| The responses that teachers provide to their students' writing are vital to engaging the students in the exploratory process of composing. In the last twenty years, studies that have examined L1 and L2 teachers' commentary have been scarce, and sometimes confusing. Educators not only disagree about how teachers should respond to student writing, but some even question the overall usefulness of teacher-written commentary. Rejecting this latter view, I decided to investigate an area that has received little attention---and whose existing literature is conflicting---how the phrasing of the commentary affects students. My study addresses the following questions: How do students respond cognitively and effectively to direct (unmitigated) and to indirect (mitigated) teacher commentary? Which of the two linguistic forms do students prefer? What types of commentary do students have most difficulty with?; In my research, I analyzed 1,186 comments written by two college composition teachers on two drafts of two writing assignments done by 43 L1 and L2 students. I examined student responses to a questionnaire on their interpretations and preferences with regard to commentary, and I interviewed the two teachers and 14 of their students to more fully explore the commenting behavior of the teachers and their students' affective responses.; Results indicate that while the quality of revisions was not affected by the extent to which a comment was mitigated (hedged), students greatly benefited, especially on an affective level, by commentary that was phrased in a polite, supportive way. Among these were the "but" or "however" formula, such as, "Your first sentence grabs my attention, but..." and "This is well written. However,...." Students had no problem understanding these comments and significantly preferred them to ones that only stated the problem (unhedged). Results also reveal that, regardless of the linguistic form of the comment, students had the most difficulty addressing comments that required challenging analytical tasks---rethinking and connecting ideas, and providing information that wasn't readily available.; The findings from the study are then compared to similar studies, and conclusions are drawn about implications for L1 and L2 teachers of writing. |
