Two Peer Review Modes: Examining Students’ Commenting Patterns, Revisions, and Attitudes in Developing Academic Writing Skills

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Arts, Communications and Social Sciences, University Canada West, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada mostafa.nazari@ucanwest.ca

2 M.Ed. Faculty, University Access Program, University Canada West, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada jeff.mccarville@ucanwest.caUniversity Canada West

Abstract

This study examines how different two modes of face-to-face and mobile-mediated peer review (FFPR versus MMPR) affect the commenting patterns based on the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) assessment criteria and actual revisions among L2 academic writers. Moreover, the students’ attitudes towards peer review will be explored to demonstrate how they mediate between the comments received from their peers and subsequent revisions which might result in writing development. A 16-session IELTS academic writing course was held in a private university in Vancouver, Canada and seventy-two English for Academic Purpose (EAP) students participated to exchange peer comments in the classroom and in a mobile application called Telegram. In order to conceptualize the peer comments in both groups, the IELTS academic writing assessment criteria were used. The results indicated that the MMPR groups generated significantly more comments with more revision-oriented responses and actual revisions. In addition, the MMPR groups’ notes were mainly in terms of lexical resources and grammatical range and accuracy, whereas the FFPR groups centered their topics on task achievement and coherence and cohesion. Finally, based on the results, not only both FFPR and MMPR students showed positive attitudes toward peer review sessions at the end but their negative attitudes decreased. Generally, MMPR students showed more positive attitudes, yet the difference was not significant.

Keywords

References

Aghajani, M., & Zoghipour, M. (2018). The comparative effect of online self-correction, peer-correction, and teacher correction in descriptive writing tasks on intermediate EFL learners’ grammar knowledge. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 7(3), 14–22. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.3p.14.
Alderson, J. C., & Huhta, A. (2005). The development of a suite of computer-based diagnostic tests based on the Common European Framework. Language Testing, 22, 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt310oa
Andujar, A. (2016). Benefits of mobile instant messaging to develop ESL writing. System, 62, 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.07.004
Arnold, N., Ducate, L., & Kost, C. (2012). Collaboration or cooperation? Analyzing group dynamics and revision process in wikis. CALICO Journal, 29(3), 431–448. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.29.3.431-448
Bikowski, D., & Vithanage, R. (2016). Effects of web-based collaborative writing on individual L2 writing development. Language Learning & Technology, 20, 79–99. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44457
Bradley, L. (2014). Peer-reviewing in an intercultural wiki environment: Student interaction and reflections. Computers and Composition, 34, 80–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2014.09.008
Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the conversation of ‘mankind’. College English, 46, 635–652. https://doi.org/10.2307/376924
Burston, J. (2015). Twenty years of MALL project implementation: A meta-analysis of learning outcomes. ReCALL, 27, 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000159
Chang, C. F. (2012). Peer review via three modes in an EFL writing course. Computers and Composition, 29, 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2012.01.001
Chen, H. C., Pisoni, G., & Gijlers, H. (2020). An exploratory study into graduate students’ attitudes towards peer assessment. In International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (pp. 310-325). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68198-2_30.
Choi, J. W. C. (2007). The role of online collaboration in promoting ESL writing (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Leicester, United Kingdom.
Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of peer e-feedback on Turkish EFL students’ writing performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.46.1.c
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). Routledge Falmer.
Ducate, L., Anderson, L., & Moreno, N. (2011). Wading through the world of wikis: An analysis of three wiki projects. Foreign Language Annals, 44(3), 495–524. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2011.01144.x.
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning and Technology, 14(3), 51–71. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44226
Gass, S. (2003). Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224–255). Blackwell.
Guardado, M., & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 443–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2007.03.002
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. Gregg & E. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 3–30). Erlbaum.
Ho, M. C. (2015). The effects of face-to-face and computer-mediated peer review on EFL writers’ comments and revisions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.495
Ho, M. C., & Savignon, S. J. (2007). Face-to-face and computer-mediated peer review in EFL writing. CALICO Journal, 24(2), 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v24i2.269-290
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge University Press.
Jurkowski, S. (2018). Do question prompts support students in working with peer feedback? International Journal of Educational Research, 92, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.09.004
Kaufman, J. H., & Schunn, V. (2011). Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6
Lam, R. (2010). A peer review training workshop: Coaching students to give and evaluate peer feedback. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 114–127. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v27i2.1052.
Lee, L. (2010). Exploring wiki-mediated collaborative writing: A case study in an elementary Spanish course. CALICO Journal, 27(2), 260–276. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.27.2.260-276
Li, M., & Kim, D. (2016). One wiki, two groups: Dynamic interactions across ESL collaborative writing tasks. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.002.
Li, M., & Zhu, W. (2013). Patterns of computer-mediated interaction in small writing groups using wikis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 62–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.631142
Liou, H. C., & Peng, Z. Y. (2009). Training effects on computer-mediated peer review. System, 37, 514–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.01.005
Liu, J., & Hansen, J. (2005). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. University of Michigan Press.
Liu, J., & Sadler, R.W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 193–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00025-0(03
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (Eds.). (2012). Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide. Wiley Blackwell Publication.
Miller, L. (2016). Collaborative script writing for a digital media project. Writing and Pedagogy, 8(1), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v8i1.27593.
Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.01.003
Neumann, K. L., & Kopcha, T. J. (2019). Using Google Docs for peer-then-teacher review on middle school students’ writing. Computers and Composition, 54, 102524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2019.102524
Ngaleka, A., & Uys, W. (2013). M-learning with WhatsApp: A conversation analysis. In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning. Academic Conferences International Limited. http://search.proquest.com/openview/d5bebb577d879e5cfeec5c635e0a8924/1?pq-origsite=gscholar
Pritchard, R. J., & Morrow, D. (2017). Comparison of online and face-to-face peer review of writing. Computers and Composition, 46, 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2017.09.006.
Rouhshad, A., Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2016). The nature of negotiations in face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication in pair interactions. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 514–534. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815584455
Samaie, M., Mansouri Nejad, A., & Qaracholloo, M. (2018). An inquiry into the efficiency of WhatsApp for self‐ and peer‐assessments of oral language proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12519
Shang, H. (2017). An exploration of asynchronous and synchronous feedback modes in EFL writing. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(3), 496–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9154-0
Soria, S., Gutiérrez-Colón, M., & Frumuselu, A. D. (2020). Feedback and mobile instant messaging: Using WhatsApp as a feedback tool in EFL. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 797-812. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13151a
Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008.
Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2017). Is mobile instant messaging (MIM) useful in education? Examining its technological, pedagogical, and social affordances. Educational Research Review, 21, 85–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.05.001.
van den Bos, A. H., & Tan, E. (2019). Effects of anonymity on online peer review in second-language writing. Computers and Education, 142, 103638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103638
Van der Pol, J., Van den Berg, B. A. M., Admiraal, W. F., & Simons, P. R. J. (2008). The nature, reception, and use of online peer feedback in higher education. Computers and Education, 51(4), 1804–1817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.001
Vo, T. T. M. (2022). EFL students’ attitudes towards teacher correction and peer correction in writing skills. International Journal of Language Instruction, 1(1), 155-173. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijli.221113
Winet, D. (2016). Mobile instant messaging in the ESL writing class. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 20(3), 1–6.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 March 2023
  • Revise Date: 31 July 2023
  • Accept Date: 14 June 2023
  • First Publish Date: 14 June 2023
  • Publish Date: 01 December 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics