The Effects of Peer Feedback on the Essay Writing Performances of EFL Students
AbstractThe aim of this study is to find out the effects of peer feedback on EFL students’ written performances in essay writing. For this end, this experimental study was conducted with a group of students studying at the English preparatory school of a state university in Turkey during the 2017-2018 academic year. Students received feedback from their peers for the four different essay tasks for which they produced a first draft and a second draft during the course of eight weeks. Students were also administered a written pre-test and post-test. The number of correct revisions in second drafts was calculated with by using Conrad and Goldstein’s (1999) taxonomy. The quantitative data coming from pre-test and post-test were analysed statistically with SPSS by conducting paired samples t-test. The results showed that peer feedback helped students write 69% of the feedback points provided by their peers correctly. Also, the written test results indicated a statistically significant difference between the pre-test and post-test. In the light of these findings, it can be concluded that peer feedback can be an effective tool in improving students’ correct revisions in second drafts and it may help EFL learners perform better in a written post-test.
Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215-241.
Berggren, J. (2015). Learning from giving feedback: A study of secondary-level students. ELT Journal, 69(1), 58-70. doi:10.1093/elt/ccu036.
Chang, C. Y. (2015). Teacher modeling on EFL reviewers’ audience-aware feedback and affectivity in L2 peer review. Assessing Writing, 25, 2-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.04.001.
Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edition). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
Conrad, S. M., & Goldstein, L. M. (1999). ESL student revision after teacher-written comments: Text, contexts, and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 82(2), 147-179.
Demirel, E. T. (2009). An investigation of a complementary feedback model for L2 writing: Peer and teacher feedback versus teacher feedback. Doctoral Dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Diab, N. M. (2010). Effects of peer- versus self-editing on students’ revision of language errors in revised drafts. System, 38, 85-95. doi:10.1016/j.system.2009.12.008.
Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erbaum Associates.
Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2005). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erbaum Associates.
Hansen, J. G., & Liu, J. (2005). Guiding principles for effective peer response. ELT Journal, 59(1), 31-38. doi: 10.1093/elt/cci004.
Hu, G. (2005). Training Chinese ESL student writers for effective peer review. Asian Englishes, 8(2), 64-76. doi: 10.1080/13488678.2005.10801167.
Hu, G., & Lam, S. T. E. (2010). Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy: exploring peer review in a second language class. Instructional Science, 38(4), 371-394. doi: 10.1007/s11251 -008-9086-1.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing: An introduction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 1-20). New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Jacobs, G. M., Curtis, A., Braine, G., & Huang, S. (1998). Feedback on student writing: Taking the middle path. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 307-318.
Lam, R. (2010). A peer review training workshop: Coaching students to give and evaluate peer feedback. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 114-127.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30-43. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002.
Mangelsdorf, K., & Schlumberger, A. (1992). ESL students response stances in a peer review task. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), 235-254.
Mendonça, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), 745-769.
Miao, Y., Badger, R., & Zhen, Y. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179-200.
Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33, 293-308. doi:10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003.
Min, H. T (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118-141. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2006.01.003.
Pearce, J., Mulder, R., & Baik, C. (2009). Involving students in peer review: Case studies and practical strategies for university teaching. Center for the Study of Higher Education The University of Melbourne. Retrieved from https://melbournecshe.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/1761518/Student_Peer_Review.pdf.
Rahimi, M. (2013). Is training student reviewers worth its while? A study of how training influences the quality of students’ feedback and writing. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 67-89. doi: 10.1177/1362168812459151.
Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 229-258.
Ruegg, R. (2015). The relative effects of peer and teacher feedback on improvement in EFL students’ writing ability. Linguistics and Education, 29, 73-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2014.12.001.
Steendam, E. V., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., & Bergh, H. V. D. (2010). The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction, 20, 316-327. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.009.
Susser, B. (1994). Process approach in ESL/EFL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 31-47.
Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170.
Villamil, O. S., & DeGuerrero, M. C. M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 51-75.
Villamil, O. S., & DeGuerrero, M. C. M. (1998). Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 491-514.
Wang, W. (2014). Students’ perceptions of rubric-referenced peer feedback on EFL writing: A longitudinal inquiry. Assessing Writing, 19, 80-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.008.
Zamel, V. (1976). Teaching composition in the ESL classroom: What we can learn from research in the teaching of English. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 67-76.
Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 16(2), 195-209.
Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing, 15, 3-17. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002.
Zhao, H. (2014). Investigating teacher-supported peer assessment for EFL writing. ELT Journal, 68(2), 155-168. doi:10.1093/elt/cct068.
Zhu, W. (1995). Effects of training for peer response on students’ comments and interaction.
Written Communication, 12, 492-528.
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.
Copyrights for articles published in International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction are retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the journal. The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.