Article published In: Linguistic Diversity and Social Inclusion in Australia
Edited by Ingrid Piller
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 37:3] 2014
► pp. 262–275
Writing feedback as an exclusionary practice in higher education
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 1 January 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.37.3.05cha
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.37.3.05cha
This ethnographic research probes into feedback on academic writing received by Taiwanese students in Australian higher education institutions, and examines whether the feedback received helped students to participate in the written discourse of academic communities. Academic writing dominates the academic life of students in Australia and is the key measure of their academic performance. This can be problematic for international students who speak English as an additional language and who are expected to acquire academic literacies in English ‘by doing’. As a social practice, academic writing depends on participation in dialogue for students to be included in the community of academia. However, the findings show that few participants received any useful feedback. Some assignments were never returned; in other cases, the hand-written feedback was illegible, and often included only overly general comments that puzzled the participants. As a result, the learning process came to an end once the students handed in their assignments; feedback failed to promote further learning related to content, and particularly to academic writing. The article highlights the few instances where participants received helpful feedback that was accessible and constructive, and which can be considered best practice for the promotion of academic literacy.
References (19)
Australian Government Department of Education. (2014). International student numbers 2013. Retrieved 24 July, 2014, from [URL].
Butorac, D. L. (2011). Imagined identity, remembered self: Settlement language learning and the negotiation of gendered subjectivity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.
Hansen, J. G. (2000). Interactional conflicts among audience, purpose, and content knowledge in the acquisition of academic literacy in an EAP Course. Written Communication, 17(1), 27–52.
Hyland, F. (2010). Future directions in feedback on second Language writing: Overview and research agenda. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 171–182.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (Eds.). (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hymes, D. (1996). Report from an underdeveloped country: Toward linguistic competence in the United States. Ethnography, linguistics, narrative inequality: Toward an understanding of voice (pp. 63–105). London: Taylor & Francis.
Kubota, R., & Lehner, A. (2004). Toward critical contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 7–27.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–172.
Leask, B., & Carroll, J. (2011). Moving beyond ‘wishing and hoping’: internationalisation and student experiences of inclusion and engagement. Higher Education Research and Development, 30(5), 647–659.
Leki, I. (2006). ‘You cannot ignore’: L2 graduate students’ response to discipline-based written feedback. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing (pp. 266–286). Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
Paltridge, T., Mayson, S., & Schapper, J. (2012). Covering the gap: Social inclusion, international students and the role of local government. Australian Universities Review, 54(2), 29–39.
Piller, I., & Takahashi, K. (2011). Linguistic diversity and social inclusion. International Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism, 14(4), 371–381.
Roca de Larios, J., & Murphy, L. (2010). Feedback in second language writing: An introduction. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), i–xv.
Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 29–46.
Tran, L. T. (2009). Making visible ‘hidden’ intentions and potential choices: International students in intercultural communication. Language and Intercultural Communication, 9(4), 271–284.
Cited by (8)
Cited by eight other publications
Esen, Emrullah, Oktay Cem Adıgüzel & Derya Atik Kara
Raitskaya, Lilia & Elena Tikhonova
Loo, Daron Benjamin
Dimmock, Kay, Paul Weeks & Sally Ashton-Hay
Green, Simon
Mochizuki, Naoko
2016. Oral interactions in a writing group as mediating artefacts. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 39:2 ► pp. 181 ff.
Oliver, Rhonda, Honglin Chen & Stephen Moore
Stracke, Elke & Vijay Kumar
2016. Exploring doctoral students’ perceptions of language use in supervisory written feedback practices – because “feedback is hard to have”. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 39:2 ► pp. 122 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
