Are self-compassionate writers more feedback literate? Exploring undergraduates’ perceptions of feedback constructiveness

IF 4.2 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessing Writing Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2023.100761
Carlton J. Fong , Diane L. Schallert , Zachary H. Williamson , Shengjie Lin , Kyle M. Williams , Young Won Kim
{"title":"Are self-compassionate writers more feedback literate? Exploring undergraduates’ perceptions of feedback constructiveness","authors":"Carlton J. Fong ,&nbsp;Diane L. Schallert ,&nbsp;Zachary H. Williamson ,&nbsp;Shengjie Lin ,&nbsp;Kyle M. Williams ,&nbsp;Young Won Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2023.100761","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Upon receiving constructive feedback, students may experience unpleasant emotions from critical comments about their writing or the realization that their work is unfinished. Few studies have focused on how learners are able to manage such emotions, one aspect of feedback literacy. Regulating these emotions may involve practicing self-kindness and avoiding self-judgment, two subcomponents of self-compassion. Self-compassionate individuals may move past any feelings of failure and direct their attention to what needs improvement. The question addressed was whether undergraduates’ level of self-compassion would affect their perceptions of the constructiveness of researcher-created feedback statements. At a U.S. southwest university, students (<em>N</em> = 508) rated the constructiveness of 56 statements that had been created to represent different levels of constructiveness in feedback to a fictitious writing assignment. Results indicated that students’ self-kindness positively predicted feedback constructiveness, whereas self-judgment was a negative predictor. Additionally, students higher in self-compassion (high in self-kindness in one analysis and those low in self-judgment in a second) rated the least constructive statements as more constructive than did students low in self-compassion. We end with implications for feedback literacy and writing assessment research and for application of self-compassion in the context of feedback on writing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessing Writing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293523000697","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Upon receiving constructive feedback, students may experience unpleasant emotions from critical comments about their writing or the realization that their work is unfinished. Few studies have focused on how learners are able to manage such emotions, one aspect of feedback literacy. Regulating these emotions may involve practicing self-kindness and avoiding self-judgment, two subcomponents of self-compassion. Self-compassionate individuals may move past any feelings of failure and direct their attention to what needs improvement. The question addressed was whether undergraduates’ level of self-compassion would affect their perceptions of the constructiveness of researcher-created feedback statements. At a U.S. southwest university, students (N = 508) rated the constructiveness of 56 statements that had been created to represent different levels of constructiveness in feedback to a fictitious writing assignment. Results indicated that students’ self-kindness positively predicted feedback constructiveness, whereas self-judgment was a negative predictor. Additionally, students higher in self-compassion (high in self-kindness in one analysis and those low in self-judgment in a second) rated the least constructive statements as more constructive than did students low in self-compassion. We end with implications for feedback literacy and writing assessment research and for application of self-compassion in the context of feedback on writing.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
富有同情心的作家是否更懂反馈?大学生反馈建构性认知探究
在收到建设性的反馈后,学生可能会因对他们的写作的批评或意识到他们的工作尚未完成而产生不愉快的情绪。很少有研究关注学习者如何管理这种情绪,这是反馈素养的一个方面。调节这些情绪可能包括练习自我善意和避免自我判断,这是自我同情的两个子组成部分。富有同情心的人可能会克服任何失败的感觉,并将注意力集中在需要改进的地方。所要解决的问题是,本科生的自我同情水平是否会影响他们对研究人员创建的反馈陈述的建设性的看法。在美国西南部的一所大学,学生们(N=508)对56个陈述的建设性进行了评分,这些陈述是为了代表对虚构写作作业的不同程度的建设性反馈而创建的。结果表明,学生的自我友善对反馈建构性有正向预测作用,而自我判断对反馈建构力有负向预测作用。此外,自我同情程度较高的学生(一次分析中自我善良程度较高,另一次分析则自我判断程度较低)认为最不具建设性的陈述比自我同情程度较低的学生更有建设性。最后,我们对反馈素养和写作评估研究以及自我同情在写作反馈中的应用提出了启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Assessing Writing
Assessing Writing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
17.90%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Assessing Writing is a refereed international journal providing a forum for ideas, research and practice on the assessment of written language. Assessing Writing publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges concerning writing assessments of all kinds, including traditional (direct and standardised forms of) testing of writing, alternative performance assessments (such as portfolios), workplace sampling and classroom assessment. The journal focuses on all stages of the writing assessment process, including needs evaluation, assessment creation, implementation, and validation, and test development.
期刊最新文献
Validating an integrated reading-into-writing scale with trained university students Understanding the SSARC model of task sequencing: Assessing L2 writing development Exploring the use of model texts as a feedback instrument in expository writing: EFL learners’ noticing, incorporations, and text quality Exploring the development of noun phrase complexity in L2 English writings across two genres L2 master’s and doctoral students’ preferences for supervisor written feedback on their theses/dissertations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1