Peer correction in teaching the writing skill to efl secondary school students

NGUYEN THI HOAI VAN PEER CORRECTION IN TEACHING THE WRITING SKILL TO EFL SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION Supervisor: Dr... NGUYEN THI HOAI VAN PEER CORRECTION IN

NGUYEN THI HOAI VAN

PEER CORRECTION IN TEACHING THE WRITING SKILL TO EFL

SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION

Supervisor: Dr Tran Thi Ngoc Yen

Nghệ An, 2016

NGUYEN THI HOAI VAN

PEER CORRECTION IN TEACHING THE WRITING SKILL TO EFL

SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

Field: Theory and Methodology of English Language Teaching

Code: 60141011

MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION Supervisor: Dr Tran Thi Ngoc Yen

Nghệ An, 2016

submitted for any other degrees

Candidate’s signature

Nguyen Thi Hoai Van

The main aim of this thesis is to examine the way EFL secondary school students at Nghi Phu Secondary School respond to their peers’ writing and the effectiveness of peer written correction In order to obtain adequate information for the study, document analysis of students’ peer written correction and a survey were carried out The participants involved in the study were 60 secondary students at Nghi Phu Secondary School

The analysis of the participants’ peer written correction revealed that the students gave feedback on different of aspects writing, especially grammar and vocabulary Also, the study results showed that the peer written correction is effective to students’ learning to write

Although it was found that peer written correction enhanced the participants’ writing ability, most students at Nghi Phu Secondary School still have difficulties in indicating mistakes and providing suggestions to improve their peers’ writing Based on the findings, the researcher provided some suggestions to improve the teaching and learning of writing using peer correction

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my deepest thanks to my supervisor, Dr Tran Ngoc Yen for her invaluable support, useful guidance and comments I am truly grateful for her advice and suggestions right from the beginning when this study was only in its formative stage

I would also express my gratitude to all the teachers of the English department at Vinh University for their constructive and insightful comments, constant support as well as suggestions for this paper

Especially, I am grateful to the students for their actively taking part in completing the writing tasks and answering the survey questionnaire Without their help, this paper could not have been completed

Finally, my special thanks go to my friends and my family who have been beside

me and have encouraged me a lot to fulfill my study

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ii

ABSRACT iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

LISTS OF TABLES AND FIGURES viii

LISTS OF FIGURES ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 The rationale of the study 1

1.2 Aims of the research 3

1.3 Significance of the study 3

1.4 Scope of the study 4

1.5 Methods of the study 4

1.6 Organization of the paper 4

CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 6

2.1The writing skill 6

2.1.1 Definition of writing 6

2.1.2 The reasons for teaching writing 6

2.1.3 Writing skill in L1 and in L2/ FL 7

2.1.4 Assessing writing ability 8

2.1.4.1 Teacher assessing students 8

2.1.4.2 Students assessing themselves 10

2.2 Teaching English writing 11

2.2.1 Approaches in teaching English writing 12

2.2.2 The Product Approach 13

2.2.3 The Process Approach 13

2.3 Correction in writing instruction 15

2.3.1 Definition of correction 15

2.3.2 Types of correction 17

2.3.3 Principle for correction 19

2.4 Background of peer correction 19

2.4.1 Definition of peer correction 19

2.4.2 Peer correction activities 24

2.4.3 Peer correction and its impact on reducing mistakes and developing writing skill 25

2.4.4 Principles of peer correction 27

2.4.5 Advantages and disadvantages of peer correction 28

2.4.5.1 The advantages of using peer correction 28

2.4.5.2 The disadvantages of using peer correction 29

2.4.6 The new roles of the teacher and the students in using peer correction 31

CHAPTER 3 THE STUDY 32

3.1 The current situation of teaching and learning writing at Nghi Phu secondary school 32

3.2 Methodology 32

3.2.1 The participants 33

3.2.2 Instrumentation 33

3.2.3 Data collection procedure 35

CHAPTER 4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION 39

4.1 ANALYSIS OF QUESTIONNAIRES 39

4.1.1 Students’ general information 39

4.1.2 Students’ attitudes towards peer correction method 42

4.1.3 Comparison of students’ confidence before and after the experiment 43

4.1.4 Students’ opinions after peer correction treatment 46

4.1.5 Students’ perceived difficulties when giving written feedback to their peers’ paper 47

4.1.5.1 Students’ perceived difficulties in indicating the mistakes in their peers’ writings 48

4.1.5.2 Students’ perceived difficulties in providing suggestions for the mistakes in their peers’ paper 50

4.2 ANALYSIS OF TESTS 52

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION 57

5.1 Summary and discussion 57

5.2 Recommendations 58

5.3 Limitations 59

5.4 Suggestions for further studies 60

REFERENCES 61

APPENDICES……….64

LISTS OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1 :Approaches to teaching writing skill 13

Table 2 :The number of students in the two groups 33

Table 3 :Procedures of data collection 35

Table 4 :Scoring scale for writing test 36

Table 5 :Results of questionnaire A 42

Table 6 :Results of questionnaire B, part 1 43

Table 7: Results of questionnaire B, part II 47

Table 8: Students’ perceived difficulties in indicating the mistakes in their peers’ papers 48

Table 9: Students’ perceived difficulties in providing suggestions for the indicated mistakes in their peers’ writings 50

Table 10: The control and experimental groups’ pretest and posttest results 53

LISTS OF FIGURES

Chart 1: Students’ experiences of studying English 40

Chart 2: Students’ thoughts of studying English 40

Chart 3: The necessity of studying EFL writing 40

Chart 4: Students’ confidence in studying English writing 41

Chart 5: “Peer correction stimulates students’ creativeness and activeness” 43

Chart 6: “It’s interesting and useful to read and give comment on others’ writings.” 44

Chart 7: “Giving peer correction helps to develop critical reading skill” 44

Chart 8: “Peer correction activities help learners to enhance communicative competence, promotes second language development” 45

Chart 9: “Peer correction increases students’ confidence in writing” 45

Chart 10: “Peer correction provides chances to build strong classmate relationship and gives students a sense of group cohesion” 46

Chart 11: Pretest and Posttest results by band scores of control group 55

Chart 12: Pretest and Posttest results by band scores of experimental group 56

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: 64

APPENDIX B: 66

APPENDIX C: 69

APPENDIX D: 72

APPENDIX E : 73

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The rationale of the study

Today English is considered one of the most important factors to the trend of globalization in all fields of life over the world Thus, English as Second Language has been taught in many countries and the demand to use English fluently as well as

to acquire four basic skills is becoming essential among all students As a result, methodology has been studied for years to find out the most effective ways of teaching and learning English

In Vietnam, secondary school students have to acquire four skills of English as reading, speaking, listening and writing when they study English Among them, writing is considered the most difficult skill In fact, students’ accuracy and fluency

in writing is problematic The difference between styles in English and Vietnamese creates difficulties for learners in cohesion and style Students’ poor topical knowledge, in addition, has a negative effect on their writing content Besides, word choice and lack of vocabulary prevent students from expressing their ideas properly Their pieces of writing also consist of many grammatical mistakes such as subject-verb agreement, the use of tenses, and pronoun references Those obstacles, which could result in students’ lack confidence in English writing as well as the low quality of their written texts, have drawn much of my attention

Little cooperative learning among students could be another reason that affects their writing quality Actually, students get correction on their written products mainly from the teachers, rarely from peers Even when the teachers provide feedback, they tend to generate ambiguous or evaluative feedback such as what Coupe (1986) addressed “Good job”, or “You should try more” because instructors do not often have enough time to give specific feedback Besides, students do not usually share their drafts for editing and revising For this reason, learners keep making the same common mistakes in their writing several times In this case, they do not have many opportunities to learn from their friends

Freeman (2000) stated that when learning is based on cooperation, language learners look for helpful results for themselves and their peers Caulk quoted

Rollinson (2005) as saying that “teachers’ feedback is general while students’ is

more specific” (P.26) Peer correction, since it allows students to make negotiation

of their strength and weakness (Williams, 1957) where the students can make negotiation of ideas, comments, and correction

Peer correction generates positive impact if the students are ready and well-trained and prepared by the teacher (Williams, 1957) Rollinson (2005) states that peer correction also trains students to be critical readers on their own writing Because of the importance of correction, there have been a lot of studies that focus on all aspects relating to correction As clear, concise correction matched to standards will increase students’ confidence in their writing lesson, correction plays a very important role in the teaching of any language Through correction, the writer learns where he or she has misled and confused the reader by not supplying enough information, illogical organization, lack of development ideas, or something simple like inappropriate word-choice or tense In other words, the writers have opportunities to identify their errors and correct them to make better writing Also, the use of peer correction in writing classrooms has been generally supported in the literature review as a potentially valuable aid for its social cognitive, affective and methodological benefits (Merlin, (1986), Radecki and Swales (1988), Hedge (2000), Ferris and Roberts (2001)) They all believe that peer correction is very important and has a great influence on the success of teaching and learning writing

As a teacher of English at Nghi Phu secondary school, the researcher is constantly searching for ways to help his students become more confident and effective writers During writing lessons, she finds that her students often make a lot of errors that increase students’ anxiety in writing lesson With a view of language learning

as a creative construction process, she shares an agreement with Rollinson (2005) in the view that peer correction is one of the most important techniques to improve writing skill for secondary school students

All above encouraged the researcher to conduct a survey to explore students’ attitudes towards peer correction technique in teaching the writing skills recommend teachers of English some suggested solutions to help their students gain

more achievement in writing skill

1.2 Aims of the research

This research was designed to investigate students’ peer written correction in writing skills at Nghi Phu Secondary School Its aims are to investigate students’ current practice of giving peer written correction, the effectiveness of peer written correction and the students’ perceived difficulties when giving feedback to their peers’ writings The researcher also desired to propose some implications for the teaching and learning writing using peer written correction and provide some suggestions for further study

In order to achieve those aims, the research attempted to answer the following questions:

1 Does peer-correction help to increase EFL secondary school students’ confidence

in writing?

2 How does peer correction effect EFL students’ writing proficiency?

1.3 Significance of the study

Theoretically, the study proves that peer written correction is crucial to the teaching and learning of writing Peer written correction offers a number of advantages Indeed, peer written correction gives both the readers and the writers more opportunities for collaboration, consideration and reflection than oral negotiation and debate It also gives the teacher a better chance of closely following the progress of individuals and groups, both in terms of the feedback offered and revisions made

Practically, the study shows that using peer written correction not only eases the teachers’ burden in giving feedback to students’ writings but also helps students improve their writing skills Obviously, when students read their peers’ writings,

they not only help their peers recognize and correct the mistakes but also become

more critical writers

1.4 Scope of the study

The study is concerned with finding the effects of using peer correction approach in helping students to learn EFL writing more confidently at Nghi Phu Secondary School in comparison with the traditional one (teachers’ response only) Other approaches to teaching writing intended for students would be beyond the scope

1.5 Methods of the study

In order to achieve the above mentioned aims to make the study more practical, data were collected by means of tests and questionnaires and analysis is also used to process the materials The primary data analysis is of quantitative method with close questions and scale questions in the questionnaire designed for the needs analysis, and students’ attitude analysis

A need analysis was to find out whether the secondary students consider learning writing useful and find out their attitudes to peer response approach Lastly, statistic analysis of students’ test scores is used to identify any improvement made by the students in writing after the experiment The analysis also helps find out the strengths and drawbacks of peer response, which may result in appropriate adjustments in the teaching method of the instructor

The books, articles and internet sources on peer response method for teaching writing are collected to examine the history of the fields and available suggestions

in the practice of teaching writing

1.6 Organization of the paper

The paper consists of five chapters as follows:

Chapter 1 – Introduction – briefly states the rationale of the study, the aims, research questions, scope as well as the significance and organization of the study

Chapter2 – Literature review- discusses the literature related to the correction to students’ writing, different views and ways of peer correction in writing as well as the guiding principles for effective peer written correction

Chapter 3–The study-describes the current situation of the teaching and learning writing at Nghi Phu secondary school and the methodology which deals with the participants, instrumentation, data collection procedure and data analysis procedure Chapter 4 – Results and Discussion- analyzes and discusses the data and then draws the implications for the teaching and learning of writing using peer written correction

The last chapter – Chapter 5 – summarizes the major findings of the study, acknowledges its limitations and provides suggestions for further study

CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

2.1The writing skill

Writing is a skill that can be developed by giving specific criteria on how to reach the learner’s expectations This project helped students to improve informal writing

by using the English language as a vehicle of communication through collaborative work of peer correction Based on this, the essential theoretical constructs used to carry out this project were: teaching writing, writing informal letters, e-mail activities and peer correction In this case the constructs were pointed to identify the key elements in writing informal letters and the structure, cohesion and coherence between paragraphs by using peer correction Teaching writing was essential in

terms of showing the students how to obtain a product after a process

2.1.1Definition of writing

In language teaching, writing is defined as a productive and taught language skill

According to Ur (1996) “most people acquire the spoken language (at least their own mother tongue) intuitively, whereas the written form is in most cases deliberately taught and learned” (p.161) He added that “writing normally requires some form of instruction It is not a skill that is readily picked up by exposure”

(p11)

In short, the word “writing” itself may imply an act, a process or a skill, which needs practice and study to develop It requires both physical and mental powers from the writers

2.1.2 The reasons for teaching writing

According to Harmer, J (1998:79), teaching writing to students of English includes some reasons as follows

Firstly, it is reinforcement Most of students gain great benefits from seeing the writing language especially the visual demonstration language construction is valuable form both their understanding and committing the new language to their

memory So it is very useful for them to write sentences using new language after they have just studied it

Secondly, language development is also a reason for teaching writing It seems that the actual process of writing helps students to learn language better The highest level of writing skill involves critical thinking To deal with their metal activities, students have to construct proper written tests using all their experience

Thirdly, the most important reason for teaching writing is that it is a basic productive language skill Obviously, students need to know how to write a note, how to write a letter etc Therefore, they need to know how some writing conventions such as punctuation, paragraph construction etc

2.1.3 Writing skill in L1 and in L2/ FL

Writing in one’s mother tongue is a demanding task, which calls upon several language abilities, as well as upon more general cognitive abilities These constituent abilities are in a constant interplay Writing in a second language (L2) is even more demanding because several of these constituent abilities may be less well developed than in one’s first language (L1) For example, linguistic knowledge of the L2 may be limited, and the accessibility of this knowledge may be less rapid or automatic

When writing in a first language (L1), words and grammatical structures may be readily available in an automatized way, as they are in speaking However, in second language1 (L2) writing, the situation is likely to be different Compared to L1 writers, L2 writers will not only differ in their linguistic knowledge of the (second) language, but – due to differences in exposure to the L2 – they most likely will also differ in their ‘fluency’ According to Silva (1993) L2 writers did less goal setting and had more difficulty organizing generated material (the same writers did not have this problem in L1) In general, adult L2 writing was less effective than L1 writing In terms of lower level concerns, L2 writing was stylistically different and simpler in structure

2.1.4 Assessing writing ability

It is vital to briefly look at assessment in general in order to understand the concept

of formative assessment and feedback Assessment is defined as “the process of gathering, interpreting, recording, and using information about the pupils’ response to educational tasks” (Lambert & Lines, 2000:4) It becomes a helpful and

constructive tool when the information derived from it is used to adapt and modify the applied teaching and learning techniques (Black and William, 1998) Pelligrino

et al (2001:42) suggests that assessment has a fundamental role in providing information to help students, teachers, administrators, and policy makers arrive at decisions

Historically writing, assessment can have a more noticeable influence on students’ behavior and performance than teaching does (Miller and Parlett, 1974) Assessment is still the most influential factor in formal education and, if not approached properly, may subvert the positive aspects of both the teaching and learning process Although tests and examinations are considered as one way of assessing, assessment does not mean testing There is an obvious distinction between assessing and testing students’ performance The purposes of tests or examinations determine clearly whether they are being used for assessment or testing (Knight, 2001:8) They are “testing” if they only provide students with marks, the final judgment, without any useful feedback of what they have (or have not) mastered On the contrary, they are “assessments” when they aim to identify what students need to do in order to enhance their performance in the future

2.1.4.1 Teacher assessing students

Using assessment as an instrument for learning English is crucial The National

Research Council (NRC; 1996: 5) states that “assessment and learning are two sides of the same coin…when students engage in assessments they should learn from these assessments” National Standard, the NRC added that “high quality

assessment in the classroom can have a positive effect on students’ achievement”

(p.9) Thus, English teachers should not look at assessment as merely judgment, but

as an aid to stimulate and engage students in the learning process This stimulation may occur when students become acquainted with their previous mistakes and are guided to avoid such mistakes in their future learning

It is instructive to recognize the purposes of assessments before addressing assessment types Kellough and Kellough (1999) have characterized six purposes of assessment:

1 To assist student learning

2 To identify students’ strengths and weaknesses

3 To assess the effectiveness of a particular instructional strategy

4 To assess and improve the effectiveness of curriculum programs

5 To assess and improve teaching effectiveness

6 To provide data that assist in decision making (p 418-419)

In addition, it is crucial to establish clear principles that may successfully guide the implementation of assessments The following six principles have been adapted from Pausch & Popp (1997) who also stress the significance of grounding assessments’ purposes on rational principles These principles are:

1 The assessment of student learning begins with educational values

2 Assessment is most effective when it reflects an understanding of learning as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over time

3 Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have clear, explicitly stated purposes

4 Assessment requires attention to outcomes but also and equally to the experiences that lead to those outcomes

5 Assessment works best when it is ongoing, not episodic

6 Assessment is most likely to lead to improvement when it is part of a larger set of conditions that promote change (p.1)

2.1.4.2 Students assessing themselves

Although, as the teachers, we ideally placed to provide accurate assessments of student performance, students can also be extremely effective at monitoring and judging their own language production They frequently have a very clear idea of how well they are doing or have done, and if we need them to develop this awareness, we may greatly enhance learning

Student’s self-assessment is bound up with the whole matter of learner autonomy since if we can encourage them to reflect upon their own language through learner training or when on their own way from any classroom Self-assessment is more accurately defined as a process by which students 1) monitor and evaluate the quality of their thinking and behavior when learning and 2) identify strategies that improve their understanding and skills That is, self-assessment occurs when students judge their own work to improve performance as they identify discrepancies between current and desired performance This aspect of self- assessment aligns closely with standards-based education, which provides clear targets and criteria that can facilitate student self-assessment

The pervasiveness of standards-based instruction provides an ideal context in which these clear-cut benchmarks for performance and criteria for evaluating student products, when internalized by students, provide the knowledge needed for self-assessment Finally, self-assessment identifies further learning targets and instructional strategies (correctives) students can apply to improve achievement Thus, self-assessment is conceptualized here as the combination of three components related in a cyclical, ongoing process: self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and identification and implementation of instructional correctives as needed Essentially, students identify their learning and performance strategies, provide feedback to themselves based on well-understood standards and criteria, and determine the next steps or plans to enhance their performance

2.2 Teaching English writing

Harmer (1998) says that the type of writing we ask the students to do depends on their age, interest and level These aspects are important to provide the students with meaningful vocabulary, grammar, strategies to write words, sentences, topic sentences, paragraphs and simple compositions The level of the students improves when they have guidance on common tasks such as, writing poems, charts, postcards and letters Their interests included things they liked; another essential aspect to take into account is the purposes of writing and the needs of the group

Furthermore, the activities that teachers Peer correction techniques prepare need to

be attractive, grasp the students’ interest and involve them in the process of writing The more the students establish this connection with the topic and the teacher, the better they write and participate with enthusiasm trying to do their best all the time Harmer (2007) says that there are several strategies to consider in the process of teaching writing, such as pre-writing phases, editing, re-drafting and finally producing a final version of their work It is important to encourage students to write drafts, reflect and revise; they need to think on what they are going to write about and this can be done by brainstorming or using a checklist to control that the task is being adequately addressed, the information is relevant, the structure is appropriate and the grammar is accurate A useful way to work on this part is through collaborative writing By using this strategy, students find their own mistakes and correct one another to submit a revised final paper It is essential to make student conscious that writing is a process and that they are responsible of it

Writing encourages students to focus on accurate language as it is mentioned in Harmer (1998) The students write to help themselves to learn better When a teacher asks them to write sentences, paragraphs or longer compositions, she is allowing her students to use the target language in real contexts or situations which can be formal or informal In formal writing, the teacher requests students to write specific questionnaires, dialogues, invitations, essays and descriptions following certain rules in order to have an effective impact However, the activities themselves do not teach the students how to write; for this reason, it is important to

focus the attention on “writing for writing” activities These are activities that are presented in an informal way and can help students develop their process of writing;

a good example is e-mails, the tool that is used in this project Through e-mails the learners are able to exchange informal letters, peer- correction techniques notes and answer questions in a very informal and friendly way which makes them feel more confident on the use of written English

In this part of the study, what have been previously published about the teaching methodology of English writing will be examined First a distinction between the characteristics of written texts will be presented Secondly, traditional and modern approaches in teaching writing will be discussed Lastly, the study will provide micro skills in writing and tasks and activities in writing classes

2.2.1 Approaches in teaching English writing

There are various ways to teach writing but the two most common are the product approach and the process approach Nunan (1991) introduced the two approaches in teaching writing and the differences between them clearly as follows:

a The product approach b The process approach

Organization of ideas is more important than ideas themselves

Emphasize grammar exercises and correctness

Focus on the end result of the writing process: the writing paper of the learners

Learners only produce one final

Ideas are important

The learners are encouraged to get their ideas on paper without worrying too much about correctness

Focus on the various forms of classroom activities which promote the development of language use

The final draft is the result of a long

draft and painful process of writing

successive drafts

Table 1: Approaches to teaching writing skill

2.2.2 The Product Approach

To be more specific, the product approach concentrates on the end product that writer has to produce Teachers following the product approach often begin the lessons with presenting a model text, which is then analyzed on the purpose, language, the organization, and the style The aim is to enable the learners to produce similar texts Learning is evaluated through text analysis of learner’s work according to some criteria such as the standard of rhetorical style, accurate grammar, and conventional organization (Brown 1994: 320) The value of this approach is the use of models for text analysis and as a basis for thinking about the purposes and readership of a text

2.2.3 The Process Approach

Unlike the product approach, the process approach focuses on thinking and writing processes The product approach sees the language learners as creators of language, decision makers of the message and content (Brown 1994: 320) It is argued by Nunan (1991: 87) that while the product-oriented approach aims at developing the learner’s writing skill mainly at sentence-level, the process-oriented approach aims

at language at discourse-level

In the view of Hedge (1990), the process contains a lot of stages which can be illustrated as follows: “being motivated to write – getting ideas together – planning and outlining – making notes – making a first draft – revising, replanning, redrafting – editing and getting ready for publication.” Meanwhile, according to Oshima and Hogue (1991), the writing process embraces essentially three steps: pre-writing, planning (outlining), writing, and revising drafts Each step involves certain kinds

of task that the writers have to fulfill in order to construct a good piece of work

* Pre-writing Pre-writing is any classroom activity that encourages the learners to write It stimulates thoughts for getting started It may include understanding the purpose of writing, discovering the topic, and thinking about the audience, gathering information or inventing possible content Once the possible content for writing has been explored, the writers will feel more confident to move forward to the next stage

* Planning

In this stage, the learners organize the ideas they have generated The most efficient way to do this is to make an outline - a plan in which the learners write down the main points and sub-points in the intended order

* Drafting Once sufficient ideas have been gathered and plan already drawn, the first attempt

at writing – drafting can proceed quickly At this stage, the writers are focused on the fluency of writing and are not preoccupied with grammatical accuracy or the neatness of the draft

* Responding Responding to student writing has a central role to play in the successful implementation of process writing It is a kind of oral or written intervention by teachers or peers or other possible readers after the writers have finished drafting This activity is intended to provide the students useful information to improve their writing

* Revising Revising is done on the basis of the feedback given in the responding stage The students reexamine what was written to see how effectively they have communicated their meanings to the readers Revising is not just checking for language errors; it is done to improve the global content and the organization of ideas so that the writer’s intention is made clearer to the readers

* Editing

At editing stage, the students are engaged in tidying up their texts as they prepare the final draft for evaluation by the teachers Editing is vital as it is not done for its

own sake but as a part of the process of making communication as clear and unambiguous as possible to the reader

* Evaluating

In evaluating the student writing, teachers normally assign scores which may be analytical (based on specific aspects of writing ability), or holistic (based on a global interpretation of the effectiveness of that writing) In order to be effective,

the criteria for evaluation need to be made known to the students in advance

2.3 Correction in writing instruction 2.3.1 Definition of correction

There is a variety of terms used equally as correction For instance, Chun et al (1982) use the term correction; Dulay et al (1982); and Tsui (1995) refer the term feedback; Ellis (1994) uses interchangeably the terms feedback, repair, and correction to indicate correction These terms are discussed in this section to illuminate the semantic restriction of each term and specify the certain term correction in the study

The term correction commonly implies direct reforming response to learners’ errors according to Collins Cobuild Learner’s Dictionary (2003); Chun et al (1982); and Ellis (1994) Corrections mean ‘the marks or comments made on the piece of work, especially school work, which indicate where there are mistakes and what are the right answer” (Collins Cobuild Learner’s Dictionary, 2003:243)

Particularly, Chun et al (1982); and Ellis (1994) only focus on teacher’s response towards learners’ errors when they define the term correction In fact, Chun et al (1982:1) on the side of educators’ perspectives explain that correction refers to teachers’ responsibility responding to learners’ errors and supplying corrected form Similarly, Ellis (1994) distinguishes correction as “teacher’s attempts to provide negative evidence to deal specifically with learners’ linguistics errors” Both Chun

et al (1982); and Ellis (1994) agree the term correction is used to express teachers’ task to deal with learners’ errors directly Generally, correction is defined as direct teachers’ reaction to learners’ errors by supplying the correct forms of a language

Among the terms relating to correction such as feedback, repair or correction; feedback may be used widely and frequently to represent diverse types of error correction activities and include various participants responding to learners’ performance Among those definitions, Kepner (1991, cited in Grami, 2005) defines feedback as all the process that indicates the accuracy of learners’ performance while feedback is regarded as readers or listeners’ response to learners’ written or spoken production in Dulay et al., (1982:34) Tsui (1995), in addition, illuminates that feedback means teachers evaluate and comment on what learners produce He also separates feedback into two types: negative and encourage ones, in which

“negative feedback creates a sense of failure and frustration among learners and will inhibit student’s contribution” (p.43) whereas, ‘encourage feedback’ motivate learners to learn and involve in classroom activities and forms friendly learning atmosphere Based on the definitions above, it can be concluded that, feedback has

a more wide range of correction activities than correction It is not only an indication of teachers’ commitments to deal with learners’ errors but also implies for other listeners or readers’ responses to the written errors, including supplying correct items, evaluating and giving comments on learners’ production

Some other researchers distinguish the terms correction and feedback based on teachers’ response on the grammatical errors or content errors A representative for this notion is Vaupetitsch (2006) He implies that correction concentrates on form, while feedback focuses on the content or the communication purpose Furthermore, feedback can be negative or positive while correction is viewed as the negative response because it shows learners that their production is incorrect (Han Ng, 2002)

As seen, there is different and even controversial understanding on the terms of correction, but the most common characteristic of correction and feedback is aimed

at improving learners’ accuracy and performance through variety of teachers, reader’s or listener’s reaction For that reason, the term correction in this study can

be used interchangeably as correction or feedback Correction in this study,

moreover, involves all participants taking part in treating learners’ errors including teachers, friends or learners themselves with various correction activities such as comments, evaluation, right forms supplement

There are a number of written correction methods such as student-teacher conferences, various kinds of teachers’ responses to learners’ written errors, and error illustration Nevertheless, the following parts of the literature review will only focus on and discuss in detail teacher correction, peer correction and self correction

2.3.2 Types of correction

Edge suggests three basic types of correction in term of who the corrector is Whenever a student makes a mistake, the essential question arises – How to correct the mistake? In principle, we have three options: Self correction, peer correction and teacher correction (Edge, 1989)

1 Self correction: This is always the best way because students prefer to

correct themselves; it is more pleasant and less stressful for them Teachers should indicate that there is something wrong in what has been said and the teacher should give his students space for making correction Edge prefers self- correction in cases where a slip is made (Edge, 1989)

Self correction is characterized as “self-initiated, self-repair”, which means a learner correct his errors by himself without external help (Foster and Ohta, 2005) Meanwhile, Macmillan English online dictionary (2008) defines self- correction happens when teacher shows a learner her error and let herself corrects it Self -correction in this study follows the definition of Macmillan, in which self - correction means that learners self-correct their errors after their teacher has pointed them out

2 Teacher correction: Teacher correction is used when neither the students

himself nor other students are able to correct the mistake But the teacher does not have to give the corrections straight away Teacher can just help students to find the

mistake or the right answers (Edge, 1989) Teacher correction has been used mostly and frequently This term can be named as teacher correction, or corrective feedback

According to Macmillan English dictionary online (2008), teacher correction simply and commonly means ‘the teacher corrects the student’ More specifically, the term corrective feedback replacing for teacher correction is found in Chaudron (1977); and Lightbrown and Spada (1999) In fact, Chaudron (1977) confirms corrective feedback is “any reaction of teacher which clearly transforms disapprovingly, or demands improvement of the learner’s utterance” (cited in Lyster, 2002:31) Meanwhile, Lightbrown and Spada (1999) characterize corrective feedback as the teachers’ ‘indication’ to the learners’ incorrect items when they perform the target language Both Spada (1999) and Chauron (1977) agree on the notion that corrective feedback means teachers’ response to learners’ errors Chaurdron’s corrective feedback implies teachers’ direct reaction to learners’ errors or supply the correct forms of a language while Lightbrown & Spada’s focuses on teachers’ direct

or indirect help so that learners are able to deal with their errors

Harmer also claims that teacher-correction is highly demanded when more students make the same mistakes which indicate that they have not understood a grammatical issue So it is good for the teacher to explain it once again Subsequently, the student whom has made the mistake should correct the original mistake (Harmer, 1994) Scrivener suggests the same types of correction as Edge: self-correction, student-student, teacher-students, and he add small groups, all class and course book/reference books (Scrivener, 1994)

On the whole, teacher correction or corrective feedback is generally represented for teachers’ direct or indirect response to learners’ errors consisting of supplying the correct form of the errors and giving comments

3 Peer correction: Students do not always manage to correct the mistake In

that case, a teacher asks someone else for the correction, this is callled peer

correction This type should be used when a mistake is made The teacher asks another student to help to correct the mistake

2.3.3 Principle for correction

Obviously, correction plays an important role in helping students confident in learning The way to correct is no exception Depending on each kind of mistakes, the way to correct is different However, firstly it is believed that students need space for expressing themselves freely Secondly, students should feel that their teacher is interested in what they express Thirdly, they should not feel guilty for

making mistakes (Edge, 1989)

2.4 Background of peer correction

Harmer (2005) establishes that this technique is a valuable element in the writing process It encourages students to work collaboratively and reduces the Peer correction techniques students’ reluctance in the editing process On the other hand, the students develop the skill of revising and checking their own process of learning Even though this is an effective process, it needs the teachers’ feedback in order to know about the focus and the way they checked a classmates’ work

In this respect, Orlich (1990) states that peer correction can also be a way to help disadvantaged or special students Students who are shy do not feel confident to participate or produce written texts because they are afraid of making mistakes Peer correction helps students overcome difficulties, the advanced students helping the weak ones who sometimes understand better a classmate’s explanation than a teacher’s

2.4.1 Definition of peer correction

A number of key words are related to the concept of “peer correction” such as peer response, peer feedback, peer review, peer assessment, and peer feedback It is necessary to clarify these terms for the working definition of peer correction used in this research According to Teo (2001), in peer correction, students are given opportunities to explore ideas in pairs or groups, give feedback on each other’s

writing and proofread and edit each other’s written work In peer response in writing classes, participating students were expected to proofread and edit each other’s writing on their own without the teacher’s intervention In these activities, a more proficient student was paired up with a less proficient one so that the former with his or her knowledge and experience would assist and benefit the latter in writing by providing with constructive feedback The instructor, then, gave comments and feedback on meaning, order, style, spelling, and punctuation of the writing in the final step to help student writers overcome problems

Research on peer review generally supports the ability of peer reviewers in helping each other when working in groups For example, Coit (2004) emphasized the important role of peer review in L2 writing classrooms in his study In his study, students were given weekly writing assignments via the internet, and then they sent their writing products to a randomly peer reviewer for correction and evaluation In this online writing course, peer review was the only source of correction and feedback

Similarly, Cho & Schunn (2005) described more clearly how SWoRD (scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline), a web-based reciprocal peer review system, supported writing practice As described in the research, 28 participants were randomly assigned into three different conditions: a single-expert condition whose writers received feedback and grades from an expert, a single-peer condition whose writers received feedback and grades from a single peer, and a multi-peer condition whose writers received feedback and grades from six peers Students selected topics that they wanted to write on and those that they wanted to review on The SWoRD controlled the number of writers and reviewers in each topic to provide a balance of reviews to each paper The researchers designed a clear but rather complicated procedure for writing and reviewing activities which consisted of five phases

In phase 1, students submitted their first drafts to SWORD and later this system distributed each set of papers back to reviewers who chose the topic for review In phase 2, reviewers downloaded a set of papers assigned to them, evaluate each

paper based on a seven-point rating scale (1: Disastrous to 7: Excellent) and then submitted written comments on how to improve the papers Next, in phase 3, the authors had to rewrite their papers based on the reviewers’ comments and then turn

in the final drafts Also in this phase, reviewers were required to reflect on the feedback that they received on their review In phase 4, students back-reviewed their reviewers’ feedback to see how the written feedback and comments were for revising their paper Finally, in phase V, reviewers accessed their comments on the first draft of each paper as well as the back reviews on the written comments

Unlike the mentioned authors, other researchers used another term to address similar concept: peer assessment It is known that peer assessment can be summative or formative Many peer assessment studies only ask students to evaluate and comment on their peers’ project work in a summative way; that is, students give a final grade for others’ project work In such cases, there was less peer interaction than in the current Web-based peer assessment by Lin, Liu, and Yuan (2001) that favored formative peer assessment In their study, they utilized internet resources to facilitate contacts between individuals and information, to assist in brainstorming among individuals, and to generate more meaningful learning at the higher education level Shaaban (2006) also preferred using formative assessment which can decrease writers’ anxiety generated by concentration on linguistic accuracy and increase their comfort and feeling of success by focusing on communicative fluency The researcher explained that peer and group assessment could help EFL learners develop their ability to work cooperatively with others in groups For peer assessment, students can write evaluative and encouraging notes for each team member The role of the teacher, then, would be to provide guidance, to explain to students what they have to evaluate in one another’s work, and to help them use the evaluation criteria properly

In addition, peer assessment is defined as “an arrangement in which students consider the quality of their fellow students’ work and in which the assessment is a formative one” (Berg, Admiraal, & Pilot, 2003) These authors studied the

contribution of peer assessment to the acquisition of writing skills by university students Besides, Topping (1998, cited in Lin, Liu, & Yuan, 2001) defined peer assessment as “an arrangement in which individuals consider the amount, level, value, worth, quality, or success of the products or outcomes of their peers’ learning

of similar status” He described the variety of peer assessment by a typology which illustrated features or variables of all possible peer assessment and various arrangements in a particular of peer assessment

Trahasch (2004) conducted a research on peer assessment as a form of innovative assessment and defined it as “a scenario where students review artifacts as learning outcomes of other students on the basis of a set of criteria” Collaborative tasks are included in peer assessment and it becomes a shared activity Students have to take

up different positions: as assessed they reviewed and as assessor they give feedback

to other learners

George, Jacobs, Zhang, and Shuqiang (1989) used the term “peer feedback” in their research and considered it as “part of a larger category of educational activities in which students work together in groups to promote student-centered learning” (p.2) The researchers stated that using peer feedback in the writing process, particularly

at the revision stage, could promote student-centered learning in writing classes In their study, students first wrote brief composition outlines for an assigned topic which were checked by the teacher for content and grammar Then, they wrote and handed in their first drafts Next, the instructor randomly paired students and asked them to read each other’s drafts and to give feedback

The feedback was of two types: markings and corrections If the students thought something might be incorrect but were not sure, they just circled the item in question with no correction (marking) If students were sure of a mistake, they drew

a line through it and suggested the correct form above it (correction) In the next step, students were allowed time to discuss the suggestions and finally revise their drafts based on their peer’ suggestions and discussion In this study, peer feedback was used as formative assessment in the writing process

In another research Using peer Feedback to Enhance the Quality of Student Online Postings: An Exploratory Study by Ertmer, Richardson, Belland, Camin, Connolly, Coulthard, et al (2007), peer feedback was used as an instructional strategy to increase the quality of students’ online postings and as a means to promote higher levels of order thinking as well as critical analysis In this study, students provided feedback regarding the quality of their postings to each other, which enabled them

to learn from each other, and thus to construct knowledge and understanding of English writing

For this study, peer feedback was defined as a numeral score based on Bloom’s taxonomy and descriptive comments supporting the assigned score and relating to the quality of the post (Ertmer, Richardson, Belland, Camin, Connolly, Coulthard,

et al (2007).Students were asked to provide feedback to two peers by reviewing their assigned postings and scoring them using Bloom’s taxonomy as well as providing comments to support the scoring After reviewing the feedback and eliminating reviewers’ names, the instructor compiled and sent the feedback to students via email to ensure anonymity Both instructor feedback and peer feedback scores were counted in students’ grades, and students also got participation points for giving peer feedback It has now become clear that peer feedback plays an important role in instruction, especially in writing courses Instructional feedback

“provides students with information that either confirms what they already know or change their existing knowledge and beliefs”(Mory, 2004; Topping, 1998 cited in

Ertmer, Richardson, Belland, Camin, Connolly,Coulthard, et al., 2007) Higgins, Hartley, and Skelton (2002 cited in Ertmer, Richardson,Belland, Camin, Connolly, Coulthard, et al., 2007) also noted that meaningful, high-quality peer feedback would help students become cognitively engaged in the content under study

Besides, peer feedback was described as “anything that might strengthen students’ capacity to self-regulate their own performance” and it served as a form of

formative assessment (Nicol& Cantlon, 2006 cited in Ertmer, Richardson, Belland, Camin, Connolly, Coulthard, et al,2007) Therefore, I assume that students can gain

more from assessing and providing feedback to each other than simply submitting their own written work

2.4.2 Peer correction activities

The procedure of online peer feedback activities will be described intensively in chapter 3 In this section, I briefly describe online peer feedback activities the participants in this study performed Students read and respond to drafts of their peers’ written assignments That is, when an assignment is complete, students exchange drafts for review and comments based on a suggested checklist Once students get feedback from their peers, they are allowed time to make corrections, additions, and deletions on their drafts before turning in their final drafts for final assessment

All peer-correction activities are organized online for controllable reasons Participants write and post their first drafts on the assigned topics onto the forum in DOKEOS Then, they download their peers’ first drafts in their subgroup and give feedback as well as comments based on the suggested editing checklist before uploading them back onto the forum More discussions are allowed along with comments via the forum or e-mail In the next step, students read their peers’ feedback, make necessary changes to improve their paragraphs based on the feedback, and rewrite them Prior to the due date, the second drafts are sent back to the forum for final valuation which is done by the instructor Finally, the instructor’s feedback including his comments, corrections, and final grades will be posted onto the drop box for all participants to share their final written products Students also have opportunities to evaluate the quality of their feedback by comparing their feedback with other peers’ or the instructor’s and to learn how their feedback benefits peers’ writing

2.4.3 Peer correction and its impact on reducing mistakes and developing writing skill

“Knowledge is best acquired through negotiated interaction” (Grabe & Kaplan,

1996, p.380) There are many approaches to error correction and also definitions of peer feedback from many linguists and experts According to Richards, et al,

Peer correction is an activity in the revising stage of writing in which students receive feedback about their writing from other students-their peers Typically students work in pairs or small groups, read each other's compositions and ask questions or give comments or suggestions (1992, p.268)

Some other researchers of EFL writing state that feedback play an essential role in the process of writing Keh (1990) claims that giving feedback means giving comments and suggestions, which helps the writer edit his or her composition Through teachers or classmates' feedback, students can know what kinds of mistakes they made and how to cope with those mistakes Therefore, if students can get a “productive feedback”, they can correct their own errors and avoiding making the similar mistakes in the later writing tasks It is wise for teachers to require learners' responsibilities for their own writing performance and their peers' ones because of the strong effect of peer feedback on students' review as well as their writing skill Zamel (1987) supposes that peers are actual and direct readers or reviewers

In the fact that, there are a number of methods teachers utilize to assist students check their mistakes but indeed teachers seem to not be able to resolve the problem individually Students play the parts of both writers and readers or givers and receivers Hefernik (1983) regards peer editing as learning and teaching instrument for teachers and learners because students can give helpful feedback each other Peer writers can edit their own written compositions basing on the readers' remarks and comments (Mendonca and John, 1994; Rollison, 1998), so the writers can be better at learning writing Students can also have superior performance by the student-to-student activities because these activities are often more detailed than teacher feedback (Caulk, 1994) Also, Mangelsdorfin thinks that peer review can

help many students to have diverse perception about their topics as well as foster the ideas and make them more clearly in the EFL writings Therefore, researchers

believe that “peer feedback can have a positive effect on classroom dynamics and can help to train learners in skills they need to become autonomous” (Spratt et al,

2005, p.157)

Joyce (1997) employs a research to explore main strategies so as to respond to the EFL students' composition writings After the twelve-week period, by comparing the initial writing sample and the third one after using peer editing, he shows that writing competency of students grows strongly and concludes this strategy is efficient and necessary

In the research conducted by Wong (1999), peer correction was carried out and discovered by qualitative data to ease the process of EFL writing in four factors: grammar, rules and concepts, meaning and emotional elements In addition, it helps students improve awareness of writing skill Quantitative findings of this study introduce 97% students admit that they want to apply peer correction in the future

It is important to stress that the writer of this study learns a lot from Wong's research, and longs to use some his methods in this research to examine whether it

is suitable for the writer' teaching fact

Kurt and Atay (2007) also experimented with 86 Turkish Prospective Teachers of English Those participants are divided into 2 groups: Experimental group (writing

an essay and receiving peer feedback) and control group (writing an essay and receiving teacher feedback only) This study concluded that peer feedback helps Turkish PTs reduce writing anxiety and it is really considered as a complementary factor of the teacher feedback

Despite its advantages, peer response has its own weakness Its procedure requests the training and organization from the teacher as well as it depends on students' ability of collaboration with peers Many students give their partners too general and ambiguous reviews They make their peers find it difficult to understand and

catch messages or information The writing ability, thus, seems to not improve (Tsui

& Ng, 2000)

2.4.4 Principles of peer correction

In order to involve all learners in class activities, it is the teachers’ business to design and apply techniques to increase students’ peer activities and make them active learners

First, a comfortable environment should be created for students to establish peer trust and mutual understanding from which to enhance peer support

Second, in order for peer work to be successful, students need to understand clearly what and why they are asked to do This will keep the writing and responding activity focused and forward-moving Students need a reason for reading that they value so that they can make peer feedback in an enthusiastic and comfortable way

To achieve this, peer response should be done in a competitive and threatening atmosphere and feedback should be constructive in a manner that might make the writer want to continue working on the paper

non-According to Pathara (29 Mar.2005), teachers should consider the following ideas when setting tasks which involve students reading and responding each other’s work:

• Clear and achievable task – there should be clear guidelines as to how to respond

• Non-competitive and non-threatening – students need to feel comfortable doing the activity

• Positive and constructive feedback – students are encouraged to share ideas and opinions in a positive and constructive ways

• Fun and motivation – let students choose subjects that interest them so that they can really get involved in

2.4.5 Advantages and disadvantages the use of peer correction

2.4.5.1 The advantages of using peer correction

Teachers are normally the ones who respond to students’ performance; however, students themselves can give comments to one another’s writings Peer response involves students’ responding to and revising their papers based on their peers’ comments This is a kind of pair or group work which helps to provide students with more opportunities to work with each other and exchange their ideas This helps them a lot in getting to know each other, in learning from each other and

creating authentic “audience” or readership Emma Pathare in her article

“Encouraging peer response” affirms that “Likes, dislikes, opinions, dream, goals,

creative thoughts all these can be expressed in writing tasks, and through reading each other’s work, students can build stronger relationship”

Peer activity gives students status of who they are and makes them more confident and creative in learning Peer activities give chances for weak students to be exposed to other’s strong pieces of writing with interesting ideas and clear organization which can serve as good models for them to apply to their own learning Besides, knowing that their classmates will read the work also encourages them to put more time to their task A supportive peer reader can also help his or her writing classmate learn which parts of her paper are working and which parts need further work according to peer comment and suggestion Having the students read each other’s work provides a wide readership who will respond to the writing in a variety of ways, giving richer response than just a single person (the teacher)

Peer correction in writing practice is one kind of task-based learning which is not only a motivating tool but also an effective method of consciousness rising In task-based learning, students are motivated because there are specific tasks’ outcomes for them to fulfill; therefore, they know for sure when they have reached an achievement and they can enjoy the satisfaction Also, in order to fulfill the task, students have to find appropriate language to negotiate and to solve problems