Exploring the potential of brief peer review training in enhancing student feedback literacy
-
Deliang Man
,
Meng Huat Chau
,
Azlin Zaiti Zainal
Abstract
Despite its popularity as a recommended practice in the literature of writing instruction, peer review training seems to be more of an idea promoted than a common practice in the classroom. The reason is obvious: review training often requires considerable time and effort from the instructor and students. This study seeks to examine whether and to what extent a review training intervention as brief as two hours promotes student feedback literacy, specifically in relation to feedback provision. A quasi-experiment was conducted with two groups of Chinese undergraduate students with a follow-up interview. Results showed a positive effect on the provision of global feedback comments and an increasing focus on elaborate, constructive feedback after the training. Findings from the interview revealed students’ positive perceptions of training activities. The present study makes an empirical contribution to the literature and advances conversation in the area of peer review training and student feedback literacy.
Funding source: Guangdong Provincial Social Science Fund
Award Identifier / Grant number: GD24WZXY02-04
-
Competing interests: No.
-
Research funding: This study was supported by the Guangdong Provincial Social Science Fund (grant number #GD24WZXY02-04).
References
Boggs, Jill & Rosa Manchón. 2023. Feedback literacy in writing research and teaching: Advancing L2 WCF research agendas. Assessing Writing 58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100786.Suche in Google Scholar
Braun, Virginia & Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2). 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.Suche in Google Scholar
Carless, David & David Boud. 2018. The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 43(8). 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354.Suche in Google Scholar
Chau, Meng Huat, Anita Lie, Zhu Chenghao & George M. Jacobs. 2022a. On Global Englishes, translanguaging, and the educational challenge of celebrating students’ capacity for communication. TESL-EJ 26(3). 1–5. https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26103a20.Suche in Google Scholar
Chau, Meng Huat, Anita Lie, George M. Jacobs & Willy Renandya. 2022b. Introduction: Promoting diversity and inclusion in language education through research and practice in Global Englishes and translanguaging. TESL-EJ 26(3). https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26103a0.Suche in Google Scholar
Chong, Sin Wang & Talia Isaacs. 2023. An ecological perspective on classroom‐based assessment. Tesol Quarterly 57(4). 1558–1570. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3201.Suche in Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2007. Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Fang, Fan & Yidie Xu. 2022. Commonalities and conflation of Global Englishes and translanguaging for equitable English language education. TESL-EJ 26(3). https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26103a9.Suche in Google Scholar
Gao, Xuesong. 2010. Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847692450Suche in Google Scholar
García, Ofelia. 2022. Designing new ownership of English: A commentary. TESL-EJ 26(3). 1–8. https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26103a10.Suche in Google Scholar
Gaynor, James. 2020. Peer review in the classroom: Student perceptions, peer feedback quality and the role of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 45(5). 758–775. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1697424.Suche in Google Scholar
Gravett, Karen. 2022. Feedback literacies as sociomaterial practice. Critical Studies in Education 63(2). 261–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1747099.Suche in Google Scholar
Han, Ye & Yeting Xu. 2020. The development of student feedback literacy: The influences of teacher feedback on peer feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 45(5). 680–696. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1689545.Suche in Google Scholar
Hu, Guangwei. 2016. Using peer review with Chinese ESL student writers. Language Teaching Research 9(3). 321–342. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr169oa.Suche in Google Scholar
Huisman, Bart, Nadira Saab, Jan van Driel & Paul van den Broek. 2017. Peer feedback on college students’ writing: Exploring the relation between students’ ability match, feedback quality and essay performance. Higher Education Research and Development 36. 1433–1447. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1325854.Suche in Google Scholar
Li, Guofang. 2022. Toward inclusive translanguaging in multilingual classrooms. TESL-EJ 26(3). https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26103a23.Suche in Google Scholar
Lie, Anita, Meng Huat Chau, George M. Jacobs, Chenghao Zhu & Hady Sutris Winarlim. 2022. Exploring the role of English in meritocracy in multilingual Indonesia: Teacher beliefs, language use, and Global Englishes. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2151601.Suche in Google Scholar
Little, Tegan, Phillip Dawson, David Boud & Joanna Tai. 2024. Can students’ feedback literacy be improved? A scoping review of interventions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 49(1). 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2177613.Suche in Google Scholar
Lundstrom, Kristi & Wendy Baker. 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(1). 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002.Suche in Google Scholar
Man, Deliang, Yiqin Xu & Mitchell O’Toole. 2018. Understanding autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students: A case study in a Chinese university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 43(4). 527–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1376310.Suche in Google Scholar
Man, Deliang, Beibei Kong & Meng Huat Chau. 2022. Developing student feedback literacy through peer review training. RELC Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221078380.Suche in Google Scholar
Man, Deliang, Kok Yueh Lee, Meng Huat Chau & Esther Smidt. 2021. Learning to evaluate through that-clauses: Insights from a longitudinal study of Bruneian student writing. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 11(2). 84–97. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2021040106.Suche in Google Scholar
Min, Hui-Tzu. 2005. Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System 33(2). 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003.Suche in Google Scholar
Min, Hui-Tzu. 2016. Effect of teacher modeling and feedback on EFL students’ peer review skills in peer review training. Journal of Second Language Writing 31. 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.004.Suche in Google Scholar
Ortega, Lourdes. 2019. SLA and the study of equitable multilingualism. The Modern Language Journal 103. 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12525.Suche in Google Scholar
Rahimi, Mohammad. 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812459151.Suche in Google Scholar
Rotsaert, Tijs, Ernesto Panadero, Tammy Schellens & Annelies Raes. 2017. “Now you know what you’re doing right and wrong!” Peer feedback quality in synchronous peer assessment in secondary education. European Journal of Psychology of Education 33(2). 255–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-017-0329-x.Suche in Google Scholar
Smidt, Esther, Meng Huat Chau, Eric Rinehimer & Patricia Leever. 2021. Exploring engagement of users of Global Englishes in a community of inquiry. System 98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102477.Suche in Google Scholar
Storch, Neomy. 2002. Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning 52(1). 119–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00179.Suche in Google Scholar
Sun, Haiyang & Minchao Wang. 2022. Effects of teacher intervention and type of peer feedback on student writing revision. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221080507.Suche in Google Scholar
Sung, Chit. 2023. Agency and feedback-seeking: Academic English socialization of L2 students in Hong Kong. Language and Education 37(3). 364–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2022.2085048.Suche in Google Scholar
Sutton, Paul. 2012. Conceptualizing feedback literacy: Knowing, being, and acting. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 49(1). 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.647781.Suche in Google Scholar
Vuogan, Alyssa & Shaofeng Li. 2022. Examining the effectiveness of peer feedback in second language writing: A meta‐analysis. Tesol Quarterly 57(4). 1115–1138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3178.Suche in Google Scholar
Yu, Shulin & Guangwei Hu. 2016. Can higher-proficiency L2 learners benefit from working with lower-proficiency partners in peer feedback? Teaching in Higher Education 22(2). 178–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1221806.Suche in Google Scholar
Yu, Shulin & Chunhong Liu. 2021. Improving student feedback literacy in academic writing: An evidence-based framework. Assessing Writing 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100525.Suche in Google Scholar
Zhang, Tiefu & Zhicheng Mao. 2023. Exploring the development of student feedback literacy in the second language writing classroom. Assessing Writing 55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100697.Suche in Google Scholar
Zhang, Zhe. 2020. Engaging with automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback on L2 writing: Student perceptions and revisions. Assessing Writing 43. 78–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100439.Suche in Google Scholar
Zhao, Huahui. 2014. Investigating teacher-supported peer assessment for EFL writing. ELT Journal 68(2). 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct068.Suche in Google Scholar
Zhu, Wei. 1995. Effects of training for peer response on students’ comments and interaction. Written Communication 12(4). 492–528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088395012004004.Suche in Google Scholar
Supplementary Material
This article contains supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2023-0278).
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
