ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback

With the popularity of computer technology, online peer feedback has become common in university writing classes. This paper reports an exploratory study of 22 English as a Second Language (ESL) students’ experiences of online peer feedback in a sheltered credit course at a western-Canadian university. Based on analyses of the electronic feedback (e-feedback) participants received, comparisons of their initial and revised drafts, and follow-up interviews, the study shows that e-feedback, while eliminating the logistical problems of carrying papers around, retains some of the best features of traditional written feedback, including a text-only environment that pushes students to write balanced comments with an awareness of the audience's needs and with an anonymity that allows peers to make critical comments on each others’ writings. However, the participating ESL students expressed little confidence in peer commenting in general. Some shied away from the demand to express and clarify meaning, which turned online peer feedback into a one-way communication process, leaving a high percentage of peer comments not addressed. An intervention of face-to-face class discussion with teacher's guidance to clarify comments in question is suggested to maximize the effect of online peer feedback.     

Empowering EIL learning with a Web 2.0 resource: An initial finding from the cross campus Storybird feedback study

Although much has been researched about feedback on traditional paper or wordprocessed compositions, responded to offline, little has yet been done on compositions published and responded to in a web 2.0 environment. This study therefore investigates the anonymous asynchronous non-reciprocal feedback given by 139 peers online to 56 English compositions published on the Storybird website by Taiwanese English major university students of two proficiency levels. Feedback responses were downloaded and submitted to detailed qualitative analysis leading to a taxonomy of feedback types which also provided quantitative findings. Overall the feedback was unlike that often reported in traditional studies of feedback given to non-native speakers by peers or teachers. Instead of a corrective and language oriented focus we found more attention paid to content, with a strong element of genuinely communicative response approximating feedback as conversation, consistent with the social function of Web 2.0. There was also evidence of respondents adjusting their feedback to the proficiency of the writer, not just in giving more language oriented feedback to weaker writers but also in mitigating its impact by greater use of interpersonal cues and communicative responses.     

Investigating the practices of student researchers: patterns of use and criteria for use of internet and library sources

For college writers, a key element of academic literacy is the ability to locate, select, evaluate, synthesize, and cite outside sources in their own writing. This study surveyed 543 college students to identify (a) their preferred criteria when evaluating Internet-based and library-based sources and (b) types of instruction students typically receive in evaluating those sources. Students writing research reports (63% of students) generally ranked most highly sources that were easy to use and easy to find, whether those sources were library-based or Internet-based (r = 0.700, p < .01). Nearly 60% of all students received library training, which came most frequently from high school teachers. Nearly 29% of all students received Internet training, which came most frequently from student peers.     

Confidence and competition online: ESL student perspectives on web-based discussions in the classroom

English as a Second Language (ESL) students bring a diverse array of perspectives on language learning that inform how they negotiate different kinds of spaces in the university writing classroom. This study addresses the variance in how three different ESL students participated in web-based discussion boards and chat rooms in their first-year university writing course. Documenting students’ perceptions of technology provided pedagogical insight into how students took up or dismissed particular kinds of web-based writing. This study found that individual students made choices in their web-based writing in ways that reflected their previous experiences with technology and writing, their views of themselves as students and writers, and their relative comfort level with their peers in the classroom. However, their choices were also constrained by the pedagogical structure of the course, including the centrality of the instructor and the institutional directive for individualized assessment.     

E-portfolios supporting primary students' writing performance and peer feedback

E-portfolios show great promise for supporting students' writing performance and facilitating peer feedback, but empirical research of their use in primary education is limited. To address this gap, a yearlong study was conducted in a 4th grade primary class in Cyprus implementing e-portfolios (n = 20) to help students document their progress and send feedback to peers. A generic, open source weblog tool localized into Greek was used as an e-portfolio tool. Data sources included 176 student-essays, 1306 instances of peer feedback, students pre- and post-tests on writing performance, nine videotaped student interviews and one teacher interview. A paired samples t-test analysis showed that there was a statistically significant difference between students' pre-test (M = 62.6, SD = 9.82, n = 20) and post-test (M = 76.5, SD = 12.6, n = 20) on writing performance (t (19) = −8.03, p < .01). A repeated measures analysis of variance on e-portfolio artifacts showed that there were learning gains with respect to students' writing performance over time [F(4.01, 76.25) = 31.59, p < .01, η² = 0.89]. A qualitative analysis of students' comments showed that students provided more thorough peer feedback over time and became gradually more capable of providing corrective feedback. The qualitative analysis of student interviews provided evidence that students valued peer feedback in their portfolios. The analysis of the teacher interview showed that average and high-ability students benefited the most from peer feedback. This study provided evidence that e-portfolios can support the development of students' writing performance and peer feedback skills in the context of primary school essay writing. Instructional implications for portfolio implementation are offered.     

Computer-based reading and writing across the curriculum: Two case studies of L2 writers

Since the early 1980s, second language (L2) writing specialists have been examining possible roles for computers in L2 writing instruction. How, and to what extent, L2 students use computer for academic literacy purposes beyond the writing classroom, that is, across the curriculum, has not received much attention. Because a common goal of L2 college level writing courses is to prepare students to write in these other domains, an awareness of computer-based literacy activities in non-L2 writing courses is essential to the cause of helping L2 writing instructors connect what students learn in their courses to how they write (and read) in other courses. This paper describes research aimed at contributing to such awareness: a qualitative study of the computer-based reading and writing activity of two undergraduate English as a Second Language (ESL) students beyond ESL writing courses.     

Formative computer-based feedback in the university classroom: Specific concept maps scaffold students' writing

Formative feedback can be regarded as a crucial scaffold for students' writing cohesive texts. However, especially in large lectures students rarely receive feedback on their writing product. Thus, computer-based feedback could be an alternative to provide formative feedback to students. However, it is less clear, how computer-based feedback should be designed to help students writing cohesive texts. For that purpose, we implemented three different computer-based feedback methods within an authentic large lecture class. We investigated effects of the format (outline versus concept map) and the specificity (specific versus general) of the feedback on students' perceived difficulty and the generation of cohesive texts. We found that specific concept map feedback was perceived as less difficult as compared to the general feedback or the specific outline feedback. Additionally, students who received specific feedback wrote explanatory texts that were more cohesive as compared to students with the general feedback. However, the format of the feedback (concept map versus outline) did not account for improvements of cohesion. Evidently, specific concept map feedback can be regarded as an efficient scaffold to provide cohesive explanations.     

Students’ reflection on online self-correction and peer review to improve writing

Reflection is considered as a mental process of an individual’s internal problem-solving activity and rarely observed in face-to-face instruction. As a consequence, students have few opportunities to observe and learn from each other. This study aimed to arouse students’ reflection on both self-correction (one’s own problem-solving process in writing) and peer review (peers’ problem-solving process in writing) to improve their texts in an online system. A sample of 95 undergraduate students was recruited to write a reflective journal, which was analyzed by content analysis to compare their reflection on self-correction with peer review in writing. Results of this study revealed that reflecting on the differences between self-correction and peer review enabled students to monitor, evaluate, and adjust their writing processes in the pursuit of text improvement. In their reflective journals, students claimed that self-correction helped them detect grammatical errors (local revision) while peer review allowed them to view their own texts from others’ perspectives. Based on others’ perspectives, they could make further revisions on text development, organization, or style (global revision). Through reflection on self-correction and peer review, students were willing to provide further support to peers and learn from each other in the process of writing.     

Group awareness of social and cognitive performance in a CSCL environment: Effects of a peer feedback and reflection tool

A peer feedback tool (Radar) and a reflection tool (Reflector) were used to enhance group performance in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Radar allows group members to assess themselves and their fellow group members on six traits related to social and cognitive behavior. Reflector stimulates group members to reflect on their past, present and future group functioning, stimulating them to set goals and formulate plans to improve their social and cognitive performance. The underlying assumption was that group performance would be positively influenced by making group members aware of how they, their peers and the whole group perceive their social and cognitive behavior in the group. Participants were 108 fourth-year high school students working in dyads, triads and groups of four on a collaborative writing task, with or without the tools. Results demonstrate that awareness stimulated by the peer feedback and reflection tools enhances group-process satisfaction and social performance of CSCL-groups.     

Camtasia in the Classroom: Student Attitudes and Preferences for Video Commentary or Microsoft Word Comments During the Revision Process

In the last ten years, libraries, individual departments, and professors have experimented with screen-capture software to develop edited tutorials, record in-class lectures via presentation software, and record think-aloud rationale for difficult problem sets. Moreover, screen-capture software has been used to provide visual/audio feedback for student writing. Currently, there is scant research on visual/audio feedback via screen-capture software in writing courses. The present study examines student perceptions and attitudes about two different modes and media of teacher feedback: Microsoft Word comments versus visual/audio commentary. The results indicate that the mode and medium of teacher feedback had an impact on students’ perceptions about the rhetorical context of the revision process and perceptions about the teacher/student relationship. Students who preferred the visual/audio modality of the teacher commentary videos cited their conversational quality, clarification of expectations, and reference to more global issues in writing. On the other hand, students who preferred the Microsoft Word comments were more apt to discuss its indexical quality in that students could easily revise surface level features or locate the “problem” sentence. The results also indicate that an either/or approach to teacher feedback is not necessary. Students articulated the relevance of using a combination approach in which Microsoft Word comments and the teacher commentary videos could be used for different elements or stages of the writing process. As instructors transition to teaching within online contexts and experiment with new technologies, it is important to examine the significance of the mode and medium of teacher feedback in student perceptions, participation, and writing practices.     

Writing as process and product: The impact of tool, genre, audience knowledge, and writer expertise

Two experiments investigated the impact of writing tool (word processing or handwriting), genre (narrative or exposition), and audience (familiar or unfamiliar) on measures of writing quality, syntactic complexity, and number and type of initial text production revisions. In the first, 84 undergraduates with little word processing experience wrote letters by hand or computer. The 64 subjects in Experiment 2 were experienced college writers who always wrote by computer. Subjects composed more syntactically complex letters of higher rated quality to an unfamiliar audience than to a familiar one. Handwritten letters were of higher rated quality than word processed. Although there were more total revisions when using a word processor, there were more text-preserving than meaningful revisions. The number and distribution of revisions also depended upon the writers' level of experience. The Hay es and Flower (1980) model of the writing process remains a useful heuristic, but our data indicate that it warrants extension.     

Rethinking Authenticity: Voice and Feedback in Media Discourse

As authentic communicative practices, news writing and media discourse have the potential to serve as pedagogical tools for foreign language students to explore content of interest. This study analyzed university students’ media discourse in the virtual world of Second Life and subsequent revisions of their works in progress with respect to (1) journalistic headlines, (2) journalistic vocabulary, (3) journalistic organization, and (4) journalistic style. The results have revealed connections between voice and composition—that is, exchanging and sharing true thoughts and feelings while maintaining a self-image facilitated more concise, engaging, clear, and relevant news writing from new or different perspectives. Participants’ actions, perceptions, and movements also facilitated a better understanding of communicative practices specific to the virtual world. The results suggest that we should rethink authenticity in terms of content, contexts, purposes, and audiences to design computer-mediated collaborative learning tasks and support students’ authentic engagement of peers or other international speakers in lingua franca communication. This study may shed light on the future use of new media literacy and playful peer discourse in foreign language writing.     

Structuring peer assessment: Comparing the impact of the degree of structure on peer feedback content

The present study examines the added value of structuring the peer assessment process, by providing students with a peer feedback template with a varying structuring degree, for the peer feedback content quality in a wiki environment in higher education. The present study took place in the 1st year of a university course in Instructional Sciences (N = 176) and more specifically compared three conditions: no structure peer feedback (control), basic structure peer feedback, and elaborate structure peer feedback condition. Quantitative content analysis of students’ (n = 41) peer feedback messages was performed, and an analysis of (co)variance revealed some discrepancies between the conditions regarding the proportion of peer feedback content categories: (1) peer feedback style, (2) verification type, (3) verification focus, (4) elaboration type, and (5) elaboration focus. This study demonstrated that a higher structuring degree in a peer feedback template during the peer assessment process might have an impact on peer feedback content with respect to the above-mentioned categories; the peer feedback content. Results revealed significant differences between the three conditions regarding the peer feedback content categories. This study illustrated how a practical instructional intervention in the feedback process can increase the potential impact of peer assessment and boost students’ learning in higher education.     

Effects of timing of formative feedback in computer-assisted learning environments

This study examines the effects of timing of corrective formative feedback on processing text information on question-answering. Undergraduate students read an expository text and answered questions in two attempts. Students were randomly assigned to a no feedback, immediate feedback and delayed feedback conditions. Students in the feedback conditions received feedback on the correctness of their answer after the first attempt and were informed about the right answer after the second attempt. Students were prompted to restudy the text after failing in their first attempt. However, students in the no feedback condition were just prompted to search the text. All students were tested on question-answering, corrective probability and a post-test cued-recall test. Results showed that: (a) feedback reduced the initial time reading the text; (b) feedback increased performance on question answering and cued-recall; (c) delayed feedback produced no advantages over immediate feedback. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.     

Adaptive feedback generation to support teachers in web-based distance education

This work examines the application of user-adapted technologies to address problems experienced in web-based distance education. We have proposed an approach to support distance learning instructors by offering advice that points at problems faced by students and suggests possible activities to address these problems. The paper describes an original feedback generation framework which utilises student, group and class models derived from tracking data in web course management systems, and follows a taxonomy of feedback categories to recognise situations that are brought to the instructors’ attention. The results of an empirical study in an online learning course point at benefits of the generated feedback to both instructors and students. Teachers can get a better understanding of their students by knowing what problems they may be facing, when they are behind or ahead of their peers, who can help them and how, and what roles can be assigned in discussion forums. This, in turn, can have a positive effect on students who can receive feedback tailored to their needs and problems. The evaluation study points at issues that can be related in general to planning empirical evaluations of user-adapted systems in realistic web-based learning settings.     

Implementing an automated feedback program for a foreign language writing course: A learner-centric study

Considering the prominence attached to written corrective feedback (WCF) within the domain of second/foreign language (L2) acquisition, automated writing evaluation (AWE) tools have steadily gained ground over the last two decades. The current study was an attempt to investigate the extent incorporating an AWE program, known as Criterion®, within a process writing framework would affect learners' writing quality in an English as a foreign language context. Moreover, we drew a comparison between the overall effects of computer- versus teacher-generated WCF. Participants consisted of 53 tertiary level students from two intact essay-writing classes. The within-group findings revealed that the experimental group's writing scores rose significantly from the pretest to posttest after receiving automated WCF over several weeks. Significant progress was also noticed on all rounds of scores obtained from five essays assigned to this group except between the first and the second. As for the comparison between computer- and teacher-administered WCF, the former condition was found to be more efficient. Overall, the findings provide a deeper insight into the workings of an automated evaluation tool and how it was employed in the L2 classroom to impart consistency to the assessment procedure and ease the burden traditionally placed upon teachers.     

Guiding the use of collective feedback displayed on heatmaps to reduce group conformity and improve learning in Peer Instruction

Peer Instruction is an active learning method widely used in higher education, whereby students answer a series of questions twice, once before and once after peer discussion. There is an ongoing debate as to whether a collective feedback should be given after the students' initial answer, and if so, how the frequently observed group conformity can be avoided. This study examined whether guiding on the use of this feedback can reduce group conformity and improve learning using an interactive learning environment to administer a new type of quiz using graphics, and delivering collective feedback to the whole class in a novel heatmap format. In the experimental group, the teacher told the students that the answer indicated by the heatmap was not necessarily the correct one; this information was not given to students in the control group. Results revealed that guided students were less likely to adopt the (incorrect) majority answer than the non-guided students, and consequently, they were more likely to improve their learning by reaching an agreement about the correct answer through discussion with their peers. These findings suggest that guiding students in their use of collective feedback may have a crucial role in Peer Instruction.     

Using track changes and word processor to provide corrective feedback to learners in writing

This study investigated the effect of computer‐mediated corrective feedback types in an English as a foreign language (EFL) intact class over time. The participants were 64 English majors who were assigned randomly into three treatment conditions that gave and received computer‐mediated corrective feedback while writing (track changes, word processor, and track changes and word processor) and one control group that neither gave nor received writing corrective feedback. Students sat to a pre‐test (week 1), immediate post‐test (week 8) and delayed post‐test (week 12) in writing. Results showed decrease in mean error and mean feedback in students' writing performance related to correcting 11 major error types on immediate and delayed post‐tests, indicating that there was a significant effect for feedback type in favour of the group that used a combination of track changes and word processor. There was also a significant effect for the computer‐mediated corrective feedback over the control group. Moreover, results showed that both mean error and mean feedback decreased significantly from pre‐test to post‐test (week 1–week 8), indicating that overall, there was a significant change over time.     

Learning to write in an online writing center: The effect of learning styles on the writing process

One of the main advantages of online learning materials is that they can be adapted for students with different learning styles. This article presents a study and a methodology to investigate whether students with different learning styles make use of the potential flexibility of online learning materials, i.c. in the context of an online writing center. The study aims to investigate the effect of learning styles on (a) the students' approach to the writing task (process), and (b) on the letters they write (product). Twenty students each completed a module on writing ‘bad news’ letters designed for Business Communication courses. Their reading and writing processes were recorded. The letters were also graded to determine their quality. An effect of learning style was found: Active and Reflective writers approached the task differently, but only in the beginning of the process. In this early stage Reflective learners were more likely to focus on the theory section than Active learners. This suggests that writers with different learning styles tackle the learning materials in different ways, often in line with the preferences that characterize their learning styles. However, no effect of learning style on text quality was found.     

Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback

Giving feedback on second language (L2) writing is a challenging task. This research proposed an interactive environment for error correction and corrective feedback. First, we developed an online corrective feedback and error analysis system called Online Annotator for EFL Writing. The system consisted of five facilities: Document Maker, Annotation Editor, Composer, Error Analyzer, and Viewer. With this system, teachers can mark error corrections on online documents and students can receive corrective feedback accordingly. The system also classifies and displays error types based on user query. Second, an experiment was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of this system. Fifty EFL (English as a Foreign Language) college freshmen were randomly assigned to two groups. The experimental group received corrective feedback with the developed system whereas the control group used the paper-based error correction method. After the treatment, students in both groups conducted corrective feedback activities by correcting the same document written by an EFL student. The experimental results were encouraging in that the analysis of students’ corrective feedback revealed significantly better performance in the experimental group on recognizing writing errors. Implications for further research are discussed.