Peer and Self Review: A Holistic Examination of EFL Learners' Writing and Review Process
AuthorJohnson, Kara Grace
Second Language Acquisition & Teaching
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
AbstractThis dissertation uses a mixed methods design to explore the process of EFL students' writing and peer review, setting up a paradigm of peer compared to self review, with teacher support. The findings that surfaced were identified in themes, with the most overarching theme being that the value of peer review came not from the actual feedback that the peers gave each other, but rather from the collaborative process of peer review. Students who were actively engaged in peer review often did not take the exact advice given, but the process of exchanging feedback followed by face-to-face discussion prompted them to think of new ideas of their own that they incorporated into their revisions. The following findings are related to this major one. (1) Both the writing proficiency of the student writers and the understanding they have of the feedback given have a symbiotic relationship and greatly affect how they apply feedback. In this study, students at higher writing proficiencies tended to include some abstract feedback, but regardless of the students' writing levels, their partners' were able to make revisions at their own level of proficiency. (2) Both peer and self reviewing students made revisions based more on their own inspirations and ownership of ideas rather than on the exact advice exchanged between partners. Often, students developed and incorporated ideas that appeared to be generated from the peer feedback and discussion, pointing to the significance of peer collaboration and discussion in the writing process. (3) Although previous studies have suggested that non-native speakers' tendency to give feedback on grammatical issues as a drawback, the in-depth examination here reveals a more positive perspective. Even when comments, such as regarding grammar, were rated as "incorrect," students were often able to make positive changes, such as rewording or reorganizing. The results brings insights to the impact of abstract feedback for varying proficiency levels, ownership of ideas, internalization of concepts, and interdependence in the collaborative peer review process within a Vygotskian framework of concept development and the ZPD. Implications for research, writing program administrators, and writing instructors are identified.
Degree ProgramGraduate College
Second Language Acquisition & Teaching
Degree GrantorUniversity of Arizona
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Timnakni Timat (writing from the heart): Sahaptin discourse and text in the speaker writing of XiluxinCash Cash, Phillip E. (The University of Arizona., 2000)The unique contributions of speaker scholarship to the study of Sahaptian languages in the Columbia Plateau have rarely been considered a domain of inquiry in the field of linguistics. In the present study, I utilize a discourse-centered approach to investigate the ways in which an indigenous language is employed as a resource in the creation of texts. I examine the status of Sahaptin language use in a series of unpublished texts produced by X&dotbelow;ilux&dotbelow;in (Charlie McKay, 1910--1996), a multilingual Sahaptin speaker and scholar from the Umatilla Indian Reservation of northeastern Oregon. I account for the merging of internal indigenous linguistic forms with writing in two occurrences: language documentation and individual expression. The study found that, when a Sahaptin speaker writer transfers his or her internalized language to the written form, Sahaptin discourse and world view play a key role in its outcome.
INTERDISCIPLINARY WRITING: STUDENTS' PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF WRITING IN UNIVERSITY CLASSES.PADGETT, SUZANNE COOK. (The University of Arizona., 1982)This study provides a description of the writing done by Freshman English students in classes other than English at The University of Arizona. The study involved three aspects of observation and documentation of writing habits: a Questionnaire administered to 1,442 students, a Writing Checklist completed by twenty-three students over a one week period, and case study interviews of five students. All three aspects were considered in the findings for the following research questions: (1) What kinds of writing tasks are students doing in classes other than English? (2) How frequent are these tasks? (3) What quantities of writing are being done? (4) To what audiences are the students writing? The population for the study is representative of the university. The task of Taking notes was the most frequently occurring by far. Journals and Creative writing were the least frequent, also by a wide margin. Students felt that teachers were more concerned with content than with presentation. Little in-class time was spent on pre-writing activities. The highest responses were to questions about students' values and attitudes concerning writing. More school writing seems to take place on Monday and Wednesday, with Friday the lowest week day work response. Little work in writing occurs on the weekend. All three aspects point to similar conclusions: students are not writing very much, they are not writing in very many different modes, they are not getting very much guidance in their writing, and they are not getting very much affirmation for writing as a valid cognitive skill in the classroom. Some students are receiving some of these benefits, but the majority of university students are not. Little research has been done on university students to determine how much and what kinds of writing they are doing in classes other than English. If our society continues to value writing as an important skill, universities must re-examine the role of writing in college classes. Without the process of discovery that occurs when writing, the student's education and cognitive growth are greatly limited. Writing is a valuable cognitive aid that must be used in all departments.
Student assessment of writing quality as a predictor of writing proficiency.Taylor, Victoria Hyrka. (The University of Arizona., 1990)As a writing placement measure, holistic scoring represents a breakthrough for compositionists and a welcome alternative to more traditional assessments--particularly standardized tests. However, reliability scores from direct measures are inconsistent; and, except for face validity, other types of validity have not been conclusively established. Furthermore, although writing instructions and writing assessment are inextricably related, testing and placing students in composition courses is still chiefly entrusted to administrators and test specialists. As such, the dual tasks are diverted from what should be the instructors' domain, constituting a threat to the empowerment of teachers as competent professionals. The Projective English Placement Instrument (PEPI) was created as part of the effort toward developing assessment tools that are cost-effective, reliable, valid, and that reflect classroom instruction. The PEPI is a 30-item, peer review instrument with a modified holistic/analytic scale which involves the students in identifying and evaluating characteristics that comprise writing quality. A total of 151 entering Freshman English students participated in this study to evaluate the effectiveness of the PEPI. Results indicate that the PEPI is a reliable, valid, accurate, and cost-effective measure of writing proficiency and placement. As a viable option to more conventional but less pedagogically sound methods of testing, such results invite inquiry and application for administrators, instructors, and researchers alike.