Assessment for Learning: A Study on the Construction of Effective Peer Feedback Model and Its Learning Effects

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2017.05.002

Abstract

Abstract: The feasibility and usefulness of peer feedback in Chinese EFL writing classroom is still largely a controversial topic and many problems associated with peer feedback have also been frequently reported which include low interest, superficiality and no reflective thinking. In response to this realistic concern, the current study employs self-regulated learning as its theoretical framework to design and implement a peer-feedback-embedded EFL writing curriculum. After a 16-week trial, it is found that students have made statistically significant progress in writing performance and reflective thinking scale. Students are also reported to be very satisfied with the new curriculum. Hence it is suggested that in order to take advantage of the great learning potential offered by peer feedback, teachers should consider and build their own confidence in incorporating peer feedback in their writing classroom.

CLC Number:

H319

LIU Xinghua, JI Xiaoling, YU Jiying. Assessment for Learning: A Study on the Construction of Effective Peer Feedback Model and Its Learning Effects[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2017, 17(05): 9-15.

References

Bandura, A. 1986. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory [M]. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Berg, E.C. 1999. The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing (8): 215-41.
Berggren, J. 2014. Learning from giving feedback: A study of secondary-level students [J]. ELT Journal (1):58-70.
Chang, C.Y. 2016. Two decades of research in L2 peer review [J]. Journal of Writing Research 8(1):81-117.
Cho, K. & C. MacArthur. 2010. Student revision with peer and expert reviewing [J]. Learning and Instruction 20:328-338.
Cohen, J. 1998. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Science (2^nd edn) [M]. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Crabbe, D. 2007. Learning opportunities: Adding learning value to tasks [J]. ELT Journal (2):117-125.
Crinona, J. & B. Marina. 2010. The role of peer feedback in learning to write explanatory texts: Why the tutors learn the most [J]. Language Awareness (2):111-128.
de Guerrero, M.C.M. & O.S. Villamil. 1994. Social-cognitive dimensions of interaction in L2 peer revision [J]. The Modern Language Journal 78: 484-96.
Diab, N.M. 2010. Effects of peer- versus self-editing on students' revision of language errors in revised drafts [J]. System 38:85-95.
Fei, H. 2006. Students perceptions of peer response activity in English writing instruction [J]. CELEA Journal (4):48-52.
Fidalgo, R., M. Torrance, G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Bergh & M. álvarez. 2015. Strategy-focused writing instruction: Just observing and reflecting on a model benefits 6th grade students [J]. Contemporary Educational Psychology 41:37-50.
Hyland, K. & F. Hyland. 2006. Feedback on second language students' writing [J]. Language Teaching 39:83-101.
Jonsson, A. & G. Svingby. 2007. The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences [J]. Educational Research Review (2):130-144.
Kember, D., D.Y.P. Leung, A. Jones, A.Y. Loke, J. McKay, K. Sinclair, H. Tse, C. Webb, F.K.Y. Wong, M. Wong & E. Yeung. 2000. Development of a questionnaire to measure the level of reflective thinking [J]. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (4):381-395.
Limpo, T. & R.A. Alves. 2014. Implicit theories of writing and their impact on students' response to a SRSD intervention [J]. British Journal of Educational Psychology 84:571-590.
Liu, J. & J.G. Hansen. 2002. Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classrooms [M]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Lundstrom, K. & W. Baker. 2009. To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing (1):30-43.
Schunk, D.H. & B.J. Zimmerman. 1997. Social origins of self-regulatory competence [J]. Educational Psychologist (4):195-208.
Strijbos, J., S. Narciss & K. Dünnebier. 2010. Peer feedback content and sender's competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? [J]. Learning and Instruction 20:291-303.
Tsui, A.B.M. & M. Ng. 2000. Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing (9): 147-70.
Villamil, O.S. & M.C.M. de Guerrero. 1998. Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing [J]. Applied Linguistics 19: 491-514.
Yang, M., R. Badger & Z. Yu. 2006. A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing 15: 179-200.
Zimmerman, B.J. 2002. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview [J]. Theory Into Practice (2):64-70.
Zimmerman, B.J.& D.H. Schunk. (eds.). 2001. Self-regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives [C]. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
白丽茹. 2013a. 基础英语写作同伴互评反馈模式的可行性及有效性检验[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报 (1):51-56.
白丽茹. 2013b. 英语记叙文/说明文写作任务同伴互评反馈表现特征及个体差异[J]. 山东外语教学 (3):58-63.
蔡基刚. 2011. 中国大学生英语写作在线同伴反馈和教师反馈对比研究[J]. 外语界(2):65-72.
邓鹂鸣、岑粤. 2010. 同伴互评反馈机制对中国学生二语写作能力发展的功效研究[J]. 外语教学(1):59-63.
盖淑华、周小春. 2013. 基于动态系统理论的同伴反馈实证研究——社会文化观视角[J].外语与外语教学 (2): 36-40.
葛丽芳. 2011. 英语写作中教师评阅及同伴互评的反馈效果研究[J]. 山东外语教学(3): 54-57.
纪小凌. 2010. 同侪互评与教师评阅在英语专业写作课中的对比研究[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报(5): 60-65.
金晓宏. 2016. 非英语专业大学生对不同形式英语写作评改反馈的接受程度研究[J]. 外语研究(5): 58-62.
孟晓. 2009. 同伴反馈在英语写作教学中的应用研究[J]. 山东外语教学(4):59-62.
莫俊华. 2007. 同伴互评:提高大学生写作自主性[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报(3): 35-39.
戚焱. 2004. 反馈在英语写作教学中的作用[J]. 国外外语教学(1): 47-53.
邵名莉. 2009. 同伴评价在英语专业写作教学中的运用研究[J]. 外语教学理论与实践 (2): 47-53.
杨丽娟、杨曼君、张阳. 2013. 我国英语写作教学三种反馈方式的对比研究[J]. 外语教学(3): 63-67.
杨苗. 2006. 中国英语写作课教师反馈和同侪反馈对比研究[J]. 现代外语(3): 293-301.
周一书. 2013. 大学英语写作反馈方式的对比研究[J]. 外语界(3): 87-96.

[1]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 454(4): 35-41.
[2]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 454(4): 72-81.
[3]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 454(4): 82-91.
[4]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 454(4): 92-96.
[5]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 454(4): 97-102.
[6]	XU Ying, BI Yu, ZHANG Yaqing. A Review of Vocabulary and English for Specific Purposes Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 453(3): 104-108.
[7]	GUO Hongjie, ZHANG Daqiu, DING Dong. An Integrated and Innovative Talents-fostering Model with Practices for FLL Discipline at Chinese Financial Universities in the New Liberal Arts [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 453(3): 35-44.
[8]	PAN Haiying, LIU Shuling. Innovation and Development of College Foreign Languages Teaching in the Construction of New Liberal Arts [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 453(3): 45-52.
[9]	MA Bingjun, CHANG Hui. Research on L2 Chinese Syntactic Processing: Theories and Empirical Studies [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 453(3): 61-70.
[10]	TAO Jifen. POA-based Reading and Speaking Approach to Oral English Teaching [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 453(3): 96-103.
[11]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 452(2): 106-110.
[12]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 452(2): 84-95.
[13]	. [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 452(2): 96-105.
[14]	Lihe HUANG. Foreign Language Teaching and Research in the Post- pandemic Era: A Multimodal Paradigm [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 451(1): 75-85.
[15]	Yongyan ZHENG. Multilingual Research in a Post-COVID Era: Reflection and Prospection [J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 451(1): 64-74.