Abstract
In this study, I use qualitative research methods—semi-structured interviews and
artifact analysis—to analyze the perceived commentary roles and actual commentary
practices of five teaching assistants at my university. My study reveals two categories of
TA commentary roles and practices: congruence and misrecognition. Teaching assistants demonstrate congruence between their perceived roles and actual practices when they do what they say they do when commenting on students’ texts. Teaching assistants demonstrate a misrecognition between their perceived roles and actual practices when they say they do one thing but they do another when commenting on texts. This research study reveals that as inexperienced teachers, TAs should be exposed to direct, individual specific research on commentary roles and practices because the TAs are not cognizant of their own congruence or misrecognition.
