment of content-area knowledge:
 Formative Assessment
 Summative Assessment

3
Overview
 Strategies that will be useful in the four major
elements of Language Arts and other content area
classes:
Speaking
Listening
Reading
Writing
 How to communicate feedback to students
 Direct or Indirect feedback
 Parental Involvement
 Peer Feedback

4
PRINCIPLES FOR FAIR STUDENT
ASSESSMENT
PRACTICES FOR EDUCATION IN CANADA
I.1) Assessment methods should allow us to make valid
inferences about the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and
behaviours possessed by each student1
-
A valid assessment will assess what we intend it to assess.
1
Principles for Fair Student Assessment Practices for Education in Canada, 1993 (as reproduced in Gronlund, 2004,
Appendix B 1-5)

5
ASSESSMENT
I.5) Assessment methods should suit the background
and prior experiences of the student1
-Assessment should be free from biases such as
culture, ethnicity, or language
1
Principles for Fair Student Assessment Practices for Education in Canada, 1993 (as reproduced in Gronlund, 2004,
Appendix B 1-7)

6
ASSESSMENT
III.4) Comments on student work should be
presented in a way that allows students to
understand and use them1
-Comments should encourage learning and help
students to understand how they can improve
1
Principles for Fair Student Assessment Practices for Education in Canada, 1993 (as reproduced in Gronlund, 2004, Appendix
B 1-7)

7
TEACHER EXPECTATIONS: A SELF-
FULFILLING PROPHECY
 Students perceive differences in teacher
expectations by watching how the teacher behaves
towards them1
 With time, students' achievement and behaviour
conform more and more closely to the
expectations of the teacher
1
(Alderman, 2004, p. 171)

8
COMMUNICATING HIGH EXPECTATIONS
 Guidelines for communicating high expectations
when assessing ESL students1
:
 Give sincere praise regarding a specific area of
development
 Provide frequent and understandable feedback
 Focus on what the students can do rather than what
they cannot
 Provide ample response time
 Provide tasks to challenge the students
1
(Gottfredson, 1991, p. 9)

9
ANXIETY
 “Sometimes when I speak English in class, I am so
afraid I feel like hiding behind my chair.” 1
 “I feel like my French teacher is some kind of
Martian death ray: I never know when he’ll point
at me!” 1
 “When I’m in my Spanish class I just freeze! I can’t
think of a thing when my teacher calls on me. My
mind goes blank.” 2
1
(Gardner, 1991, p. 27)
2
(Gardner, 1991, p. xiii)

10
ANXIETY
 Steinberg and Horwitz (1986) found that anxiety
affects communication strategies1
 Certain grammar points may also be “forgotten”2
 Krashen’s Affective Filter3
 This affects the validity of the assessment
1
(Gardner, 1991, p. 28) 3
(Herrell & Jordan, 2008, p. 4)
2
(Gardner, 1991, p. 29)

11
MEANINGFUL FEEDBACK?
 We will show assessment methods and ways to
communicate results to students that:
1) Are valid
2) Fit students’ backgrounds
3) Are understandable
4) Communicate high expectations
5) Lower emotional barriers

12
ASSESSING ACADEMIC CONTENT
KNOWLEDGE
 ELLs often understand more than
they can express1
 Use assessments that are less
dependent on language
proficiency1
 Assess in the same way students
are taught1
 Demonstrations
 Creation of a product
 Speech-based
 Written products
1

13
ASSESSING THE TASK: FORMATIVE
ASSESSMENT (ASSESSMENT FOR
LEARNING)
 These types of assessments occur on a daily basis
and help teachers decide what they can do to help
students progress1
:
 Student Reflections (learning journals, concept maps)
 Anecdotal Note-taking
 Conversations with students
 Peer Assessments
1
(Government of Manitoba, 2008, p. 29)

14
LEARNING JOURNALS
 Allow students to:
 Record personal
responses to content
 Record questions about
confusing terms
 Record observations
 Illustrate or describe
concepts
Emphasis is on content
rather than grammar
and mechanics1
1
(Hurley, & Tinajero, 2001, p. 94)

16
CONCEPT MAPS
 Visual representations of the student’s mental
structure1
 Kidspiration or Inspiration2
1
(Birbili, 2006)
2
(Inspiration Software, 2008)

17
(Inspiration Software, 2008)
Grade 6 Social
Studies: Greece

18
WHY USE LEARNING JOURNALS AND
CONCEPT MAPS?
 Knowledge demonstrated pictures and/or words1
 Student-centred and promote reflection 2
 Teacher can assess preconceptions and
misconceptions3
1
(Hurley & Tinajero, 2001, p. 92)
2
(Genesee & Upshur, 1996, p. 123)
3
(Birbili, 2006)

19
CONCEPT MAPS & LEARNING JOURNALS:
ASSOCIATED ISSUES
 Too much guidance or too little guidance?1
 Must be addressed immediately1
 Judgements will discourage students, making the
formative assessment less useful to the teacher2
1
(Shanahan, 2007)
2
(Nunan, 2004, p. 159)

20
ANECDOTAL RECORDS
 Small number of students observed each day1
1
(Genesee Upshur, 1996, p. 94)

21
WHY USE ANECDOTAL RECORDS?
 Good indicators of student progress1
 Do not increase language demands, or anxiety
 Allow you to assess without interrupting the
natural classroom activities2
1
2
(Austin & Haley, 2004, p. 129)

22
ANECDOTAL RECORDS: ASSOCIATED ISSUES
 If not organized, they become pieces of paper
with random notes on them1
 May overlook vital issues21
2

23
FORMAL AND INFORMAL CONVERSATIONS
 Conferencing1
 Having impromptu conversations
 Making notes afterwards2
1
2

24
WHY HAVE CONVERSATIONS?
 Conveys high expectations1
 Informal conversation is a natural way to get a
feel for level of understanding
 Gives students the opportunity to seek
clarification
1
(Gottfredson, 1991, p. 9)

25
CONVERSATION: ASSOCIATED ISSUES
 Learners may be uncomfortable discussing areas in
which they are struggling1
 Open conversation may be hindered by low levels
of English language proficiency
1

26
ASSESSING THE TASK: SUMMATIVE
ASSESSMENT (ASSESSMENT OF
LEARNING)
 Assessment used for reporting purposes to ensure
that students have achieved the curricular
outcomes1
:
 Portfolios
 Student Self-Assessments
 Rubrics
 Checklists and Rating Scales
1
(Government of Manitoba., 2008, p. 55)

27
PORTFOLIOS
Two types:
 Developmental Portfolio1
 Showcase Portfolio2
 Students actively participate by purposefully selecting
entries2
 Teachers assist with entry selection and provide
feedback during conferences3
1
(Gronlund, 2004, p. 157)
2
(Gronlund, 2004, p. 158)
3
(Gronlund, 2004, p. 159)

28
PORTFOLIO REFLECTION
 A reflection is attached to each entry1
 Other possibilities include:
 Reflections written in first language
 Reflections recorded by the teacher
 Reflections recorded by a peer/parent who speaks the
same L1
1
(Gronlund, 2004, p. 158)

29
WHY USE PORTFOLIOS?
 Completed without pressure or time
constraints1
 Clearly demonstrate progress over
time1
 Develop active learners1
 Conversations about entries
demonstrate comprehension and the
ability to use academic language2
1
(Nunan, 2004, p. 160)
2

30
SELF-ASSESSMENT
 Teachers need to provide students with
words, definitions or concepts they will
need to understand the task1
 Common formats include1
:
 yes or no questions
 I can name the regions of Canada
Yes  No 
 Sentence completion
 I am still confused about...
 Rating scales
 I cooperated with my group
 (never) 1 2 3 4 (always) 
 Picture cues or by discussion
beforehand.
1

31
WHY SELF-ASSESSMENT?
 Builds metacognitive
competence1
 Students can tell us a lot
 Creates independent
learners1
 Assesses both the learning
process as well as
outcomes2
1
2
(Nunan, 2004, p. 149)

32
PORTFOLIOS AND SELF-ASSESSMENT:
ASSOCIATED ISSUES
 Students may not accurately judge own ability1
 Language barrier
 The notion that students have a role in assessment
may be difficult to accept2
 Learners may be uncomfortable sharing work that
is in need of improvement3
 Learners may be hesitant to take pride in their
achievements3
1
(Nunan, 2004, p. 149)
2
3

33
RUBRICS
 Holistic1
 Analytic2
 Use between 4 and 8 points to avoid a “middle
dumping ground”1
 Assess the content rather than language
proficiency3
1
(Gronlund, 2004, p. 134)
2
(Austin and Haley, 2004, p. 131)
2
(Austin and Haley, p. 132)

Excellent
(4)
Good
(3)
Satisfactory
(2)
Needs
Improvement (1)
Score
Understanding
of animal
lifecycle
Illustrations of the
infant and adult
accurately portray the
creature in its
respective stage. Small
details have been
recognized and
included.
infant and adult
portray the creature
and demonstrate an
understanding of the
lifecycle.
infant and adult
somewhat portray
the creature and
demonstrate a
generalized
understanding of
the lifecycle.
infant and adult
are completely
inaccurate or
demonstrate no
difference
between the two
forms.
/4
Habitat Student has provided a
detailed illustration of
the animal’s habitat
Student has provided a
basic illustration the
animal’s habitat (land,
water, etc)
Student has
provided an
illustration of the
animal’s habitat
that is lacking is
some regard.
Student has not
provided an
illustration of the
animal’s habitat,
or the habitat
drawn is incorrect
/4
Strategy used to
organize ideas
Student has chosen an
appropriate strategy to
organize their findings.
The chart is completed
correctly, is neat, and
contains details above
and beyond what was
asked
Student has chosen an
appropriate strategy
to organize their
findings. It is correct
and contains all
pertinent information
Student has
attempted to use a
strategy, but has
used it incorrectly
or the chart is
incomplete
Student has not
selected a
strategy.
Information is
recorded at
random.
/4
Total: /20

35
RATING SCALES AND CHECKLISTS
Checklists: check off the items that correspond to what
you have observed or inferred1
Ex. Student cooperates in a group setting ___
Rating scales: Allow you to specify the degree to which
the item was achieved2
(1= never, 2= rarely, 3= frequently, 4= always)
Ex. Student completes homework every night 1 2 3 4
1
2

36
TRY ASSESSING!
 Read the ESL writing sample and use the checklist
to assess it.
 Then talk to a partner:
 What did you like about it?
 What problems did you encounter?

37
WHY USE CHECKLISTS, RATING SCALES AND
RUBRICS?
 Assigns justifiable
grades to authentic
classroom activities1
 Used in self-assessment
and clarify teacher’s
expectations1
 After construction, they
require little time or
effort to complete2
 Show specific areas of
strength and need3
1
(Gronlund, 2004, p. 136)
2
3

38
CHECKLISTS AND RATING SCALES:
ASSOCIATED ISSUES  Require precise and well-
articulated categories and
criteria1
 Take a considerable
amount of time to
construct2
 Are highly specific and will
likely need to be modified
each time3
 Language to can be
complex and difficult for
an ESL student to
understand
1
2
(Genesee & Upshur, p. 90)
3
(Genesee & Upshur, p. 91)

39
OVERVIEW
 Strategies that will be useful in the four major
elements of Language Arts and other content area
classes:
Speaking
Listening
Reading
Writing

41
(Collier, Combs, & Ovando, 2003)
Stages of Language Production
 Beginning stage: Silent period, rely on
gestures and pictures
 Early production stage: usage of more
grammar
 Speech Emergence stage: can handle more
academic concepts
 Intermediate Fluency stage: fewer errors
in speaking
 Fluency stage: at level of fluency but are
still learning

42
(Oxford, 1990)
Vocabulary Instruction
 Provide both explicit and implicit vocabulary
instruction.
 Teach strategies for how to handle unfamiliar
words
 Language Learning Strategies: using clues, asking for
clarification, using keywords.
 Exposure to high frequency vocabulary through
meaningful activities.

43
(Hewings, 2004)
Pronunciation
 Five things to ensure students understand:
Consonants
Cluster
Vowel length
Word stress
Prominence or tonic stress
For example, teach:
Stress-timed versus syllable-timed language

44
(Fisher & Rothenberg, 2007)
BICS and CALP
 Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills
 Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency

45
SOLOM
Student Oral Language Observation Matrix
 Allows observation of oral language proficiency;
BICS and CALP
 Assesses real day to day classroom purposes and
activities.

46
Potential Problems
 Vocabulary instruction
Implicit can cause problems for students- they
may think they understand but they do not
Explicit may teach rote memorization and not
meaningful understanding.
 Pronunciation Instruction:
Students’ L1s may interfere if they have a
syllable timed language.
 BICS and CALP
CALP cannot be inferred, it has to be directly
taught and modeled.

47
Handout: Speaking
Guide to Implementation (Alberta Education, 2007, P. 161)
 SOLOM: Student Oral Language Observation Matrix (Cabral, Herrera, & Murry, 2007)

49
(Herrell, & Jordan, 2008)
Strategy for Improving Listening and
Oral communication skills
 Dictoglos
 Focus is on fluent academic language
 Supports recalling information by listening to
English language models.
 Process:
Listen
Take notes
Partners, groups
Re-create text

50
Develop listening skills:
 Explicitly teach how to listen:
Selective Attention
Ask for clarification: teach students how to
recognize when they have misunderstood, and
teach the questions to ask to get back on track.
Model strategies aloud.
Provide graphic organizers or fill in the blanks
for videos and lectures, so they can concentrate
on listening rather than writing.
Build background knowledge: “Frontload”
Use self-assessments of how well they listened.

51
Potential Problems
When listening, students:
 may not recognize when they do not understand
 may not know they need clarification or further
explanation
 may not know how to formulate questions to get
the answers they seek

52
Handout: Listening
Guide to Implementation (Alberta Education, 2007, p. 160)
 BICS and CALP Checklist (Cabral, Herrera, & Murry, 2007)

54
(Herrell &Jordan, 2008)
(Bright, Pollard, Tompkins, & Winsor, 2008)
Running records/Miscue Analysis
 Finds oral reading errors
 Helps to see what strategies the reader is using
and points to areas of instruction.

55
(Herrell & Jordan, 2008)
Cloze Activities:
 Support language acquisition and reading skills
 Are from written text where some words are left
out and blanks are inserted instead.
 Are used to assess reading comprehension
 Provide opportunities to teach vocabulary and
reading decoding skills.
Example: I went for a walk to the ______.
I wanted to _______ a _______.

56
Potential Problems:
 Running Records/Miscue Analysis
 May be hard to find a reading passage that is at the
student’s reading level.
 Cloze
 Time consuming to make for students’ specific needs

57
Handout: Reading

59
The writing process
 Prewriting: use drawing to gather ideas, talk about the
topic, or dramatize the topic. Students choose topics
that are familiar. Graphic organizers, webbing.
 Drafting: emphasize expressing ideas, not handwriting
skills or conventional spelling.
 Revising: rereading, making few changes or adding to
clarify, slowly try and address audience.
 Editing: de-emphasize until the students have learned
conventional spelling, rules for capitalization, etc.
 Publishing: putting into a final form, sharing with
others.

60
(Ferris, 2003, p. 3)
Feedback through comments on
student writing
Three purposes:
 To let students know if their texts have conveyed
their intended meaning.
 Help students become aware of the questions and
concerns of an audience.
 To give students a motive for revision.

61
(Ferris, 2003, p. 3)
Written Comments:
 can take away students’ attention from their own
purpose and bring it to the teacher’s purpose.
 are not context specific and can be changed from
context to context.

62
(Ferris, 2003, p. 3)
Error Correction
 Selective correction: choose several major
patterns of error, rather than all types of errors.
 Comprehensive correction: give detailed
feedback, so that students are not mislead about
correctness if the teachers do not mark all errors.
 Direct Feedback: teachers write the correct form
on student’s paper.
 Indirect Feedback: allows the student to engage
in guided problem-solving

63
Conferences
 Students are the focus. They are the writers.
 Teachers/Peers help to make choices and define
directions for revisions.
The process
 Students should talk first about their concerns.
 Ask questions, do not give answers.
 Give compliments, then suggestions later.
 Limit the number of revision suggestions.

64
Potential Problems
 Written comments
 Generic comments
 Changes student’s ideas to teacher’s ideas
 Error correction
 Focus on errors on the first draft
 Lack of hierarchy of important issues for revision
 Miscommunication with the teacher. Mark what you
have taught.
 Conferences
 Cultural differences

65
Handouts: Writing

66
Differentiating between Content and
Language Feedback
 Keep feedback short and simple to allow the students to
understand it.
 Ensure feedback is specific to the assignment, not giving broad or
general suggestions
 Make sure to emphasize ideas over grammar and mechanics.
 When correcting written work avoid marking sentences that are
technically correct but poorly written or awkward. Focus on
errors that the students are familiar with and can understand.
 Postpone grammar corrections until the final stages of the
assignment to allow for focus on the meaning and idea
construction
 Errors are a normal part of learning. Make sure the students
know it!
Graham (1987)

67
Overview
 This section will cover ways to communicate
feedback to students in a meaningful way. We’ll
explore some advantages and disadvantages of
each as well as issues and applications.
 1. Direct or Indirect Feedback
 2. Parental Involvement
 3. Peer Feedback

68
Direct or Indirect feedback?
 Direct feedback
 The teacher identifies an error and corrects it for
the student, providing an example of the proper
form
 Indirect feedback
 Feedback where the educator points out that an
error has been made but does not correct it. The
students must identify and correct the error
themselves.

69
Indirect Feedback: Long Term
Improvement?
 Ferris (2002) found that direct feedback on errors
led to more correct revisions than indirect feedback
(88% vs 77%).
 He also noted that over the course of the school
year those who received indirect feedback reduced
their error frequency substantially more than those
receiving direct feedback.
 Fathman and Walley obtained similar results in their
1990 study.

70
Direct Feedback: Misdirecting Focus?
 Fregeau (1999) found that direct feedback was
often inconsistent, unclear, and seemed to
overemphasize the negative.
 Not understanding the errors made, students often
guessed at corrections.
 Students also tended to focus more on correcting
these errors than improving or extending their
ideas.

71
Indirect Feedback
 Uncoded feedback
The teacher indicated an error has been made, but
does not correct the error. The student must
diagnose the type of error and correct it.
 Coded feedback
Gives the exact location of an error and indicates
the type of error involved using a code.

72
Applications: Coded Feedback
 Coded feedback is a combination of direct and
indirect feedback.
 Using a predetermined legend, the teacher
indicates the presence and type of an error with a
symbol.
 The students must locate and correct the error
themselves.

73
An example of Coded Feedback
 Legend
Sp Spelling
Cap Capitals
needed
p Punctuation
w/o Word order
> Missing word
On the weekend I went the zoo >
with amy. There was a big tiger. Cap
He has stripes There also a p
stiped horse. We fed him. We Sp
got to eat pizza and icet cream. Sp
I want to go again back soon. w/o
(Etc)

74
Coded Feedback: Remember…
 Make sure your students are familiar with and
understand the symbols used
 Make sure the students understand the underlying
grammatical rule
 Be consistent!

75
Peer Feedback
 Peer Feedback is a controversial form of feedback
because of its disadvantages. When implemented
properly, these disadvantages are minimized,
allowing the teacher and student to take full benefit.
Image: Working Together. From: http://pwebs.net/branding/2007/05/developing-business-brand-online.php

76
What Students Want
 Zhang (1995, p. 1) found that students “overwhelmingly”
prefer to receive feedback from their teachers rather than
peers.
 Carnells 2000 interviews indicated that students like to
receive feedback from their peers. They felt more freedom
interacting with peers than with a teacher.
 Ur (1996) found that students enjoy being consulted for peer
feedback, and usually put a lot of effort into trying to give
helpful feedback.

77
Cultural Differences
 Alavi and Kaivanpanah (2007, p. 191-193) found that Iranian
students prefer to work alone because they feel they can get
better results this way. He also found that the students
recognize that there is some value in peer evaluation, but feel
that teacher feedback is more accurate and helpful.
 Carson and Nelson (1996, p. 1-18) found that Chinese
students tend to avoid giving critical commentary for two
reasons: students withheld criticism in order to maintain
group harmony and they were reluctant to be in a position of
authority over their peers.

78
Peer Feedback: Advantages
 Allows for more immediate feedback
 Can provide a different kind of feedback than
traditional teacher feedback (less authoritarian)
 Provides students experience with critical
evaluation that can transfer to their own work
 Encourages life skills such as collaboration and
communication

79
Concerns
 Peer feedback may be inconsistent with teacher
feedback.
 ELLs may not feel comfortable giving feedback in
their L2.
 Native language speakers may resent receiving
feedback from ELLs.
 Shy or reserved students may be uncomfortable
with the exercise.

80
What Works
 Coaching students in providing effective
feedback
-Reduces inappropriate feedback
-Promotes acceptance and understanding
-Allows for discussion to address concerns

81
Coaching Students in Providing Effective
Feedback
 Explain benefits of peer feedback
 Class discussion of the role of students
(collaborators, not correctors), purpose of activity
 Practice and application
 Discussion of benefits, weak points, overall success
 (Rollinson, 2005, p. 3-7)

82
Considerations- Peer Feedback
 Size of group.
 Number of drafts to be written.
 Evaluation: will students be evaluated on the level
of their feedback?
 Written or oral feedback groups?
*Written is usually preferable to oral as it allows
time for reflection to avoid inconsiderate comments
and lets teacher follow more closely.
(Rollinson, 2005, p. 3-7)

83
Parental Involvement
 When it comes to parental involvement,
communication is key, although it can be quite
difficult due to language barriers.
 Parents know their child better than anyone else so
they are great resources for the teacher.

84
Cultural Differences
 Korean culture emphasizes trust and respect for
authority figures. As a result, questioning a
teacher’s methods is frowned upon and considered
extremely impolite (Souyoung, 2005).
 As a result, Korean parents may seem less
involved than parents who are more vocal.

85
Issues
 Language barriers
 Potential gender role conflicts
 Cultural brokers can assist with this
 Ideological differences in teaching methods or styles
 Time conflicts and access difficulties

86
What Works
 Frequent contact ensures parents and teacher are working
together and helps avoid parental alienation.
 Goal setting with the parents allows the teacher to enlist
their support, ensuring the home and school environments
are working in harmony.
 Conferences or meetings with the parent or guardian allow
concerns to be expressed, and also provide an opportunity
for the students’ successes to be showcased.

87
Applications: Conferences
 As Angela discussed, student-teacher conferences are an
important method for providing formal and informal feedback.
 Parent-teacher-student conferences are good tools for all
parties involved to set goals and get to know each other’s
expectations.
 The conference can be teacher-led or student-led.
 Student-led conferences allow the students to showcase their
achievements, which can foster a greater sense of pride.

88
 Be prepared for the conference. If a translator is needed
ensure the parents will be comfortable with his/her presence
and will understand his/her role.
 Ensure that you discuss the student’s strengths as well as any
problems or weaknesses.
 Have examples of the student’s work prepared. Pick a few
pieces from the student’s portfolio that show the student’s
strengths and weaknesses.
 Use the opportunity to set goals with the help of the parents
for all parties involved.
 Plan for a follow-up meeting.

89
REFERENCES
Alberta Education.(2007). English as a Second Language Guide to Implementation: Kindergarten to Grade 9. In:
Education: Teachers: Programs of Study: English as a Second Language: Learning and Teaching Resources.
Retrieved November 23, 2008, from http://education.alberta.ca/teachers/program/esl/resources.aspx
Alderman, M. K. (2004). Motivation For Achievement: Possibilities For Teaching and Learning (3rd ed.) [Electronic
Version]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Alavi, S. M. K. (2007). Feedback expectancy and EFL learners’ achievement in English. Journal of Theory and
Practice in Education. (5)1, 181-196.
Austin, T. Y., & Haley, M. H. (2004). Content-Based Second Language Teaching and Learning: An Interactive
Approach. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Birbili, M. (2006). Mapping Knowledge: Concept Maps in Early Childhood Education. Early Childhood Research &
Practice, 8(2). Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v8n2/birbili.html
Boyle, O. F., & Peregoy, S. F. (2005). Reading, Writing, and Learning in ESL: A Resources Book for K-12 Teachers (4th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Bright, R. M., Pollard, M. J., Tompkins, G. E., & Winsor, P. J.T. (2008). Language Arts: Content and Teaching
Strategies. Toronto, ON: Pearson Education.
Cabral, R. M., Herrera, S. G., & Murry, K. G. (2007). Assessment Accommodation for Classroom Teachers of
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Carnell, E. (2000). Dialogue, Discussion and Secondary School Students on How Other Help Their Learning: Feedback
for learning. London, UK: Routledge.
Carson, J. & Nelson, G. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of
Second Language Writing. 5(1),1 -19.
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M., (1994). Chamot & O’Malley’s Taxonomy of Learning Strategies in the classroom.
The CALLA Handbook. Reading MA: Addison- Wesley.
Collier, V., Combs, M., & Ovando, C. (2003). Bilingual and ESL Classrooms: Teaching Multicultural Contexts (3rd
ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill

90
REFERENCES
Eckes, M. & Law, B.(2000). The more than- just surviving handbook: ESL for every classroom teacher (2nd Ed.)
Winnipeg, MB: Portage & Main Press.
Fathman, A. K., Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher Response to Student Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
Press.
Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to Student Writing; Implications for Second Language Students. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Fisher, D. & Rothenberg, C. (2007). Teaching English Language Learners: A Differentiated Approach. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Fregeau, L. A. (1999). Preparing ESL Students for College Writing: Two Case Studies. TESL Journal , 5(10). Retrieved
November 15, 2008, from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Fregeau-CollegeWriting.html
Gardner, R. C. (1991). Language Anxiety: From Theory and Research to Classroom Implications. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Genesee, F., & Upshur, J. A. (1996). Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Glew, Paul J. (1998). Verbal interaction and English second language acquisition in classroom contexts. Issues in
Educational Research, 8(2), 1998, 83-94. Nepean: University of Western Sydney.
Gottfredson, D. C. (1991, November). Increasing Teacher Expectations for Student Achievement: An Evaluation.
Baltimore, MD: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Retrieved November 8, 2008, from ERIC .
Government of Manitoba. (2008). Chapter 5: Assessment of Learning. In Education and Literacy: K-12: Assessment
and Evaluation. Retrieved November 9, 2008, from http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/assess/wncp/
Graham, J. G. (1987, November). Helping the ESOL writer: Constructive feedback [Presentation]. Los Angeles, CA:
National Council of Teachers of English. Retrieved November 25, 2008, from ERIC.
Gronlund, N. E. (2004). University of Alberta: Assessment of Student Achievement (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson
Education.

91
REFERENCES
Hurley, S. R., & Tinajero, J. V. (2001). Literacy Assessment of Second Language Learners. Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Herrell, A. L, & Jordan, M. (2008). Fifty Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners (3rd ed.).
Columbus, OH: Pearson Education.
Herrera, S. G., Murry, K. G., Cabral, R. M. (2007). Assessment accommodation for Classroom teachers of
culturally and linguistically diverse Students. Pearson Education. Ally & Bacon. Boston MA.
Hewings, M. (2004). Pronunciation Practice Activities: A Resource Book for Teaching English
Pronunciation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Inspiration Software. (2008). Examples and Lesson Plan. In Products: Kidspiration: Examples and Lesson
Plans. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from
http://www.inspiration.com/themes/inspiration/example.php?nid=772&page=small&set=771,772,773,774,778,775,776,77
Inspiration Software. (2008). Kidspiration. In Products: Kidspiration: Details. Retrieved November 10,
2008, from http://www.inspiration.com/Kidspiration
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-Based Language Teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Boston, MA: Heinle
& Heinle.
Boyle, O. F., & Peregoy, S. F. (2005). Reading, Writing, and Learning in ESL: A Resources Book for K-12
Teachers (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Principles for Fair Student Assessment Practices for Education in Canada. (1993). Edmonton, AB: Joint
Advisory Committee.
As reproduced in Gronlund, N. E. (2004). University of Alberta: Assessment of Student Achievement
(2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal. (59)1, 23-30.
Shanahan, M. (Fall, 2007). Formative Assessment Through Science Notebooks. University of Alberta:
Curriculum & Instruction in Elementary School Science, EDEL 330.

92
REFERENCES
Soyoung, L. (2005). Selective parent participation: Structural and cultural factors that influence school
participation among Korean Parents. Equity & Excellence in Education.
Sweetland, R. (2005). Light Misconceptions. In Science: Misconceptions: Light, Shadows and Rainbows:
Three Diagrams and Study Summary. Retrieved November 13, 2008, from
http://www.huntel.net/rsweetland/science/misconceptions/lightDiag.html
Ur. P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Williams. J. G. (2003). Providing feedback on ESL students’ written assignments. TESL Journal. (6)10.
Retrieved November 15, 2008, from http://itesli.org/
Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal
of Second Language Writing. (4)3, 209-222.

Providing feedback

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Providing feedback

Similar to Providing feedback (20)

More from Walaa Abdelnaby

More from Walaa Abdelnaby (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Providing feedback

Editor's Notes