The question of what constitutes effective feedback for Higher Education students on L2 writing courses has been the subject of extensive discussion and debate. Some studies consider feedback the cornerstone for students to develop their writing skills and access their target communities. In contrast, other studies criticize feedback, stating that it is inefficient, ineffective, and counter-productive. Despite a wealth of studies investigating the strategies and value of feedback, there is a lack of research into the clarity, consistency, and accuracy of peer feedback compared to teacher feedback.  Moreover, few studies have addressed linguistic variations between peer and teacher feedback comments and whether these comments are complementary or contradictory for students.

This article discusses the findings of a small-scale qualitative study analysing peer and teacher feedback in a writing course for 20 medical doctoral researchers. The aims of the study were (i) to compare the clarity, accuracy, and linguistic variations of peer versus teacher feedback,  and (ii) to consider approaches for scaffolding peer feedback to complement teacher feedback.