Peer and Self Editing Strategies to Improve Students’ Writing Skill

Winarto, Agus Edi

doi:10.30762/jeels.v5i1.71

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies explored the impact of peer and self-editing on writing. Abadikhah and Yasami (2014), Prabasiwi and Warsono (2017), and Winarto (2018) examined the effect of peer and self-editing strategies on learners' writing skills. All the aforementioned studies confirmed a positive impact of both the editing strategies on linguistic accuracy as well as writing performance.…”

Section: Peer Editing and Self-editingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of automated writing evaluation (AWE) on EFL learners’ peer and self-editing

Al-Inbari

Al-Wasy

2022

Educ Inf Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) is one of the machine techniques used for assessing learners’ writing. Recently, this technique has been widely implemented for improving learners’ editing strategies. Several studies have been conducted to compare self-editing with peer editing. However, only a few studies have compared automated peer and self-editing. To fill this research gap, the present study implements AWE software, WRITER, for peer and self-editing. For this purpose, a pre-post quasi-experimental research design with convenience sampling is done for automated and non-automated editing of cause-effect essay writing. Arab, EFL learners of English, 44 in number, have been assigned to four groups: two peer and self-editing control groups and two automated peer and self-editing experimental groups. There is a triangulation of the quasi-experimental design with qualitative data from retrospective notes and questionnaire responses of the participants during and after automated editing. The quantitative data have been analyzed using non-parametric tests. The qualitative data have undergone thematic and content analysis. The results reveal that the AWE software has positively affected both the peer and self-editing experimental groups. However, no significant difference is detected between them. The analysis of the qualitative data reflects participants’ positive evaluation of both the software and the automated peer and self-editing experience.

show abstract

Section: Peer Editing and Self-editingmentioning

confidence: 99%