'Would you perhaps consider ...': hedged comments in ESL writing

Nurmukhamedov, Ulugbek; Kim, Soo Hyon

doi:10.1093/elt/ccp063

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even when it is legible, a curt scrawled comment such as “awkward” or “explain” can itself require explanation. For this and other reasons, 30 percent of students have reported finding feedback so unclear that they require follow‐up clarification, and an even higher percentage may find written feedback of little value in improving later performance (Weaver , Chanock , Nurmukhamedov and Kim ). Experienced instructors will have encountered students who take little notice of written comments on their work and skip immediately to their mark.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Video Feedback in Philosophy

Lamey

2015

Metaphilosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marginal comments on student essays are a near-universal method of providing feedback in philosophy. Widespread as the practice is, however, it has well-known drawbacks. Commenting on students' work in the form of a video has the potential to improve the feedback experience for both instructors and students. The advantages of video feedback can be seen by examining it from both the professor's and the student's perspective. In discussing the professor's perspective, this article shares observations based on the author's experience delivering feedback through video. Turning to the student's view, it discusses qualitative feedback solicited from students that indicates a clear preference for video feedback over written marginalia. In particular, students describe video feedback as more informative, more personal, better at suggesting improvements on future assignments, enhancing the professor's ability to communicate through tone of voice and gesture, and easier to understand compared to written feedback.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Video Feedback in Philosophy

Lamey

2015

Metaphilosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We know from a whole range of studies into written feedback that students often complain that the feedback they receive is unclear, hard to read and sometimes confusing (Zamel 1985;Nurmukhamedov and Kim 2009). One thing that seems to emerge from many of the studies into feedback using SCT is that students have consistently highlighted the clarity of the feedback (Mathisen 2012;Harper et al 2012;Stannard 2017): "The great advantage that screen capture has over written feedback is that screen capture gives a much clearer impression of what is being commented upon and assessed" (Mathisen 2012, 105).…”

Section: Claritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Language and Intercultural Skills through an IaH Programme at University

Arnó-Macià¹,

Aguilar-Pérez²

2019

Studia UBB Philologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The surveyed studies have enriched our perceptions of the challenges NNES scholars face and how they cope with these challenges in publishing their research works, as well as the constructive role convenience editors play. Nevertheless, the reviewed studies have mostly tapped convenience editors’ beliefs, practices, or challenges through think‐aloud processes (Willey & Tanimoto, ); semi‐structured, open‐ended, or stimulated recall interviews (Bisaillon, ; Gholami & Zeinolabedini, in press; Nurmukhamedov & Kim, ); or small, controlled, or partial‐manuscript editing practices (Willey & Tanimoto, ).…”

Section: Convenience Editingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colleagues helping each other to publish in medical sciences: Iranian field specialists' convenience editing strategies

Zeinolabedini

Gholami

2016

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports a study into 60 research articles (RAs) authored by Iranian medical researchers and published in high-quality international English journals. It investigated how academic professionals in medical sciences implement peer convenience editing (CE) to improve articles and make them suitable for publication. The research identified nine editing interventions that were categorized as micro-or macro-editing strategies.The findings indicated that the most frequently used strategies are microstrategies of substitution, addition, and mechanical alteration. The study also found that the abstract received the majority of editorial changes (mostly micro), followed by the introduction and then the discussion sections. The findings may help authors and institutions identify which sections and which types of editorial interventions are most likely to be required to ensure that RAs are optimized for publishing in international journals.

show abstract

'Would you perhaps consider ...': hedged comments in ESL writing

Cited by 17 publications

References 6 publications

Video Feedback in Philosophy

Video Feedback in Philosophy

Developing Language and Intercultural Skills through an IaH Programme at University

Colleagues helping each other to publish in medical sciences: Iranian field specialists' convenience editing strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About