Teaching and Researching Chinese EFL/ESL Learners in Higher Education

Zhongshe Lu, Meihua Liu, Wenxia Zhang, Zhongshe Lu, Meihua Liu, Wenxia Zhang

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000395280
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Teaching Language Arts
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

China has attached great importance to teaching students to become proficient users of English. Yet, despite a plethora of studies and practice on Chinese ESL/EFL (English as a second/foreign language) learners, the large student population, its complicated composition and the complex nature of second and foreign language learning have rendered it difficult to offer a panoramic view on ESL/EFL teaching and learning of Chinese learners.

This book provides a new and up-to-date perspective on the teaching and learning of Chinese ESL/EFL learners. The book collects 15 case studies, falling into two parts—Curriculum Development and Teaching Practice and Skills-Based Research. The collected studies deploy qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods to explore patterns, features, developments and causes and effects of a variety of issues in the sphere of ESL/EFL teaching and learning. Moreover, the cases offer insights that are relevant beyond the mainland Chinese context such as Hong Kong, Macau, Britain and Australia.

Students and scholars of TESOL and applied linguistics will be interested in this title.

Part I

Curriculum development and classroom teaching

1 Feedback and doctoral student writing

Brian Paltridge

City University of Hong Kong and University of Sydney

Introduction

Feedback is an important way through which doctoral students learn the expectations of writing at their particular level of study. It is also through feedback that students are inducted into the community of practice of their discipline (Hyatt, 2005; Kumar & Stracke, 2007; Lave & Wenger, 1991). This feedback is provided by the student’s supervisor/s during their period of study as well as by examiners on completion of the degree. While a number of studies have examined supervisor feedback (see e.g., Basturkmen, East, & Bitchener, 2014; Bitchener Basturkmen, & East, 2010; Kumar & Stracke, 2007; Morton, Storch, & Thompson, 2014; Starfield, 2019; Wang & Li, 2011) and examiner feedback (see e.g., Holbrook, Bourke, Lovat, & Dally, 2004, 2014; Starfield et al., 2015, 2017; Stracke & Kumar, 2010), a matter that is still underexplored is how supervisors and examiners ask students to make changes to their work and the language they use do this. This chapter examines the feedback that doctoral students get on their work from both supervisors and examiners. In particular, it examines features of this feedback that students might find difficult to interpret and, as a result, respond to.

Supervisor feedback on doctoral student writing

Bitchener, Basturkmen, and East (2010) discuss the feedback that supervisors give doctoral students on their writing. They describe this feedback as “arguably the most important source of input on what is required or expected of thesis-writing students by the academic community” (p. 79). Bitchener and his colleagues discuss a study in which they asked supervisors what they focussed on when they gave their students feedback on their work. The supervisors in their study were from three academic disciplines: humanities, sciences/mathematics and commerce. They found there was little difference in the type of feedback that was given by supervisors in the different disciplines and that similar feedback tended to be given to both first and second language student writers. Bitchener et al. found that the most common area of feedback mentioned by the supervisors was gaps in the content area of the thesis, especially theoretical understanding and coverage of the topic. They said this is an area that both first and second language writers struggle with. They also stressed the need to take a critical perspective on research that had been published. The construction of an argument was also a matter that needed attention in the students’ work.

Starfield (2019) discusses how feedback is a key means of both socialising and apprenticing new students into their disciplinary community. It is, however, she says, fraught with problems and difficulties. Students might fear getting feedback from their supervisor and not know who else to turn to for advice and guidance on their work. Aitchison and Guerin (2014) suggest students form writing groups and seek feedback from their peers as a way of helping with the development of their writing as well as making social connections with other students in what for many students is often a very isolating experience.

Basturkmen et al.’s (2014) research into supervisor feedback showed that the supervisors in their study often focussed on linguistic accuracy and appropriateness. This finding is similar to the work of Kumar and Stracke (2007) where this was also the case. In focussing on language, the supervisors highlighted the need for meticulousness in grammar and expression (Basturkmen et al., 2014) knowing that examiners expect a high standard of literacy and presentation in the thesis (see Examiner feedback on doctoral student writing below). The supervisors also, of course, focussed on the content of the students’ texts but this was less frequent than their comments on linguistic accuracy and appropriateness. Morton et al. (2014) looked not just at supervisor feedback but also how supervisors use feedback to scaffold learning. They show how, in one of the cases they examined, the supervisor’s feedback played a central role in the student’s development as an emerging academic author and the ability to call her work “her own”. Kumar and Stracke (2007) discuss how interactions between students and their supervisor in relation to the feedback they have been given induct beginning doctoral writers into their academic discourse community and help them become independent and self-confident researchers on completion of their Ph.D.

Examiner feedback on doctoral student writing

While Ph.D. theses may be written differently in different areas of study, universities typically apply the same criteria to their examination. Many universities provide examiners with a list of criteria to refer to while they are assessing a student’s thesis. These criteria are normally some kind of variation on the following:

• An awareness and understanding of relevant previous research on the topic;

• A critical appraisal of previous research on the topic;

• A clearly defined and comprehensive investigation of the topic;

• The appropriate application of research methods and techniques;

• A thorough presentation and interpretation of results;

• Appropriately developed conclusions and implications that are linked to the research framework and findings;

• A high standard of literary quality and presentation;

• A contribution to knowledge on the particular topic.

The last of these points, contribution to know...