Effects of Combined Peer-Teacher Feedback on Second Language Writing Development

Demirel, Elif; Enginarlar, Hüsnü

doi:10.16986/huje.2016015701

Cited by 7 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Working with seven volunteer students, she found that self-annotation writing was an effective and enjoyable tool to use, with benefits for awareness-raising and learner autonomy. Finally, Demirel & Enginarlar's (2016) large-scale experimental study compared the effect of combined peer and teacher feedback with exclusively teacher provided feedback on students' L2 writing development. Results revealed no significant differences between the two groups either in the number of revisions made in students' drafts or in students' success (as measured by grades given) on the written works, This finding could be seen as a rebuke to the understanding that Turkish students tend to prefer teacher feedback.…”

Section: Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selected research in applied linguistics and English language teaching in Turkey: 2010–2016

Aydınlı¹,

Ortaçtepe²

2018

Lang. Teach.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this state-of-the-art review, we aim to build on Alptekin & Tatar's (2011) article covering research conducted in Turkey between 2005 and 2009, and survey published research in 31 Turkey-based journals between 2010 and 2016. As the second review paper on Turkey's English language teaching (ELT) agenda, our goal is twofold: first, to introduce the research of those researchers whose high-quality, Turkey-based work may not be known outside Turkish academia; and second, to point to recent scholarly developments that have occurred in Turkey and set these in the context of recent shifts in language teaching research worldwide. This paper presents approximately 140 articles that appeared in locally published peer-reviewed academic journals, and clearly demonstrates that Turkey as an English as a foreign language (EFL) context presents a vibrant research scene in language teaching. The reviewed works cover a wide spectrum of timely topics (e.g., computer-assisted language learning (CALL), the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages (EPOSTL), language assessment, affective factors), and present findings that have much to contribute to current discussions in the field. Nevertheless, our review also reveals some concerning trends, including an almost exclusive emphasis on practical concerns over conceptual development; shortcomings in locating research within broader disciplinary debates; and few efforts to bring together and build on local research in a manner that might allow for original and creative influences on the broader discipline. It is therefore the further aim of this article to spark debates on these issues among Turkish scholars and contribute to the strengthening of the local disciplinary community.

show abstract

Section: Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selected research in applied linguistics and English language teaching in Turkey: 2010–2016

Aydınlı¹,

Ortaçtepe²

2018

Lang. Teach.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is generally accepted that students' reviewing peers' writing makes them cognizant of the assessment criteria and the requirements of the writing, and in the long run helps them become more self-reliant writers who have the skill to self-edit and revise their writing Rollinson, 2005). However, feedback from various sources makes a positive contribution to their approach to writing by transforming the writing class from being an extension of a grammar course where language structures are practiced to a platform where they share, discuss and develop their ideas and motivates them to make revisions to improve their writing skills (Demirel & Enginarlar, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, a combined use of teacher-and peerfeedback was also found to be welcomed by students in L2/FL settings (Demirel & Enginarlar, 2016;Maarof et al, 2011). In particular, Maarof et al (2011) These two forms of feedback should be therefore best seen as complementary (Zamel, 1985), and combining them systematically could thus provide students additional benefits, such as decreasing writing anxiety, improving writing ability and being more confident in their abilities to make decisions about their own writing and revision choices (Paulus, 1999).…”

Section: Combined Peer-teacher Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, Maarof et al (2011) These two forms of feedback should be therefore best seen as complementary (Zamel, 1985), and combining them systematically could thus provide students additional benefits, such as decreasing writing anxiety, improving writing ability and being more confident in their abilities to make decisions about their own writing and revision choices (Paulus, 1999). Furthermore, Demirel and Enginarlar (2016) also found that the combined peer-teacher feedback model helped students make useful revision in form, content and organization, resulting in an increase in their writing scores.…”

Section: Combined Peer-teacher Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Case Study of Combined Peer-Teacher Feedback on Paragraph Writing at a University in Thailand

Nguyen

2017

Indonesian J. Appl. Linguist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Writing in English is challenging for ESL writers, so feedback is crucial in assisting them. Although several studies have been conducted on the effectiveness of peer and teacher-feedback in ESL writing, studies on the combined peer-teacher feedback model tend to be scarce. This study thus reported on the combined feedback model in two paragraph-writing classes of sixty students at a university in Thailand where English is taught as a foreign language, students are reported to be passive in class activities and most writing programs are still taught using the traditional method. Students' peer comments (both valid and invalid ones), their revisions based on both their peers' and teacher's feedback (correct and incorrect revisions) and their grades on each paragraph were recorded, and a five-point Likert scale survey and a focus group interview were conducted. The findings indicated its success in terms of students' positive attitudes towards this feedback model, the usefulness of peer comments, high percentages of feedback incorporations and the high overall writing scores. This paper is thus expected to shed some light on how Thai university students with their passive style of learning English positively react to this interactive activity and partly reflect how in-service teachers adjust feedback strategies in their actual teaching situations.

show abstract

“…Research on the effects of conference feedback has been a vital area (Anast-May et al, 2011;Hyland & Hyland, 2006), as it is undertaken with a "one-on-one" dialogue (Al Noursi, 2014), or a discussion between teacher and students to improve a piece of writing (Boggs, 2019;Hyland & Hyland, 2006). Although several researchers, for example Demirel and Enginarlar (2016), Ho et al (2020), Huisman et al (2019), Klimova (2015), Angel et al (2017), Nurie (2020), Sotoudehnama and Pilehvari (2016), and Yamalee and Tangkiengsirisin (2019) argued that any kinds of feedback helps students become better writers in class and beyond, conference feedback has a distinct feature, as a process-oriented technique, for enhancing students' writing abilities to improve language accuracy and meaning in the written texts (Atai & Alipour, 2012;Chandler, 2003;Ekmekci, 2015;Lerner, 2005;Sotoudehnama & Pilehvari, 2016). In addition, this feedback focuses not only on teacher's feedback but also on teacher-student interactions along a writing process (Eckstein, 2013;Lerner, 2005) which helps develop students' writing skills and speaking abilities (Hyland & Hyland, 2006;Nosratinia & Nikpanjeh, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating conference feedback in Cambodian EFL class: students’ writing accuracy improvement and their views of the feedback

Chan

2021

J. Eng. Foreign. Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research of conference feedback on EFL students' writing accuracy is a vital issue; however, it has never been conducted in Cambodia. This study was carried out to fill this void by investigating conference feedback to improve students' writing accuracy in four categories: semantic, grammatical, mechanic, and lexical features. It also explored the students' perceptions of the feedback in the context of EFL writing class. One class, with twelve students, from 18 to 25 years of age, with a ratio of 8:4 women: men, was purposively chosen for the study which was designed in two cycles, each with eight steps. Data were collected from the writing tests, writing assignments, students' self-evaluation survey, and focus-group discussions. Findings revealed that conference feedback had improved students' writing skills by allowing them to use correct grammar and expressions. The feedback has also developed students' engagement in the writing process. It also proposed a pedagogical implication that effective feedback through a conference approach depends to a great extent on the knowledge and experience of the teacher, classroom resources, and interactions between the teacher and the student.

show abstract

Effects of Combined Peer-Teacher Feedback on Second Language Writing Development

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

Selected research in applied linguistics and English language teaching in Turkey: 2010–2016

Selected research in applied linguistics and English language teaching in Turkey: 2010–2016

A Case Study of Combined Peer-Teacher Feedback on Paragraph Writing at a University in Thailand

Investigating conference feedback in Cambodian EFL class: students’ writing accuracy improvement and their views of the feedback

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About