Second Language Writing
Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues

I was delighted to be asked to review these two books on L2 writing, because I was a huge fan of the first editions. For almost twenty years, Hyland’s 2003 Second Language Writing has been the go-to book for anyone interested in understanding theory and practice around the teaching of L2 writing. Targeted at novices in this area, it was also a reliable resource for experts, with an excellent set of references. Hyland and Hyland’s 2006 Feedback in Second Language Writing was the first major collection of its kind in this field and a very welcome source of ideas from a range of experts on aspects of L2 feedback. Written and co-edited by two of the best-known scholars in this field, these books have been seminal influences on novice teachers and researchers of L2 writing and good reference books for fellow academics ever since they were published.

Reading the new editions, I began to feel uneasy. I read what the books claimed: ‘completely revised’ (Hyland 2019, back cover blurb) and ‘up-to-date’ (ditto, Hyland and Hyland 2019); however, it seemed to me that they were, with some notable exceptions, neither of these things. That got me wondering: what is the purpose of a second edition of an important textbook—a classic, even? I wrote to several publishers to ask them what advice/guidance they gave writers of second editions: none replied. I then turned to colleagues and asked them to complete two sentences:

1. A second edition of a core textbook should …

2. A second edition of an edited collection of research/discussion chapters should …

The most commonly occurring lexical items in my (admittedly tiny!) corpus of 524 words from seven colleagues were new (15), updated/up-to-date (7), change/d (6) and recent (4). Were these adjectives I as a reviewer familiar with the first editions could ascribe to these two books? Unfortunately, I would argue that I cannot. I hope the following review explains why I hold that view, whilst at the same time still acknowledging that Hyland 2019 is an excellent introduction to L2 writing, and Hyland and Hyland 2019 contains some interesting discussion of research in general and of some specific studies.

The disappointment is especially true for Hyland 2019. My colleagues’ completion of the first sentence above talked about updating research, discussion, literature, ‘new theoretical and methodological developments’, new ideas for teaching, filling in gaps. As I hope to show below, the book does not do any of these things. It updates the 2003 edition where necessary but is fundamentally the same book that introduced L2 writing to teachers around the globe in 2003. And, one could argue, why change a successful format? Many of the points made in Tribble’s (2005) review of the first edition in ELT Journal still hold true and much of his praise for individual chapters is still valid. The book provides an excellent starting point for teachers who want to ground their teaching in an understanding of theoretical viewpoints underlying current approaches.

Part of the book’s success for the novice teacher is that it covers a very wide range of topics, providing a general introduction to many areas in applied linguistics beyond the specifics of writing. The coverage of topics such as needs analysis, materials design and evaluation, tasks, and language testing remains excellent, with succinct introductions to those areas for any new teacher. In fact, it feels at times that these topics are introduced from their own perspective with writing being almost incidental (and referred to mainly through the examples). Does this matter? I don’t think it does, because the depth of discussion of writing elsewhere more than compensates and the examples used for these general topics—such as the table of ‘Commonly used writing tasks and their main focus’ (p. 113)—are very useful.

A change Hyland identifies in our field in the years since the first edition is a greater professionalization of English language teachers, including interest in research. Like the first edition, however, this book is presented as a no-background-needed introduction to teaching L2 writing for practising teachers and teacher trainees. It remains that. There is, arguably, no other book that covers all aspects of L2 writing in such accessible depth, and with so many suggestions for reflection and discussion embedded within the book.

The expectations of readers such as my colleagues are acknowledged in the preface, which states that ‘second language writing has changed considerably over 15 years and this edition attempts to bring things up to date’ (p. xiv). This is a big claim for what is, in effect, an updating of references and some improvements in/rearrangement of content. Chapters now have numbered subsections, the first of which answers a new opening fundamental question setting the scene for that specific chapter—e.g. ‘4.1 What are writing materials?’ (p. 64), introducing Chapter 4, ‘Texts and Materials in the Writing Class’. The subject and author indices have been merged into one, and UK spellings have replaced US ones. Additional content includes useful further readings and resources at the end of each chapter, and a helpful nine-page glossary of terms. This glossary, however, is uneven. Some important new key terms from other fields of applied linguistics such as ‘academic literacies’ and ‘assessment for/of/as learning’ are missing; Bereiter and Scardamalia’s (1987) knowledge-transforming model is here, but oddly its partner, knowledge-telling, is not; and the definitions of ‘qualitative’ and ‘quantitative’ (p. 276) have been switched.

In terms of content, most chapters have similar subsections (now helpfully numbered) and broadly similar, or identical, content. The book does include some updated examples, although golden oldies remain. Most of the changes do not bring content up-to-date; much of the text is identical to the original, in the same chapters, though rearranged in places in line with slightly revised subheadings (e.g. in Chapter 8 ‘Assessing Student Writing’). One notable exception is, as expected, Chapter 6, ‘New Technologies in Writing Instruction’. Happily, the helpful ‘reflection’ activities throughout, and the ‘discussion questions and activities’ at the end of each chapter, remain, often in their original form.

This overall replication of the first edition is a pity, because there are topics that could have been added and are missing: the major influences on the teaching of writing from the two areas where writing is most in demand: EAP (with its broadening of assessed genres) and ESP (especially professional writing); the move from study skills to academic literacy to academic literacies; in assessment, discussion of assessment for/as learning as well as assessment of learning (see Earl and Katz 2006). These ideas have come into L2 writing from elsewhere in education or applied linguistics and have had, or will have, significant impacts on how writing is taught.

I now turn to the book itself. Chapter 1 discusses what L2 writing is—the guiding concepts and the focuses of different writing approaches: language structures, text functions, creative expression, the writing process, content, and genre. It concludes with an outline of the position most informed writing teachers find themselves in, namely a synthesis of process, purpose, and context.

Chapter 2, ‘Second Language Writers and Teaching Contexts’, begins by acknowledging the enormous variation among L2 writers, before turning to cultural differences and variations in instructional contexts—adding a new, short section on ‘EFL/ESL and Migrant Teaching Contexts’. Mention of migrants is in one paragraph, and, although this topic is welcome (given the sad world developments since 2003), this is an example of the book’s overambitious reach and limited detail in places; there are also no references to work in this area that an interested reader could pursue (e.g. Capstick 2016). Chapter 3 remains an excellent overview of ‘Course Design and Lesson Planning’, followed logically by Chapter 4, ‘Texts and Materials in the Writing Class’. Chapter 5 then looks at ‘Tasks in the Writing Class’, including a useful discussion of integration of reading and writing tasks.

Chapter 6, ‘New Technologies in Writing Instruction’, as noted above, has been almost completely rewritten. Out are sections on ‘word-processing’ and ‘CALL’, and in are ‘digital writing’ (including a subsection on incorporating images) and a new section on ‘writing in new contexts’, which looks at collaborative writing, wikis and blogs, a discussion of social media in the writing class, and hyperlinking within the larger heading of ‘online writing’. There is also helpful advice on managing online learning, which is even more important after the two years we have just had. The chapter considers virtual learning environments and using the internet for content and for linguistic data (corpora still rule, as recommended in 2003—with the Web a massive free corpus). As also discussed in 2003, in addition the internet provides teachers and learners with a plethora of language advice and learning materials (e.g. online writing laboratories hosted by university language centres). There is a new section on similarity checking and the other affordances of software such as TurnItIn (e.g. monitoring participation), although the threat to teaching writing posed by translation software is not mentioned. Corpora—‘one of the most exciting applications of new technologies in the writing class’ in 2003 (p. 167)—is now, of course, presented as a useful resource teachers need to know about (but Hyland acknowledges many struggle to use). Sadly, the helpful 2003 appendix of ‘Some Useful Websites for Writing Teachers’ has been dropped from the new edition. Admittedly, several of the websites seem to have gone, and there is always a risk of broken links, but there are some golden oldies still out there which novice teachers could have been introduced to: Dave’s ESL café and the wonderful Purdue Online Writing Lab for academic writers, for example.

Chapter 7, ‘Responding to Student Feedback’, is very similar to the original, with the exception of two new areas: a couple of paragraphs on developing self-assessment skills, and a new section on ‘automated writing evaluation’. The older, somewhat revised, sections in this chapter remain a good introduction to many aspects of this important area. Teachers will, however, be disappointed to see the continuing focus on the ‘how’ of feedback with little consideration of the ‘what’: while there is a subsection on ‘responding to errors’, there is little discussion of how feedback can actually be given on drafts, content, genre, and on meeting readers’ expectations. There is also no discussion of feedforward, seen as increasingly important in L1 (especially higher education) circles (Walker 2013).

Chapter 8, ‘Assessing Student Writing’, has also changed little, and unfortunately ways of viewing assessment of and as learning, as mentioned above, are not considered. The sections on validity and reliability, designing assessment tasks, and approaches to scoring are examples of the general introduction to a topic (here, testing) noted above. The section on portfolios remains, and remains useful, but, disappointingly, there is no discussion of the affordances of online portfolios. The final section on looking at managing assessment rings the changes somewhat, but even there the discussion on dealing with anxiety was in the previous edition, so we are left with a few new paragraphs on managing (teachers’) workload and using technology. The summary and conclusions are broadly the same as they were in 2003—has so little really changed in writing assessment, or was Hyland ahead of his time then? I would argue it is a bit of both—Hyland 2003 was the up-to-date presentation of the most current issues in many areas of L2 writing; Hyland 2019 adds only very few new ideas to the previous edition.

Chapter 9, ‘Researching Writing and Writers’, is the most disappointing in its lack of a radical overhaul. I was really looking forward to some new ideas here, given Hyland’s prolific research career and his opening acknowledgement of the new professionalism of teachers and their increased interest in research. I was, therefore, dismayed to find so little had changed. The original sections are still useful, of course: looking at ‘Getting Started: Generating and Designing a Project’; ‘Collecting Data’ (there is a new, helpful distinction and division here between methods and methodologies); ‘Analysing Data’; and ‘Reporting Research’. But is there really nothing new to suggest in this chapter’s summary and conclusions, the discussion questions, and, finally, in the last two pages of the book, Appendix 9.2, ‘Some Topics and Issues for Writing Research’?

And that’s it; the book just stops. There is no conclusion, no looking to the future, no posing as-yet unanswered questions. I wonder if this would have been less important to me had I reviewed this book before the momentous changes of the last eighteen months, when our whole way of seeing the world, our colleagues, our students, and of working/teaching, has been turned upside down. In the light of that unprecedented and, in some pedagogic ways, exciting upheaval, a book that mirrors so closely its precursor from almost twenty years ago seems to be bordering on an anachronism. I’m not saying it is not good—it is a fantastic grounding in the teaching of L2 writing. It just isn’t very exciting anymore.

To sum up, little has actually changed in terms of Hyland’s discussion of teaching L2 writing since the first edition. The book also made me realize what a debt we owe to the writing teachers and researchers of the 1970s–1990s, as they set up this important discipline area of L2 writing. The groundwork for almost all the chapters here was done then. Or maybe Hyland has just ignored the major changes in thinking (such as academic literacies—e.g. Lea and Street 2006) that do not fit into this practical advice for novice teachers? For example, apart from the missed opportunities for specific updates mentioned here, there is no discussion of critical discourse analysis, or the gatekeeping role of anglophone writing demands, as discussed, for example, in Lillis and Curry (2010).

However, I am aware I am not the target audience here; and I would still recommend this book as a key reference to novice writing teachers and postgraduate students. This is an excellent book, in many ways, but mainly because the original was so good, rather than because of new, updated sections. It does not, therefore, do what my colleagues expect of a new edition of a core textbook. What happened here? Authors write, and Hyland is expert, prolific, and fluent, but I would argue that his publisher and editor had a responsibility to ensure this book did what they claim it does on the cover and in the introduction. As academic textbooks go, this will be an applied linguistics best seller; what a pity the opportunity to make an excellent book even better has been wasted.

Turning now to Hyland and Hyland, the blurb here claims this is an ‘up-to-date, accessible, yet authoritative introduction to feedback on second language writing’. As with Hyland 2019, the emphasis is on being an introduction to the field, so one would expect really classic, important research studies—both from the old edition and new ones. My colleagues’ expectations of a second edition of a collection of papers highlighted the need for an updated introduction and conclusion, suggesting there should be a focus on relevance to current developments and developing the research agenda initiated by the first edition. One colleague summarized this well: such a book should ‘review the field as a whole in order to (a) take out chapters that have been superseded or discredited, ensure that authors bring their chapters up to date and (b) ensure that additions to thinking are represented in new chapters’.

So how far does this book deliver on these expectations? The first edition included fourteen chapters in three sections: ‘Situating Feedback: Sociocultural Dimensions’ (section 1); ‘Shaping Feedback: Delivery and Focus Dimensions’ (section 2); and ‘Negotiating Feedback: Interpersonal and Interactional Dimensions’ (section 3). This new edition keeps these and adds a fourth, ‘Engaging with Feedback: Student Participation Dimensions’. The second edition retains five of the original chapters (including the introduction) and has ten new ones (so, fifteen in all). The authors/co-authors of chapters include many of the experts in L2 writing feedback (Bitchener, Ferris, Hu, Ken Hyland, Fiona Hyland, Storch, Tardy) and it is good to have their work presented in one volume.

Both editions target researchers and teachers, aiming to bridge the gap between the two, and noting that much of the research in journals does not find its way to teachers. With this in mind the editors claim that authors were asked to link research and practice. This was therefore very much at the forefront of my mind: does the book do what it claims and ‘go a long way towards answering the questions that researchers and teachers have been asking for some time’ (p. xiv) (such as ‘What shall I give feedback on?’). Do the chapters give ‘teachers and researchers a clear, complete, and current perspective on different issues on which to base their classroom practise or research into this fascinating and fundamental area’ (p. xiv)?

The book promises updated versions of retained chapters; similar to what we saw in the other book, for all except the introduction this means very minimal changes—the most we get here are a few updated references, some rewording, and in one case a change in terminology from ‘electronic written exchanges’, CMC, and ‘conferences’ to ‘forums’ in the chapter by Hewings and Coffin. Even where chapters are based on a research study, one could expect an updating of discussion of the significance of the study, and/or discussion of subsequent work building on it by others. If there is none, that rather begs the question of why this chapter was kept in the new edition. For example, Villamil and Guererro’s ‘Sociocultural Theory: A Framework for Understanding the Socio-cognitive Dimensions of Peer Feedback’ (chapter 2, which opens section 1) draws on a study from 1993. Readers may ask: is there no more important research since then on peer feedback to replace this? I think the editors should have provided a justification for including a study that is almost three decades old. The same is true of the editors’ own ‘Interpersonality and Teacher-Written Feedback’ (chapter 9), which is based on Fiona Hyland’s 1990s study of the feedback of two ESL teachers in New Zealand. This study was ground-breaking at the time and has been much referenced, so it fits in the golden oldie category—but I would argue that precisely because of that status this chapter should have included an update on research and thinking since 2006 in this crucial aspect of feedback. Not doing so will disappoint both researchers who need current thinking and teachers, who as Hyland 2019 tells us, ‘have realised the importance of research’ in a field that is ‘becoming more professionalised’ (p. xiii).

The fourth chapter in the ‘pull-through’ category is Tardy’s ‘Appropriating, Ownership, and Agency: Negotiating Teacher Feedback in Academic Settings’. There is a bit more updating of content here, mainly with regard to the literature surveyed, with the addition of six new references, including, importantly, discussion of Canagarajah’s post-2002 work (e.g. Canagarajah 2015). However, overall another opportunity has been missed to give a significant update of an important area.

The editors’ opening chapter has more updating than any of the four straight pull-through chapters discussed above, but is almost identical to its predecessor in discussion of historical context; thirteen years is a long time in the history of L2 writing, so there should have been more to say here. Four of the five key issues identified here are very similar to the original too. The chapter introduces the four dimensions, with a brief overview of each chapter, which is unsurprisingly identical to that in the 2006 edition for the pull-through chapters. The identical conclusion to 2006’s leads it to refer to ‘the three dimensions referred to above’ (p. 16), when we now have four—pity that this was not spotted at any stage.

One chapter that breaks this pattern of ‘same old’ in the new edition and shows what could (should?) have been done is Ferris and Kurzer’s ‘Does Error Feedback Help L2 Writers?’ (chapter 6, in section 2). This is a complete revision of Ferris 2006, which also had that wording as part of its title. True, it makes reference to the study that earlier chapter was based on, but only in passing. The chapter’s welcome focus, as its subtitle claims, is on the ‘latest evidence on the efficacy of written corrective feedback’, which it delivers.

Let us turn to the chapters that are completely new to this edition—how well do they earn their place? Some of these chapters may be more of a struggle than others for non-researchers. A chapter does not allow space for detailed introduction to or discussion of theory. For non-researchers to persist with such a chapter the pedagogic pay-off must be worth it. An excellent example of this is Hu’s contribution on ‘Culture and Peer Feedback’ (chapter 3). This addresses head-on the view that culture is an impediment for engagement in peer feedback among students of certain backgrounds, in this case Chinese. Hu approaches culture through the lens of three scales—macro, meso, and micro—and revisits three peer feedback studies he has been involved in through this lens. The points made are very useful for practising teachers in terms of working with students and peer feedback.

The four chapters in section 2 include Ferris and Kurzer’s, mentioned above. The other three are new. Bitchener (chapter 5) looks at ‘The Intersection between SLA and Feedback Research’. The focus is on written corrective feedback (WCF)—that is, accuracy-focused feedback and what it can contribute to L2 acquisition. This is an excellent overview, by a leading expert, of the research literature in this area since it began in the 1980s. For many writing teachers around the world WCF is the issue in L2 writing feedback: is WCF on language errors, which so many of us provide (in some cases exclusively—see Furneaux, Paran, and Fairfax 2007), worth doing? And if so, what kind of WCF: direct (error correction given), indirect (error indicated), or metalinguistic (error explained); focused (targeted) or unfocused (everything)? This chapter does not give simple answers, because research rarely does, but what it does do is provide a comprehensive review of research findings in this area, empowering teachers to consider the issue in an informed way and to make more informed choices. It also provides a useful framework and directions for researchers. This is exactly the kind of chapter this book is for, and it does everything that the book claims, and that my colleagues are looking for in a new edition.

Stevenson and Phakiti, in chapter 7, discuss computer-generated feedback, which they refer to as ‘automated writing evaluation’ (AWE), giving the background and current concomitant controversies. Present and future developments in techniques using ‘artificial intelligence, natural-language processing and latent-semantic analysis’ (p. 126) make this topic in many ways a holy grail for exhausted writing teachers drowning in scripts. Although forms of AWE began in the early days of computing, this is ‘still an emerging technology’ (p. 138); summative automated assessment currently requires human scoring too, and for formative feedback purposes it is seen as supplementary to, not a replacement for, teacher’s feedback. The chapter, whilst acknowledging these current limitations, points to current trends (such as incorporation in intelligent tutoring systems, and the use of AWE in large-scale teaching contexts, such as Massive Open Online Courses) and future developments. The chapter then looks at AWE with regard to ‘its scoring and feedback, its effects on writing and its integration into classroom writing instruction’ (p. 129)—all useful for teachers with an eye on this as a future tool, and for researchers looking for areas to explore. I thought this was an interesting chapter, but it does not cover the scope of Ware and Warschauer’s 2006 broader chapter on ‘Electronic Feedback and Second Language Writing’, which would have benefited from a Ferris and Kurzer-type update. Given that more ways of providing electronic feedback are available now than in 2006, teachers will be disappointed not to see this topic discussed in the book.

Storch looks at ‘Collaborative Writing as Peer Feedback’ in chapter 8. This raises a number of issues in terms of making connections between chapters in edited collections. The brief introduction to peer feedback here makes no reference to Hu’s chapter in this collection, which is a pity as Hu helpfully outlines some of the same issues in greater depth. Nor does it refer to the final chapter by Han and Warschauer, also on collaborative writing. The chapter swiftly moves to its focus: collaborative feedback as ‘the co-authoring of a text’ (p. 143)—in class and increasingly online. Theoretical underpinnings are mostly grounded in Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory of mind (also discussed in greater detail in chapter 2—another missed opportunity for cross-referencing). This is an excellent overview of the topic, with a solid grounding in the research, pointing out that such feedback can cover a range of aspects. The excerpts of feedback data from collaborative writing sessions in different studies (including Storch’s own), however, mostly focus on language, and it would have been interesting to see discussion of a wider range of topics. Storch makes a clear argument for the motivational advantages of collaborative writing over usual peer feedback activities in ‘the joint responsibility and ownership of the text’ (p. 153). Research related to pedagogic implications (such as grouping of peers for collaboration) is also summarized in a useful conclusion. Again, a nod to the pedagogic suggestions around peer feedback culture made by Hu in chapter 3 would have been an excellent addition.

Section 3, ‘Negotiating Feedback’, includes two old chapters (Hyland and Hyland, and Hewings and Coffin), and two new chapters, which focus on feedback in writing in areas that are almost certainly of greater interest to L2 researchers than teachers: Starfield’s chapter 11, ‘Supervisory Feedback: Building Writing Scaffolds with Doctoral Students’ and Paltridge’s Chapter 12, ‘Reviewers’ Feedback on Second-Language Writers’ Submissions to Academic Journals’. Both are excellent overviews by major researchers in these specific areas. Any PhD supervisor will learn from Starfield’s summary of what is known about doctoral written feedback, a little-researched area but with some interesting insights already appearing with regard to student and supervisor perspectives, as well as in joint-authoring contexts.

Paltridge looks at a topic of growing interest, especially for researchers writing in English as a second language. He discusses the process of peer review in this context, and then draws on article reports from reviews for one journal (ESPJ): twenty-nine reviewers’ reports on successful ‘non-native’ submissions and fifteen on successful ‘native’ speakers’. Any first-time article author should read this chapter, if only for the insights it gives into the process. Other researchers will find the study interesting in its focus on stance, as reflected in evaluative language, and overview of other studies in this area.

Section 4, ‘Engaging with Feedback’, is new to this edition, with three chapters. The focus here is on student participation. This is an important aspect of feedback and I had high hopes of encountering new classics here, especially given the names of authors. Chapter 13, by Han and Fiona Hyland, is titled ‘Learner Engagement with Written Feedback: A Sociocultural Perspective’. The chapter presents case studies of two university students studying English in China. In effect, it builds (without mentioning either) on Bitchener’s and Villamil and Guerrero’s earlier chapters. Ferris and Kurzer’s chapter is referred to, however—but this is the only cross-reference to another chapter I noticed throughout the book. Interestingly, there is a quote here (p. 250) from ‘Hyland and Hyland 2006b, p. 212’, when that is the article pulled through to this 2019 edition. This is a shame, as such referencing would have contributed to making this a collection, as opposed to a set of unconnected articles such as you might find in a journal.

Ken Hyland contributes Chapter 14, which is an article from a journal; he acknowledges this and presents it as a modified version of Hyland (2013). The title here (‘What Messages Do Students Take from Teacher Feedback?’) is different from the article’s, but the only other change is the addition of five new references. The chapter describes an interview study of twenty-four Hong Kong university students’ experiences of feedback in English language and a range of discipline areas, with some excellent student quotes. It was an interesting study in 2013, but it is disappointing that as an expert on L2 writing Hyland has nothing more recent to share in the area of feedback, and does not see the need to update this article beyond a handful of references. Thinking of my own university in the United Kingdom, feedback on writing has become much more of a focus in the disciplines than it was eight years ago. Given Hong Kong’s investment in higher education (Postiglione 2018), I imagine that could be the same there, and therefore a more recent study might (or might not!) have revealed different findings from those presented here of almost exclusively summative feedback in the disciplines that students saw as ‘perfunctory, delayed and unrelated to their individual needs’ (p. 281).

The last chapter, 15, ‘Students Initiating Feedback: The Potential of Social Media’ by Yim and Warschauer, looks at using Google Docs for ‘dual mode’ collaboration with face-to-face interaction around online group writing on individual laptops. The writers are American eighth-grade pupils in a mainstream US classroom—no age range given, but Google tells me this means thirteen- to fourteen-year-olds. The chapter focuses on one group; its four group members comprised two pupils who spoke Korean or Tagalog at home, and two who were ‘generation 1.5 students’ (i.e. with no L1 literacy—for a useful definition see De Anza College n.d.) of Korean background. The latter two took on expert roles in guiding their more novice group members. Google Docs (widely used in academic writing instruction) is presented as a social media platform as it ‘mirrors the central characteristics of digital writing practices in social media, including instant communication, interconnection, and decentralized access’ (p. 287)—although here the first two of these were done orally because the pupils were in class together. The focus is on exploring how synchronous feedback can be incorporated into formal academic writing—so while this use of Google Docs is technically an example of social media use, it could be argued that the media aspect is the use of an online tool, with the social being done face-to-face.

The chapter presents a very well-conducted study, providing, for example, a useful research design framework for others. However, I suspect the context is too far removed from that of most L2 writing teachers for them to see its applicability to their teaching. In particular, teachers might question how far the affordances of this highly specific expert–novice context would transfer to other, more typical L2 writing classrooms. For them Storch’s chapter 8 would be a more useful introduction to collaborative peer writing.

So, we have two new studies and one old one presented in this section. To return to the question at the start of the discussion of this book: have they earned their place? Are they classics—either already or in the making? The reader can make up their own mind on this issue. However, my feeling is that, while Hyland 2013 may be, the other two are not sufficiently of ground-breaking relevance to have earned their place here. Whilst it is great, and entirely appropriate, to see supervisors publishing with their doctoral students (as is the case with chapters 13 and 15), surely such studies should be presented in one of the specialist journals we have for applied linguistics/writing, rather than in a specialist collection ‘written by leading experts’ (cover)?

Like Hyland 2019, this book also has no conclusion, disappointing both my and my colleagues’ expectations of a good new edition of a research collection. I am also disappointed that the lack of concern about making the edited book a ‘true’ collection means it is a series of unconnected chapters, without even the most basic level of cross-referencing across chapters.

So, where does this all leave me in reviewing these two books? I am glad to see the publisher thinks there is still a market for such volumes—and I agree. However, I do not think these new editions deliver either what they promise in terms of currency or what readers might expect. They are too close to their first editions to provide the updated and new text my colleagues identified as necessary in a second edition. These are, in the end, two interesting and important but flawed books. Those with an interest in L2 writing, especially novice writing teachers, should begin their L2 writing teaching journey with Hyland 2019, but should also search for up-to-date, ‘state-of-the-art’ updates elsewhere. Researchers in feedback on L2 writing, especially those starting out, such as doctoral students, should read through Hyland and Hyland 2019 and focus on chapters that catch their eye. I would recommend that teachers selectively read the chapters I have highlighted as excellent above (i.e. Bitchener; Ferris and Kurzer; Hu; Stevenson and Phakiti; Storch), and probably pass on the others, as not of direct use to them.

And finally: publishers should be clear about what they expect of new editions and then should deliver what they promise. If they do not do this, readers (and the libraries which purchase these books) will become increasingly sceptical of the relevance of second editions.

The reviewer

Clare  Furneaux has a background in English language teaching in schools and universities in Asia and Britain, and is currently a Professor of Applied Linguistics in the Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics, University of Reading, UK, where she is also a Teaching and Learning Dean. She supervises and conducts research into academic writing. She is a Principal Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and a UK National Teaching Fellow.

References