article+reflection+by+Fatih+Gün

Between-draft revision is stressed by Process-oriented writing instruction. Students who make mistakes are not eager to examine their mistakes. Yet current literature and traditional pedagogy have provided little guidance for motivating student writers to look beyond surface errors to develop and to reﬁne their communicative intentions and writing abilities. The author suggests that teacher feedback with an inquiring stance engages student writers in negotiation over the emerging meaning of their texts. Sample draft compositions are used to explore the assumptions and implications of this instructional stance to student writing. Acknowledging the instructional context framing any assignment, the authors argue that addressing developing writers’ communicative purposes through an inquiring stance to early drafts motivates revision and thus creates opportunities for writing skills development. **Introduction ** Author in this article mainly talks about the importance of giving feedback on the students’ products and the effects of this feedback on the achievement of students. The importance of engaging developing writers in draft revision is related to the process-oriented writing instruction in subsequent languages. Many writing teachers have adopted suggestions by Zamel (1982), among others, to make redrafting a key point of instruction and they draw attention on the importance of between-draft process. **Evaluative or formative feedback? ** Evaluative feedback, mainly focuses on the product and expresses to a writer how well the instructor’s instructional priorities have been met. It also helps instructor to see whetter students are doing the right things according to his/her instructions or not. This type of feedback typically passes judgement on the draft in terms of some abstract, undeﬁned notion of an ‘ideal’ paper, reﬂects a preoccupation with sentence-level errors, and takes the form of directives for improvement on present or future assignments**.** On the other hand, formative feedback (also sometimes referred to as facilitative or intermediate feedback) typically consists of feedback that takes an inquiring stance towards the text. **Evaluative feedback illustrated ** The remainder of this paper refers to writing samples in order to delineate further the two approaches to teacher feedback on L2 writing, evaluative and formative, as well as the instructional priorities associated with each. They are presented in a way that acknowledges the importance of the preceding factors in shaping the precise nature of teacher feedback. The ﬁrst sample highlights the features of evaluative feedback. **Formative feedback illustrated ** In contrast, formative feedback is an instructional approach that encourages revision by raising potential questions readers might have about ideas presented in the text, leaving it to the developing writer to make the ﬁnal decisions about the content. **Features of formative Feedback ** Most of the feedback is probing and asks questions, an approach consistent with a stance that acknowledges the developing writer’s expertise in the content. It is a kind of a questionnaire which helps instructor to see until which degree the degree of students’ ability has come. At the same time, this inquiring approach leads writers to focus on the deeper meaning of their text. To summarize; formative feedback: takes an inquiring stance; prioritizes content over form; avoids evaluative statements; and is personalized. Formative feedback addresses writers at a level where their own communicative purposes are the primary consideration. It often takes the form of probing questions, focuses on content, avoids judgement, and is personalized.
 * MOTIVATING REVISION OF DRAFTS by FATİH GÜN **