Writing Instruction Reconsidered (Published)
This study is designed to gauge the effectiveness of methods used in our regional universities in writing classes, in comparison to the current methods commonly recommended by specialists and used at most American universities. The data is collected as follows. First, an informal survey was conducted with students who had already completed two writing courses, and various samples of corrected student writings were examined. Second, several interviews were held with a considerable number of writing instructors working at both public and private universities, and their writing syllabi were carefully studied. Data collection focused on the methods and strategies in effect; such as the number of students enrolled in each section, steps of writing taught, instructor responses, documentation of written pieces, textbooks, and grading procedures. The study revealed a number of weaknesses in need of urgent attention and offers suggestions and recommendations to help improve the teaching of English writing in regional universities.
THE ROLE OF TEACHER CORRECTION FEEDBACK IN THE SUCCESS OF STUDENTS’ ERROR CORRECTION DURING REVISION AMONG HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN BOTSWANA (Published)
Arguments have risen about whether teacher corrective feedback is necessary for students or not; in other words, does error correction benefit students? Feedback is one of the factors in Skinner’s operant conditioning model of learning closely tied to behaviourist learning theory. In this learning model, feedback is equated with positive or negative reinforcement. This paper sought to identify the role played by teacher correction feedback in the success of students in correcting errors during revision. The study is based on the hypothesis that there is a relationship between feedback mechanism applied to student errors and students’ success in correcting errors during revision. The study makes use of a longitudinal, quasi-experimental design. Two Form 4 classes from one private co-educational secondary school were used comprising 28 males and 40 females of ages 16 years to 21 years. The results reveal that students manage to correct most of the errors made in the original essays after reviewing the correction feedback by teachers in the long term.