随着课程改革的推进，写作教学在高中英语教学中占得比重越来越大,广大教师在英语作文教学中投入的精力也越来越多。但传统的英语习作评改模式一般为教师全批全改。而我国基本是大班教学，这就使得教师有限的时间和精力与学生习作评改的无限需求之间的矛盾变得越来越严重。同时，这种传统的评改方式忽视了学生在评价中的主体作用，无法深入了解学生在写作过程中的思维、情感和认识，不能更好提高学生的写作能力。过程写作是流行于西方教育系统写作课程的一种教学法。学生对想要表达的内容在构思、写、修改、再写、再修改的过程中从模糊不完整逐渐变为清晰和充实。它越来越受到我国教师的青睐，在英语写作课堂上教师开始鼓励学生对一篇文章进行多稿写作。但对于多稿的批改反馈，谁来进行、何时进行及怎样进行意见不一。本实验试图验证教师反馈、同伴反馈和自我修改相结合的反馈形式在高中英语多稿写作课堂上是一种有效的评价方式。本研究采用对比实验研究，为期半学期。被试是来自河北某市一个中学高三年级两个理科班的八十二名学生。两个班在作文课上均进行多稿写作，但所采用的反馈形式不同。在四十五分钟的写作课中，教师在控制班对学生多稿写作采用传统教师评价，而在实验班采用自我修改、同伴反馈和教师反馈相结合的评价。在实验进行中，教师在两个班采样了三次写作成绩。数据采集方法包括作文测试、问卷调查、课堂观察、课下访谈等，并采用SPSS中的t-test进行数据统计。实验结果表明多种反馈整合在高中英语多稿写作课中提高了学生的写作能力。实验后两个教学班的学生的英语成绩都有所提高，但实验班学生比控制班学生的写作成绩提高的更快，特别是在语言表达、写作内容和写作技巧三个方面。而控制班学生在结构和连贯性方面要好于实验班学生。此外，问卷调查的对比分析表明学生对多稿写作课堂采用多种评价的方式持肯定态度。教师反馈、同伴反馈和自我修改相结合的反馈形式在高中英语多稿写作课堂上的应用提高了学生的写作兴趣和信心，增强了学生的合作意识和自学能力，同时还减轻了教师的批改负担，真正发挥了学生的主体地位。希望本研究的发现能对中学英语写作教学有所启发。

With the reformation of curriculum, in English teaching, writing teaching has become more and more important. However, teaching English writing has also been found to be one of the most difficult challenges for the majority of senior high school English teachers. It is urgent and necessary to find out a better way to solve the conflict between reducing teachers’ heavy burden in correcting students’ compositions and developing students’ independence and writing ability. In China more and more teachers’ attention is attracted by the process-based writing approach, which can motivate the students to write and make the students benefit from the process of writing. However, there are some heated debates on who should give feedback, when and how to give feedback during the process of writing, which fail to come to an agreement.The present study aims to investigate the effect of mixed revision in multiple-draft writing class in senior high school. The study used comparative design, which lasted one semester. The participants were 82 third-year senior high school students from two regular classes in a senior high school in Hebei province. In the multiple-draft writing class, the two classes had the same writing tasks under the same learning environment but received different feedback. The control class was given traditional teacher feedback though the whole class, while the experimental class received teacher feedback, peer feedback and self-correction at different stages of process writing. During the experiment, three writing scores were collected and analyzed. In addition, questionnaires were conducted to investigate the students’ perception towards mixed revision in multiple-draft writing.The finding shows the effectiveness of mixed revision in multiple-draft writing class in senior high school. After the experiment, the participants in two classes have enhanced their writing abilities. However, the students in the experimental class performed significantly better in their writing, especially in the aspects of language expression, content and mechanics. The students in the control class did well in structure and coherence. Besides, the participants in the experimental class positively appreciated mixed revision, and showed more interest and confidence to writing after the experiment. Meanwhile, they were aware of their responsibility in leaning, and enjoyed the process of cooperation.It’s hoped that some practical approaches and some pedagogical implications can be provided for future writing teaching in senior high school.