top of page

Dialogic Feedback

  • Giving feedback should be a dialogic process (Lillis, 2003), where the reviewer opens a conversation with the author. You’re essentially playing back what you’ve understood from your reading (Straub, 2005).

​

  • You need not be a writing expert to give good feedback. Watling and Lingard (2019) detail a process where you name the problems you can, identify areas that you didn’t fully follow the author, and—if you don’t know why—explain your experience as a reader. This is a big part of the conversation.

​

  • Good reviewers are selective. They select the highest priority items. They then provide detailed, actionable feedback as much as they can to help the writer.​

​

  • Writers and reviewers should all recognize that, ultimately, this is the writer’s piece. They’re in control of final decisions, and feedback is simply a suggestion for possible changes.

​

  • Leave syntax and grammar until the writing process is almost complete.

Dialogic Feedback
Image by John Schnobrich

References

Grauman, J. (2022). What’s that                       supposed to mean? Using feedback         on your writing. Writing Spaces, 4,           145-165.

        

Lillis, T. (2003). Student writing as                   academic literacies: Drawing on               Bakhtin to move from

       critique to design. Language and             Education, 17, 192–207.

​

Lingard, L., & Watling, C. (2020). Beyond         feedback: 11 tips for coaching                   writing. Perspectives

       in Medical Education. 

 

Straub, R. (2005). Responding—really             responding—to other students’                 writing. In W. Bishop & J. Strickland         (Eds.), The subject is writing (pp.               136-146). Boynton-Cook.

​

Watling, C., & Lingard, L. (2019). Giving           Feedback on Others'                                   Writing. Perspectives in

       Medical Education, 8, 25-27. 

Key Threshold Idea

Giving feedback should be like a conversation with a writer, undertaken with an understanding that their work is still developing and the reviewer legitimately wants to help that writer improve what they’ve written.

Image by charlesdeluvio

Three Pillars of Good Feedback

01

It is sensitive. It accounts for the author's intentions and knowledge of a topic.

02

It is constructive. It provides tangible, actionable ways to improve.

03

It is supportive. It helps the author reach their goals. It doesn't over-compliment and doesn't over-criticize. It understands the work is in process.

Audio Example

Quotes from the Field

  • “You’re not just marking up a text; you’re responding to the writer. You’re a reader, a helper, a colleague. Try to sound like someone who’s a reader, who’s helpful, and who’s collegial. Supportive. And remember: Even when you’re tough and demanding you can still be supportive (Straub, 2005, p. 140). 

​

  • “You are the author of your work, so you get to make the final call. No matter where your feedback comes from, you need to make your own decisions about what the best action is…and while your professor is an expert on effective writing, your professor is not automatically an expert on what you were trying to get across” (Grauman, 2022, pp. 152-153) 

​

  • “Remember, though, critiquing how someone thinks can be even more threatening than critiquing how they write. Critique should be characterized by generosity and grace.” (Lingard & Watling, 2020, para 8). 

© 2023 by Name of Site. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page