Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency?

Peer feedback content is a core component of peer assessment, but the impact of various contents of feedback is hardly studied. Participants in the study were 89 graduate students who were assigned to four experimental and a control group. Experimental groups received a scenario with Concise General (CGF) or Elaborated Specific (ESF) feedback by a high or low competent peer. ESF by a high competent peer was perceived as more adequate, but led to more negative affect. Students in CGF groups outperformed ESF groups during treatment. Groups with a low competent peer outperformed groups with a high competent peer during the posttest. Feedback perceptions and performance were uncorrelated

Peer feedback and out-of-class blogging to develop informal writing skills in an EFL course

98 Páginas.Se presentan los hallazgos de un estudio realizado en línea con una población de estudiantes de licenciatura en inglés. Se proponía indagar sobre el rol ejercido por la retroalimentación entre pares en el desarrollo o mantenimiento de la coherencia en la escritura narrativa y no ficcional a través de los blogs. Los participantes recibieron formación en la creación y mantenimiento de un blog, en el intercambio de retroalimentación, y en el desarrollo de coherencia textual. Estos, a su vez, produjeron entradas narrativas de blog e intercambiaron comentarios de retroalimentación, todo lo cual fue evaluado dos veces para establecer la posible relación entre la retroalimentación y la coherencia textual. También se crearon y recolectaron diarios de aprendizaje con el fin de obtener datos de segundo orden de los estudiantes. Todos los datos se recolectaron a través del computador o de internet y fueron analizados desde el enfoque de la teoría fundada. Los hallazgos sugieren que la retroalimentación entre pares y los blogs pueden actuar como factores potenciadores en el mejoramiento o mantenimiento de la coherencia en un texto escrito, a través de la intervención de los dominios cognitivo y afectivo del estudiante. Los resultados revelan el potencial de las estrategias centradas en el estudiante para mejorar el aprendizaje y para promover la autonomía a través de un mayor control del estudiante sobre su aprendizaje. Adicionalmente, se propone la aplicación de nuevos paradigmas de evaluación del lenguaje, que reconozcan al estudiante como una fuente válida y confiable de información evaluativa. Finalmente, se abre la posibilidad para que la iniciación de prácticas de aula innovadoras en el futuro desempeño profesional de los participantes

INVESTIGATING THE IMPACT OF PEER FFEDBACK AND TEACHER FEEDBACK USING GOOGLE DOCS ON EFL STUDENTS’ WRITING PERFORMANCE

Online written corrective feedback via Google Docs, in recent years, has been used and brought about positive outcomes in different teaching contexts. In this light, this study was conducted to examine the different effects between teacher feedback using Google Docs and the combined peer feedback and teacher feedback using Google Docs on EFL high school students’ performance in writing paragraphs. The study also attempted to gain insights into students’ attitudes towards the effect of peer feedback and teacher feedback using Google Docs on their paragraph writing. In this study, a mixed research method was employed; both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. Twenty two grade 11 students in a high school in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam were selected as participants. They were assigned to two groups of treatment: the experimental group, receiving both peer feedback and teacher feedback using Google Docs and the control group who only received teacher feedback using Google Docs. Participants completed two writing tasks; each of them included first draft, second draft and final draft. Prior to the study, students from the experimental group received a face-to-face training on giving peer feedback. Data were collected from six drafts of two writing tasks, three drafts for one task, and interviews at the end of the study. Results indicated that participants who received teacher feedback in the control group performed their paragraph writing better than those receiving both peer feedback and teacher feedback using Google Docs in the experimental group after the study. Also, participants in both groups improved their writing performance in their revised drafts. From the interviews, results showed participants’ positive attitudes towards the impact of peer feedback and teacher feedback using Google Docs on their paragraph writing.   Article visualizations

A CASE STUDY OF PEER ASSESSMENT IN A MOOC-BASED COMPOSITION COURSE: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS, PEERS’ GRADING SCORES VERSUS INSTRUCTORS’ GRADING SCORES, AND PEERS’ COMMENTARY VERSUS INSTRUCTORS’ COMMENTARY

Although the use of peer assessment in MOOCs is common, there has been little empirical research about peer assessment in MOOCs, especially composition MOOCs. This study aimed to address issues in peer assessment in a MOOC-based composition course, in particular student perceptions, peer-grading scores versus instructor-grading scores, and peer commentary versus instructor commentary. The findings provided evidence that peer assessment was well received by the majority of student participants from their perspective as both peer evaluators of other students’ papers and as students being evaluated by their peers. However, many student participants also expressed negative feelings about certain aspects of peer assessment, for example peers’ lack of qualifications, peers’ negative and critical comments, and unfairness of peer grading. Statistical analysis of grades given by student peers and instructors revealed a consistency among grades given by peers but a low consistency between grades given by peers and those given by instructors, with the peer grades tending to be higher than those assigned by instructors. In addition, analysis of peer and instructor commentary revealed that peers’ commentary differed from instructors’ on specific categories of writing issues (idea development, organization, or sentence-level). For instance, on average peers focused a greater percentage of their comments (70%) on sentence-level issues than did instructors (64.7%), though both groups devoted more comments to sentence-level issues than to the two other issue categories. Peers’ commentary also differed from instructors’ in the approaches their comments took to communicating the writing issue (through explanation, question, or correction). For example, in commenting on sentence-level errors, on average 85% of peers’ comments included a correction as compared to 96% of instructors’ comments including that approach. In every comment category (idea development, organization, sentence-level), peers used a lower percentage of explanation—at least 10% lower—than did instructors. Overall, findings and conclusions of the study have limitations due to (1) the small size of composition MOOC studied and small sample size of graded papers used for the analysis, (2) the lack of research and scarcity of document archives on issues the study discussed, (3) the lack of examination of factors (i.e. level of education, cultural background, and English language proficiency) that might affect student participants’ perception of peer assessment, and (4) the lack of analysis of head notes, end notes, and length of comments. However, the study has made certain contributions to the existing literature, especially student perception of peer assessment in the composition MOOC in this study. Analysis of the grades given by peers and instructors in the study provides evidence-based information about whether online peer assessment should be used in MOOCs, especially composition MOOCs and what factors might affect the applicability and consistency of peer grading in MOOCs. In addition, analysis of the data provides insights into types of comments students in a composition MOOC made as compared to those instructors made. The findings of the study as a whole can inform the design of future research on peer assessment in composition MOOCs and indicate questions designers of peer assessment training and practice in such MOOCs could find helpful to consider

Adopting Moodle:Case Studies in the Diffusion of Innovation

This joint research paper among five part-time English teachers at Maebashi Kyoai Gakuen University, hereafter called Kyoai University, represents a focused practical application of Action Research based on CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) in the classroom and syllabus. This research builds upon the history and development of CALL at the University, including previous research based on student perceptions of CALL (Deadman, 2014) and teacher’s perceptions and evaluations of multimedia technologies (Mason, 2014). The paper details and investigates how CALL is adopted amongst the teachers in this study, through the existent software Moodle (Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment). Two of the members of this group have used Moodle, whereas the three other part-time teachers have had limited exposure and experience using it. The aim of this research group is to peer-teach each other in a community of practice, in order that our own technology skills increase, ultimately transferring this to better learning experiences for the students. The paper will use teachers experience, observations and planning to detail the purposefulness of technology in the curriculum; the teacher’s own perceptions of the technology; the subsequent selection, planning and design of appropriate class-specific Moodle applications; and each teacher’s initial evaluations of Moodle as they begin to construct their own Moodle accounts for various classes.　A general　e-mail was sent to all Japanese part-time teachers who would be interested in jointly partaking in a research paper, based on the above considerations. As such, the members of this research paper are equal in membership and responsibility for the research, as per the ethical considerations of practitioner research (Hammersley, M., Gomm, R., and Woods, P., 2003)

Web 2.0 tools in the EFL classroom: Comparing the effects of Facebook and blogs on L2 writing and interaction

[EN] Web 2.0 technologies have become an integral part of our lives, transforming not only how we communicate with others, but also how language is taught and learned in the L2 classroom. Several studies have looked into the use of these tools and how they influence L2 learning (e.g. Jin, 2015; Wang & Vásquez, 2014), yet only one has compared the effects of two Web 2.0 technologies (Castaneda Vise, 2008). Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the impact that Facebook and blogs had on the writing skills, namely, writing fluency, lexical richness, and syntactic complexity, of Japanese EFL learners. Moreover, the authors examined the influence blogging and Facebook had on interaction, i.e., the number of comments the learners posted outside of class. Student attitudes towards using these tools for written English were also measured through a survey based on the technology acceptance model (Davis, 1989). Twenty-three students at a Japanese university participated in the study and were divided into a Facebook group (n = 14) and a blog group (n = 9) according to their classes. Both groups took part in a ten-week treatment consisting of weekly guided free-writings on their respective Web 2.0 applications. Pre- and post-tests were administered and non-parametric statistical tests were used to determine if any significant writing gains were made. It was found that students in both blogging and Facebook groups showed similar improvements in writing skills. However, blogging seemed to be more effective at promoting interaction and students who took part in this group retained more favorable attitudes on using blogging for L2 writing. It was concluded that Facebook may indeed present an environment where students can be distracted from more formal educational pursuits (e.g. Wang & Kim, 2014) even when they are in private Facebook groups, while blogging may support a more serious environment for improving L2 writing skills.Dizon, G.; Thanyawatpokin, B. (2018). Web 2.0 tools in the EFL classroom: Comparing the effects of Facebook and blogs on L2 writing and interaction. The EuroCALL Review. 26(1):29-42. doi:10.4995/eurocall.2018.7947SWORD2942261Alm, A. (2015). Facebook for informal language learning. EUROCALL Review, 23(2), 3-18. Retrieved from http://polipapers.upv.es/index.php/eurocall/article/view/4665/4791Amir, Z., Ismail, K., Hussin, S. (2011). Blogs in language Learning: Maximizing Students' Collaborative Writing. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 18, 537-543. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.05.079Browne, C. (2013). The new general service list: Celebrating 60 years of vocabulary learning. The Language Teacher, 37(4), 13-16.Castaneda Vise, D. A. (2008). The effects of wiki- and blog-technologies on the students' performance when learning the preterit and imperfect aspects in Spanish. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A. The Humanities and Social Sciences, 69 (01), 0187.Crook, C. (2008). Web 2.0 Technologies for Learning: The Current Landscape - Opportunities, Challenges and Tensions. Retrieved fromhttp://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1474/1/becta_2008_web2_currentlandscape_litrev.pdfDavis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. Retrieved from jstor.org/stable/249008Dizon, G. (2016). A comparative study of Facebook vs. paper-and-pencil writing to improve L2 writing skills. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(8), 1249-1258. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2016.1266369Fellner, T., Apple, M. (2006). Developing writing fluency and lexical complexity with blogs. The JALT CALL Journal, 2(1), 15-26.George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Hammond, L. (1991). Using focused freewriting to promote critical thinking. In P. Belanoff, P. Elbow, & S. Fontaine (Eds.), Nothing begins with N: New investigations of freewriting (pp. 71-92). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University.Harrison, R., & Thomas, M. (2009). Identity in online communities: social networking sites and language learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 7(2), 109-124.Hashimoto, K. (2012). Exploring the relationship between L2 blogging, learner autonomy, and L2 proficiency levels: A case study of post-secondary Japanese L2 learners (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest, UMI Dissertations Publishing.Hwang, J. A. (2010). A case study of the influence of freewriting on writing fluency and confidence of EFL college-level students. Second Language Studies, 28(2), 97-134. Retrieved fromhttp://www.hawaii.edu/sls/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Hwang.pdfJin, S. (2015). Using Facebook to promote Korean EFL learners' intercultural competence. Language, Learning & Technology, 19(3), 38-51. Retrieved fromhttp://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2015/action2.pdfKabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? Internet and Higher Education, 13, 179-187. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.07.003Kissau, S., McCullough, H., Pyke, J. G. (2010). 'Leveling the playing field:' The effects of online second language instruction on student willingness to communicate in French. CALICO Journal, 27(2). 277-297. doi: 10.11139/cj.27.2.277-297Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16, 307-322. doi:10.1093/applin/16.3.307Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. T. (2003). The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12, 752-780. Retrieved from aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol12/iss1/50Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL Dimensions: Options and issues in CALL. Lawrence Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ.Mills, N. (2011). Situated learning through social networking communities: The development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement, and a shared repertoire. CALICO Journal, 28(2), 345-368. doi: 10.11139/cj.28.2.345-368Mitchell, K. (2010). A social tool: Why and how ESOL students use Facebook. CALICO Journal, 29(3), 471-493. doi: 10.11139/cj.29.3.471-493.Miyazoe, T., Anderson, T. (2009). Learning outcomes and students' perceptions of online writing: Simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, and wiki in an EFL blended learning setting. System, 38, 185-199.Montero-Fleta, B., & Perez-Sabater, C. (2010). A research on blogging as a platform to enhance language skills. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 773-777. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.100Moore, K. & Iida, S. (2010). Students' perception of supplementary, online activities for Japanese language learning: Groupwork, quiz and discussion tools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(7), 966-979. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet26/moore.htmlNakatsukasa, K. (2009). The efficacy and students' perceptions of collaborative blogging in an ESL classroom. In Chapelle, C.A., Jun, H.G., Katz, I (Eds.), Developing and evaluating language learning materials (pp. 69-84). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.Nation, I. S. P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17, 377-384. doi: 10.1016/0346-251X(89)90010-9Nepomuceno, M. (2011). Writing Online: Using Blogs as an Alternative Writing Activity in Tertiary ESL Classes. TESOL Journal, 5, 92-105.Pegrum, M. (2009). Communicative networking and linguistic mashups on Web 2.0. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Handbook of research on Web 2.0 and second language learning (pp. 20-41). IGI Global.Pinkman, K. (2005). Using Blogs in the Foreign Language Classroom. The JALT CALL Journal. 1(1), 12-24.Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interaction in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27-57. doi: 10.1093/applin/22.1.27Shih, R. C. (2011). Can Web 2.0 technology assist college students in learning English writing? Integrating Facebook and peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(5), 829-845. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ943540Sykes, J. M., Oskoz, A., & Thorne, S. L. (2008). Web 2.0, Synthetic Immersive Environments, and Mobile Resources for Language Education. CALICO Journal, 25(3), 528-546.Tu, C., Blocher, M., & Ntoruru, G. (2008). Constructs for Web 2.0 learning environments: A theatrical metaphor. Educational Media International, 45(4), 253-269. doi: 10.1080/09523980802588576Wang, S., & Kim, D. (2014). Incorporating Facebook in an intermediate-level Chinese language course: A case study. IALLT Journal, 44(1), 38-78. Retrieved fromhttp://old.iallt.org/iallt_journal/incorporating_facebook_in_an_intermediate_level_chinese_language_course_a_case_studyWang, S., & Vásquez, C. (2012). Web 2.0 and second language learning: What does the research tell us? CALICO Journal, 29(3), 412-430. doi:10.11139/cj.29.3.412-430Wang, S., & Vásquez, C. (2014). The effect of target language use in social media on intermediate-level Chinese language learners' writing performance. CALICO Journal, 31(1), p. 78-102. doi: 10.11139/cj.28.2.345-368Warschauer, M. (2010). Invited Commentary: New Tools for Teaching Writing. Language Learning and Technology, 14(1), 3-8. Retrieved fromhttp://llt.msu.edu/vol14num1/commentary.pd

Backward evaluation in peer assessment: A scoping review

Implementing backward evaluation as part of the peer assessment process enables students to react to the feedback they receive on their work within one peer assessment activity cycle. The emergence of online peer assessment platforms has brought new opportunities to study the peer assessment process, including backward evaluation, through the digital data that the use of these systems generates. This scoping review provides an overview of peer assessment studies that use backward evaluation data in their analyses, identifies different types of backward evaluation and describes how backward evaluation data have been used to increase understanding of peer assessment processes. The review contributes to a mapping of backward evaluation terminology and shows the potential of backward evaluation data to give new insights on students’ perceptions of what is useful feedback, their reactions to the feedback received and its consequences for feedback implementation.publishedVersio

From English to undergraduate: the international student experience

Over 3,000 international students study at Northumbria, of whom over 70% originating from the Pacific Rim region choose to study programmes within Newcastle Business School (NBS). On a regular basis, large and small scale learning and teaching experience - based studies have been undertaken by Northumbria with all students. Demographic information, collected in all cases, allowed data extraction for both UK and international NBS students. Studies included questionnaires, distributed to students studying English Language (ELAN) courses followed up once students started their chosen programme, which drew upon established research outlining issues relating to international student adjustment to UK study. These research findings led to recommendations on adapting practice to make teaching more inclusive, which were distributed to lecturers. Following a suitable bedding- in period, an additional study was undertaken to establish whether students concurred with the recommendations made and to assess the extent they believed these were now being practiced. This paper presents the most significant findings from the studies outlined above