Output file VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES POST GRADUATE DEPARTMENT LÃ NGUYỄN BÌNH MINH THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING PEER CORRECTION ON IMPROVING WRITING SKILLS TO STUDENTS IN[.]
INTRODUCTION
Identification of the problem
Writing is considered one of the most challenging language skills for learners to master due to its complexity and the fact that it is a productive skill As Penny Ur (1996:11) explains, writing "is a skill that is readily picked up by exposure," highlighting the importance of consistent practice and immersion in developing strong writing abilities.
“requires some forms of instructions”
Many EFL students struggle with writing despite their grammar skills, often making common mistakes and errors A significant issue is that students rarely proofread their work before submitting it, leading to careless grammar and spelling mistakes that could be easily avoided To improve student writing, teachers need to employ effective strategies to address these challenges and help students develop better revision habits.
In many countries, including Vietnam, EFL writing is primarily taught to help students pass examinations, with limited emphasis on developing genuine writing skills The traditional product-oriented approach is commonly used, where teachers focus on the final written product by assigning tasks, collecting students' work, and providing corrections or feedback for revision This method prioritizes the end result over process-based learning, emphasizing exam preparation over meaningful writing development.
Recent years have seen EFL writing teachers adopting techniques from first language acquisition pedagogy, particularly the process approach to composition established in the 1970s The process approach outlines four key stages in writing: pre-writing, composing/drafting, revising, and editing, which are recursive and interact dynamically throughout the writing process Emphasizing revision and peer feedback, this method encourages students to produce multiple drafts, frequently crossing out sentences and reorganizing paragraphs to improve their work.
Peer correction is a highly recommended strategy within the process approach to teaching writing, serving as an effective tool to address common writing challenges Despite its potential benefits, its effectiveness has not been extensively researched in specific teaching contexts, highlighting the need for further investigation This gap in research forms the rationale for the present study, aiming to explore and validate the impact of peer correction on student writing improvement.
The Scope of the Study
This study investigates students' perceptions of the effectiveness of peer correction on their writing within a university's English language program The effectiveness was assessed through a student questionnaire instead of pre-test and post-test measures The research does not seek to establish a causal relationship between peer correction and improvements in writing proficiency Instead, it focuses on understanding how students perceive the impact of peer correction on their writing skills.
The Purpose of the Study
This study aims to investigate students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of peer correction as an instructional strategy to enhance the quality of EFL students’ English writing It explores how peer correction impacts learner improvement and engagement in the writing process Additionally, the research offers pedagogical implications for teachers on effectively implementing peer correction in EFL writing classes The study also provides recommendations for further research to optimize the use of peer correction strategies in language teaching.
The Significance of the Study
This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of peer correction in enhancing learners' writing skills within the EFL teaching context Its findings will offer valuable insights into error treatment strategies, potentially providing teachers at HLU with an alternative method to address errors in students’ compositions and improve writing proficiency The research also encourages language teachers to review and rethink their approaches to responding to student writing, promoting more effective teaching practices at various scales Moreover, if proven effective, peer correction could lead to revisions in teaching materials and textbooks, integrating this method into writing lessons to foster better learner outcomes.
The Organization of the Study
This minor thesis comprises five chapters, beginning with an overview of challenges and approaches to EFL writing, along with the study's scope and rationale It clearly states the purpose and organization of the research Chapter two provides a literature review to contextualize the study within existing research Chapter three details the research methods and procedures employed The fourth chapter presents a thorough analysis of both quantitative and qualitative findings Finally, the concluding chapter discusses pedagogical implications, acknowledges limitations, and offers suggestions for future research.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Writing is a complex skill in EFL learning, posing significant challenges for teachers and students alike Acquiring writing skills is often more demanding than mastering other language skills, as it requires producing coherent, fluent, and extended texts in a second language Nunan (1999) highlights that creating such writing is an enormous challenge, especially given that English rhetorical conventions—such as structure, style, and organization—often differ from those in other languages, requiring extra effort to understand and apply these differences effectively (Leki, 1991).
Teaching EFL writing is a complex process that involves multiple key dimensions, including accuracy, originality, organization, and purpose Educators must guide students in developing clear, coherent ideas while considering tone and audience needs Balancing these essential aspects often presents challenges for both teachers and students throughout the writing process.
Many students practice writing primarily to pass exams or earn good grades, as their education systems heavily emphasize test performance This exam-oriented focus often reduces writing to a mere task of producing a graded product, which diminishes students’ genuine interest in writing Consequently, writing becomes decontextualized and artificial, leaving students without a clear sense of purpose or engagement in the activity.
These challenges of EFL writing require an innovation in the teaching method to motivate students to learn and improve their writing proficiency at the same time.
Approaches to Teaching Writing: Product vs Process Approach
The product approach is a traditional method of teaching writing that emphasizes the final output of the writing process, such as paragraphs, letters, essays, or stories Writing teachers who adopt this approach focus on the quality of the completed piece, assessing it against specific criteria to evaluate students' writing skills This approach prioritizes the end result over the process of composition, aiming to develop polished and well-structured written work.
Effective writing assessment focuses on key components such as vocabulary use, grammar accuracy, spelling, punctuation, content quality, and organizational structure (Brown, 1994) In product-oriented approaches, students are provided with a model text and encouraged to imitate it to develop their own writing skills Typically, teachers assign a writing task, review and return the students' work for revision, either correcting errors directly or marking them for students to address (Raimes, 1983) This process helps students learn through guided practice and exemplars.
Analyzing model texts helps students understand the key features of different genres, such as paragraph structure and formal language in formal letters For example, when studying a formal letter, emphasis is placed on the importance of clear paragraphing and appropriate language for making formal requests In contrast, when exploring stories, the focus shifts to identifying narrative techniques that make the story engaging, such as where and how the writer uses these literary devices This approach enhances students’ comprehension of genre-specific features and improves their writing skills.
Controlled practice involves focused exercises on specific language features, typically practiced in isolation For example, when learning to write formal letters, students may practice using key phrases like "I would be grateful if you would…" to master making formal requests effectively.
Effective organization of ideas is crucial in writing, as many believe it holds more importance than the ideas themselves Proponents of this approach emphasize that structuring ideas clearly enhances overall communication, making the control of language equally vital in ensuring the message is effectively conveyed.
The end goal of the learning process is for students to demonstrate their language proficiency by completing a variety of comparable writing tasks They apply the skills, structures, and vocabulary they've learned to produce a well-crafted piece, showcasing their fluency and competence as effective users of the language.
The process approach to teaching English writing, which gained popularity over 30 years ago through extensive research on first language writing, emphasizes the importance of engaging students in the entire writing process rather than focusing solely on the final product Unlike traditional product-oriented methods where teachers assign topics and evaluate completed texts with little intervention, the process approach encourages active teacher involvement in guiding students through drafting, revising, and reflecting on their work According to Nunan (1991), this method prioritizes the steps involved in creating a piece of writing, acknowledging that no text can be perfect, but continual revision brings learners closer to excellence While the product-oriented approach emphasizes sentence-level skills, the process approach aims at developing learners’ writing at the discourse level through producing, reflecting, discussing, and reworking multiple drafts.
The process approach to teaching writing emphasizes a structured sequence that guides learners through essential stages before creating their final product Houpt advocates a three-step method, including in-class conversations, drafting, and self-editing, to develop writing skills effectively According to Oshima and Houge (1991), the writing process comprises four key stages: pre-writing, planning through outlining, drafting, and revising drafts, ensuring a comprehensive approach to improving writing proficiency.
Hedge (1990) outlines a multi-stage writing process that includes motivation, idea collection, planning, outlining, note-taking, drafting, revising, rethinking, redrafting, editing, and preparing for publication These steps highlight the importance of a structured process approach, where learners perform specific tasks at each stage to produce quality work In this thesis, a simplified writing process is presented: prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing, each supported by targeted strategies to ensure successful writing development.
Prewriting is an essential activity that prompts writers to reflect on their subject, clarifying the purpose of their writing During this stage, writers explore the topic, consider their target audience, gather relevant information, and organize their ideas This thoughtful process sets a strong foundation for effective writing and ensures the final piece is well-structured and focused Proper prewriting techniques enhance clarity, improve content quality, and contribute to successful communication.
Drawing Talking Brainstorming Graphic organizers Research Listing Field Trips
The process of putting ideas down on paper involves focusing on the content and fluency of the writing, without being preoccupied with grammatical accuracy or neatness in the initial draft This approach encourages free expression and creative flow, helping writers develop their ideas effectively Prioritizing substance over perfection allows for a more natural and authentic writing process, laying a strong foundation for future editing and refinement.
Taking notes, Organizing thoughts into paragraphs, Writing a first draft
The process of refining the piece of writing The writer adds to a writing piece The writer reorganizes a piece of writing The writer shares his story
Peer editing Conferencing Share Chair or Author’s
Chair and gets input from peers or teacher
Mechanical, grammatical and spelling errors are fixed in the writing piece
The writing piece is prepared in final form, including illustrations The writer shares his writing with others
Reading aloud Reading to a group Displaying in the room
Table 1: 5 Steps of the Writing Process
The process approach to teaching writing offers significant pedagogical benefits by helping students develop independent writing skills, critical thinking, and effective learning strategies This method also fosters learners' ability to assess and manage their own progress, enhancing their self-efficacy and promoting personal growth in writing.
• Model text to be imitated
• Emphasis on organization of ideas
• Importance of teacher-corrected papers
• Model text as resource for comparison
• Emphasis on ideas and idea development
• Various audiences according to type of writing
• Peer feedback as valuable tool
• Importance of conferencing and interactive feedback
Table 2: Product vs Process Approach
Peer correction
2.3.1 Definition: What is peer correction?
Peer correction is a key element of the process-oriented approach to writing, where students read and provide feedback on each other's work, promoting active engagement and mutual learning According to Liu and Hansen (2002), it involves learners acting as sources of feedback and taking on roles traditionally held by teachers, such as commenting and critiquing peers' drafts in both written and oral formats This method often includes students exchanging drafts and comments, facilitating collaborative editing and proofreading without direct teacher intervention In this context, peer correction refers to any modifications made to students' compositions after they have reviewed and proofread each other's work independently, emphasizing student autonomy and responsibility in the writing process.
Teachers traditionally serve as the primary providers of correction models and are the sole evaluators of students' writing In recent years, peer correction has emerged as an effective alternative to traditional error correction methods This innovative approach offers numerous benefits, enhancing the learning experience for both teachers and students.
Peer correction offers significant advantages for teachers by reducing their workload associated with correcting students’ writing errors, allowing them to focus more on designing effective lesson plans and developing tailored teaching materials This approach also enables teachers to dedicate time to scientific research aimed at enhancing their teaching methods and overall quality Ultimately, students directly benefit from these improvements in teaching strategies and learning environments.
Peer feedback is no doubt beneficial to students for various reasons First and foremost, peer correction is the source of motivation and encouragement for students to write
Effective writing is driven by audiences, especially peer audiences who offer immediate feedback and encouragement, motivating students to invest more effort in their work Knowing that friends will read their compositions boosts students' confidence and fosters a supportive learning environment Peer correction diversifies the interaction beyond traditional teacher-student dynamics, increasing engagement and interest in language learning Additionally, peer review aligns with task-based learning principles, as students are motivated by clear objectives and experience satisfaction upon achieving specific writing goals.
Peer correction enhances students' social interaction and collaboration, fostering a supportive learning environment According to Larsen-Freeman (2000), cooperative learning involves students learning from each other in pairs or groups, which promotes meaningful engagement Socio-cultural approaches to teaching highlight that interaction with peers and teachers is essential for constructing and conveying new understanding Vygotsky’s work demonstrates that cooperative interaction significantly facilitates students’ progress Johnson (1994) describes cooperative learning as a process characterized by shared goals, interdependence, and active participation, all of which contribute to improved language acquisition and social skills.
Cooperation involves working together to achieve shared goals, where individuals aim for outcomes that benefit both themselves and all group members Cooperative learning is an instructional approach that uses small groups to foster collaboration, enabling students to enhance their own understanding while supporting their peers Unlike competitive learning, where students compete against each other to earn top grades, cooperative learning emphasizes collective success and mutual growth.
Group work and pair work enhance learners' confidence and accelerate progress compared to solely teacher-led instruction (Haines, 1995) Peer interaction serves as a vital tool for knowledge construction, aligning with constructivist learning theories that emphasize active learning through social interaction According to Biggs and Moore (1993), knowledge is actively constructed through social engagement rather than passive observation, making peer interactivity effective for promoting deeper learning Incorporating peer collaboration in educational settings facilitates both formal and informal learning, supporting overall academic achievement.
Research shows that peer review significantly benefits students by enabling effective feedback exchange and fostering revising skills Studies by Rollinson (1998) and Caulk (1994) demonstrate that peer feedback is highly valid and specific, with 80-89% of comments considered useful and often more detailed than teacher comments Additionally, peer writers tend to revise effectively based on peer suggestions, with 65% of comments accepted either fully or partially (Rollinson, 1998) and 53% of revisions incorporating peer feedback (Mendoca & Johnson, 1994) Developing the ability to critically evaluate peers' writing can also enhance students’ own editing and revising abilities.
Peer correction in L2 writing classes primarily benefits students by providing valuable opportunities to practice and enhance their writing skills, aligning with teachers' core goal of improving language proficiency.
2.3.3 How to incorporate peer correction into the writing lesson?
Peer correction offers significant benefits for both teachers and learners by reducing teachers' grading workload and providing students with constructive feedback on their writing It serves as an effective tool to enhance learning from mistakes and encourages active participation in the editing process of writing To ensure successful implementation, instructors should first raise awareness among students about the advantages of peer correction to promote responsible engagement Additionally, providing modeling or training on how to effectively give feedback—using worksheets or forms as guides—helps learners deliver appropriate and constructive responses, maximizing the benefits of peer correction in the learning process.
Implementing peer review as a learning strategy offers various effective methods, such as students exchanging their work within pre-assigned pairs either during or outside of class In-class exchanges with immediate feedback enable students to improve their work on the spot, while instructors can collect and redistribute papers for peer correction For more complex assignments, out-of-class peer review provides students with sufficient time to thoroughly complete their tasks, enhancing understanding and learning outcomes.
Peer correction is an essential part of the revising stage in writing instruction, to be implemented only after students complete their first drafts Depending on lesson plans and schedules, learners may finish their compositions either during class or as homework Therefore, incorporating peer correction involves a structured process that ensures effective revision and improvement of students' writing skills.
Begin by setting a clear writing goal for students Once the task is defined, instruct learners to produce their first draft, emphasizing the importance of double-spacing or leaving generous margins to facilitate easy editing and corrections.
Encourage students to exchange their compositions with a partner or have teachers collect and redistribute the work for correction Students should underline the mistakes made by their classmates and add correction codes either in the margins or underneath the errors This peer review process enhances learning by promoting active engagement and self-correction, ultimately improving writing skills Using correction codes efficiently streamlines the editing process and helps students understand common errors, making it an effective classroom strategy for language development.
Encourage students to submit their work for peer correction and revise it accordingly If class time is limited, teachers can permit students to complete revisions at home and submit both the original draft and the improved version in the next class This approach allows teachers to compare students' before-and-after peer correction performance, fostering growth and learning.
During collaborative work, it is important for instructors to touch base with each pair in order to give help or advice promptly
2.4 Previous study on peer correction
Students’ attitudes towards peer correction method
4.2.1 Students’ views towards the effectiveness of peer correction
To evaluate students’ attitudes toward the impact of peer correction, the total scores from the 12-item pre- and post-questionnaires were computed The analysis revealed the distribution of these combined scores, providing insight into changes in students’ perceptions before and after the intervention This data highlights any shifts in attitudes and the overall effectiveness of peer correction in enhancing learning experiences.
Figure 6: Students’ perceptions of peer correction before the experiment
DISTRIBUTION OF SUMMED SCORES STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES (N&) IN
PRE- AND POST-TREATMENT QUESTIONNAIRES (ITEMS 1-12)
Summed score Pre-treatment questionnaire Post-treatment questionnaire
Table 4: Distribution of summed scores students’ attitudes in pre- and post-questionnaire
Understanding the interpretation of the results in Table 4 requires knowledge of what each score signifies In this study, scores ranging from 34 to 38 (median 36) indicate neutral attitudes towards peer correction Scores above this range reflect positive attitudes, while scores below suggest negative attitudes, providing clear insights into participants' perceptions of peer correction.
Before the experiment, students generally held negative attitudes towards peer correction, with 81% scoring below 36 and no respondents expressing strong agreement or disagreement on the 12 key items However, after the experimental period, attitudes shifted significantly, with only 4% maintaining a negative view and 12% remaining neutral, while 84% of students highly agreed with the statements, indicating a predominantly positive outlook towards peer correction as an effective classroom technique.
This study analyzed participants’ responses to 17 Likert-scale items in both pre- and post-treatment questionnaires, summarized in Table 5 Students rated each statement on a five-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with combined scores for positive responses ("strongly agree" and "agree") and negative responses ("strongly disagree" and "disagree") This method helps to present the data clearly and concisely without distortion, providing an efficient overview of participant attitudes before and after the treatment.
The article highlights that the reported percentages reflect students’ responses from both the pre-treatment and post-treatment questionnaires, with identical respondent numbers for each phase This consistency ensures accurate comparison of students’ attitudes and perceptions before and after the intervention, providing clear insight into the program’s effectiveness.
Statements Agree Not sure Disagree
1 Peer correction helps students find out and correct their errors
2 Peer correction helps students avoid the same types of mistakes in their subsequent writings
3 Peer correction helps students make clear and be aware of grammar rules
4 Peer correction helps students learn some grammar rules
5 Peer correction helps better students’ expressions and organization
6 Peer correction helps students produce various ideas
7 Peer correction helps students improve the content of students’ compositions
8 Peer correction is fun and motivating 18%
Tải bản FULL (58 trang): https://bit.ly/3y5XTl3
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net
9 Peer correction creates collaborative learning environment
10 Students can help and get help from each other 34.5%
11 Students are more confident in writing 0%
12 Students will be more careful when writing in
46% 15.5% Table 5: Students’ responses to Statements 1 to 12
1 st statement: Peer correction helps students find out and correct their mistakes
Initially, only 31% of respondents believed that peer correction could help them identify and correct their mistakes, while 50% were skeptical and 19% were unsure However, after practicing peer correction multiple times during the course, 96% of students reported that the technique was effective in helping them recognize and fix their errors, with only one student maintaining a negative attitude towards it This significant shift highlights the positive impact of repeated peer correction on students’ perceptions and learning outcomes.
2 nd statement: Peer correction helps students avoid the same types of mistakes in their subsequent writing
According to the post-questionnaire, 61.5% of learners supported the effectiveness of peer correction, a significant increase from just 4% in the pre-questionnaire Initially, 73% of respondents believed that peer correction would not help them avoid repeated mistakes in their writing; however, this perception persisted for 34.5% of students even after multiple attempts This suggests that students' carelessness or inattentiveness may contribute to their continued inability to prevent the same errors in English writing.
3 rd statement: Peer correction helps students make clear and be aware of grammar rules
Tải bản FULL (58 trang): https://bit.ly/3y5XTl3
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net