4.2 Article

Exploring Chinese university English writing teachers' emotions in providing feedback on student writing

出版社

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/iral-2023-0233

关键词

L2 writing; feedback-giving; teacher emotions; emotion profiles

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed a measurement tool for Chinese university English writing teachers' feedback-giving emotions and identified five types of emotions and four groups of teachers. The results also showed that most demographic variables had no correlation with teachers' feedback-giving emotions, except for professional training experience which had minimal influence on teachers' group memberships.
Despite the growing interest in emotions in L2 writing education, empirical research on teachers' emotions as feedback providers is limited. With 288 English writing teachers from 120 universities in 23 provinces of China, this study developed a 17-item scale to measure Chinese university English writing teachers' feedback-giving emotions. Exploratory factor analysis revealed five kinds of emotions: cheerfulness, contentment, frustration, anxiety, and anger. Latent profile analysis identified four groups of teachers according to their diverse patterns of emotions: slight-positive-emotional teachers (N = 118, 40.97 % of the total sample), negative-emotional teachers (N = 35, 12.15 %), positive-emotional teachers (N = 50, 17.36 %), and mixed-emotional teachers (N = 85, 29.51 %). Most demographic variables, including teaching experience, student background, and institution prestige, had no correlation with teachers' feedback-giving emotions. Only professional training experience had minimal influence on teachers' group memberships concerning feedback-giving emotions. This study contributes to the literature on teachers' emotions during the provision of feedback by developing an instrument for large-scale quantitative studies. It also confirms the complexity of feedback-giving emotions, particularly the identification of mixed-emotional teachers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据