Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classrooms

Liu, Jun; Edwards, Jette G. Hansen

doi:10.3998/mpub.8952

Cited by 221 publications

(220 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

203

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings indicated that online peer feedback activity can be beneficial at different levels. At the educational level, the participants "pool their resources" (Bruffee, 1984, 644) to do the tasks more easily; in other words, sharing the information is just some clicks away (Liu & Hansen, 2002;Zheng, 2012). At the psychological level, online asynchronous peer feedback is of its own stress-free atmosphere, which facilitate the exchange of comments and consequently the extension of learners' interlanguage (RouxRodriguez, 2003;Ware & Warschauer, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study is of significance as it probes into the effect of CMC on EFL learners' attitudes towards and perceptions of written peer feedback in the traditional educational system of Iran; the importance of context in peer feedback is highlighted by Rahimi (2013), Liu and Hansen (2002), and Hyland and Hyland (2006) who believe that since peer feedback is a social action, unique features of factors involved (people, materials, medium, etc.) can affect the dynamics of peer response.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efl Learners' Attitudes and Perceptions of Online and Conventional Peer Written Feedback: A Tertiary Level Experience

Hoomanfard

2017

MJLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efl Learners' Attitudes and Perceptions of Online and Conventional Peer Written Feedback: A Tertiary Level Experience

Hoomanfard

2017

MJLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The method has been used extensively in various fields (Turner & Pérez-Quiñones, 2009;Falchikov & Goldfinch 2000;Liu & Hansen 2002;Dossin 2003;Carlson & Berry 2005;Anewalt 2005;Hundhausen et al 2009;Turner, Pérez-Quiñones, Edwards, & Chase, 2010;Liou & Peng, 2009;Goldin & Ashley, 2011;Gehringer, Ehresman, Conger, & Wagle, 2007), having a long history in writing instruction and relevant courses at the college level (DiPardo & Freedman, 1988;Haswell, 2005;Cho & MacArthur, 2010).…”

Section: Peer Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to improve the peer review method: Free-selection vs assigned-pair protocol evaluated in a computer networking course

Papadopoulos

Λάγκας

Demetriadis

2012

Computers & Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides field research evidence on the efficiency of a "free-selection" peer review assignment protocol as compared to the typically implemented "assignedpair" protocol. The study employed 54 sophomore students who were randomly assigned into three groups: Assigned-Pair (AP) (the teacher assigns student works for review to student pairs), Free-Selection (FS) (students are allowed to freely explore and select peer work for review), and No Review (NR) (control group). AP and FS student groups studied and reviewed peer work in the domain of Computer Networking, supported by a web-based environment designed to facilitate the two peer review protocols. Our results indicate that students following the Free Selection protocol demonstrate (a) better domain learning outcomes, and (b) better reviewer skills, compared to the AP condition. Overall, the study analyzes the benefits and shortcomings of the FS vs. AP review assignment protocol, providing evidence that the FS condition can be multiply beneficial to students who engage in peer review activities.

show abstract

“…Additionally, with the help of supportive peers, students' attitudes towards writing can be enhanced and their apprehension can be lowered. Moreover, being assigned the role of a teacher through peerreview, students are actively engaged in their own learning and assume responsibility of their own learning progress (Liu & Hansen, 2002). Finally, by reading each other's drafts critically students can learn more about writing and revision and at the same time they are able to identify the weak and strong points in their writing, and hence improve their writing proficiency and become autonomous learners (Hansen & Liu, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classrooms

Cited by 221 publications

References 4 publications

Efl Learners' Attitudes and Perceptions of Online and Conventional Peer Written Feedback: A Tertiary Level Experience

Efl Learners' Attitudes and Perceptions of Online and Conventional Peer Written Feedback: A Tertiary Level Experience

How to improve the peer review method: Free-selection vs assigned-pair protocol evaluated in a computer networking course

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About