Feedback And Revision Reflection: Authors, Name, Institution

12feedback And Revision Reflectionauthors Nameinstitutional Affiliati

Feedback and Revision Reflection Author’s Name Institutional Affiliation Instructor’s Name Course Code Due Date Based on the instructor's feedback on my writing plan, the best strategy for writing my critical analysis essay include reading thoroughly and carefully, being able to choose a thesis statement, writing a good introductory paragraph, organizing my essay body carefully, coming up with clear sentences, having popular evidence in the essay and summarizing my work with a good conclusion paragraph (Buckingham & Aktuğ-Ekinci, 2017). In this case, I would say that the best revision approaches that have worked best for me include letting someone else read my work for me and reading it aloud.

These have enabled me to understand the mistakes in my work hence making it for me to revise. The best revision strategies that have worked for me include study groups, recording notes, and reflecting on the whole course. The feedback by my instructor has helped me to get the areas that require improvement and how best I can make such improvements. Since I have the outside feedback, I will be able to improve my writing skills as well as how I put my ideas together. The audience that might benefit from reading my essay is my classmates as they will get more ideas from my work and make changes in theirs if they find my work to be better to some extent.

However, for better understanding, the audience ought to turn distractions off, ask questions in areas where they do not understand, take notes, show their engagement by using non-verbal clues, and be able to make a connection with what is being read. The challenges I might have connected with the audience include some of them failing to understand my work easily and thus requiring further clarification and some of my audience failing to pay attention. The choices that I can make to connect with this particular will involve creating a connection between ourselves, constructing a persona, and being informative. References Buckingham, L., & Aktuğ-Ekinci, D. (2017). Interpreting coded feedback on writing: Turkish EFL students' approaches to revision. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 26, 1-16. Sotáková, I., Ganajová, M., & Bacinová, M. (2020). Inquiry-Based Science Education as a Revision Strategy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(3).

Paper For Above instruction

The process of effective writing and revision is crucial for producing high-quality academic work. As highlighted by Buckingham and Aktuğ-Ekinci (2017), thorough reading, clear thesis formation, structured organization, coherent sentences, relevant evidence, and a strong conclusion are fundamental elements in crafting a compelling critical analysis essay. Incorporating instructor feedback and engaging in revision strategies such as peer review and reading aloud significantly enhances writing proficiency and clarity. Reflective revision practices, including participating in study groups and taking detailed notes, serve to identify and rectify common errors and improve overall coherence and argumentation.

Constructive feedback from instructors guides writers toward recognizing their weaknesses and developing targeted strategies to address them. For instance, creating drafts, receiving external critique, and revisiting the work allow learners to refine their ideas and presentation. Understanding the audience—such as classmates—also plays a central role in shaping the clarity and impact of the essay. It is important for readers to minimize distractions, ask questions, actively take notes, and establish connections with the content. These practices foster better engagement and comprehension, thereby making the discussion more meaningful.

However, challenges in audience engagement may include difficulty in understanding the writer’s ideas or lack of attention. To bridge these gaps, writers can employ strategies such as establishing a personal connection, adopting a relatable persona, and providing clear, informative content. In summary, continuous revision supported by effective feedback, strategic engagement, and audience awareness is vital for improving academic writing. These practices not only elevate individual work but also facilitate meaningful academic discourse and skill development.

References

  • Buckingham, L., & Aktuğ-Ekinci, D. (2017). Interpreting coded feedback on writing: Turkish EFL students' approaches to revision. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 26, 1-16.
  • Sotáková, I., Ganajová, M., & Bacinová, M. (2020). Inquiry-Based Science Education as a Revision Strategy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(3).
  • Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The influence of modelled peer feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(2), 126–140.
  • Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. University of Michigan Press.
  • Hyland, F., & Hyland, K. (2006). Feedback on Second Language Students’ Writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101.
  • Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
  • Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2017). Peer Response in the EFL Classroom: What Do Learners Think? Language Teaching Research, 21(4), 472-487.
  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189.

Related Assignments