The impact of peer written feedback on the writtent skill of first year students at english department, school of education, can tho university

16 4.2 The current situation of using peer written feedback among first-year students at the English Education, School of Education, Can Tho University.... This study is conducted in an

CAN THO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

Course: 32

Can Tho, May 2010

i

CONTENTS

Contents i

Acknowledgements ii

Abstract (English version) iii

Abstract (Vietnamese version) iv

List of Tables and Figures v

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

1.1 Rationale 1

1.2 Research aims 2

1.3 Research questions 2

1.4 Hypotheses 2

1.5 Organization of the study 2

Chapter 2: Literature Review 4

2.1 An overview of writing teaching 4

2.2 An overview of peer written feedback on writing 5

2.3 Related studies 9

2.4 Conclusive remarks 11

Chapter 3: Research Methodology 12

3.1 Research design 12

3.2 Participants 12

3.3 Research instruments 12

3.4 Procedure 14

Chapter 4: Results 16

4.1 General questionnaire analysis and writing assignments analysis 16

4.2 The current situation of using peer written feedback among first-year students at the English Education, School of Education, Can Tho University 16

4.3 Students’ perceptions of their peers’ written feedback 17

4.4 The impact of peer written feedback on students’ writing revision 19

4.5 The correlation between students’ writing ability and their perceptions of using peer written feedback on writing 20

Chapter 5: Discussions, implications, limitations, suggestions for further research 21

5.1 Discussions 21

5.2 Pedagogical implications and suggestions for further research 23

5.3 Limitations 27

5.4 Conclusion 27

References 29

Appendices 32

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

On completing the graduation paper, I owe profound indebtedness to so many people, without whose contribution and spiritual support I would not have accomplished it First and foremost, my thesis hardly finished without valuable encouragement, advice, comment from my supervisor, Mrs Phan Thi My Khanh I could not forget her enthusiasm to help me correct every part of the thesis and her care about my practice time at high school

Second, my regards are respectively sent to all teachers of the English Department for their encouragement, guidance, especially Ms Le Xuan Mai, who helped me much

in conducting this study from collecting data to marking writing assignments as well

as giving me some suggestions in the teacher’s interview And I would like to acknowledge Mrs Ngo Thi Trang Thao who gave me useful instructions to analyze the data using SPSS program Moreover, I would like to send my heartfelt gratefulness Mrs Truong Nguyen Quynh Nhu who read my study critically and gave

me some worthwhile suggestions to enhance my study Also, my sincere gratitude is sent to Mr Le Cong Tuan, Ms Tran Mai Hien, and Mrs Tran Thi Phuong Thao during the time I interviewed to be given some useful suggestions for the pedagogical implications in my study

My sincere thanks also go to 90 English Language Teaching students, course 35 at Can Tho University for their patience and willingness to do my survey questionnaires

as well as their writing assignments Moreover, I would like to send my gratitude to

my family, my classmates and my best friend, Mr Nguyen Khanh Duy, for encouraging me and supporting me during the time undertook my study Without them, I would not have been able to complete this thesis

iii

ABSTRACT

As well as teachers’ feedback, peer written feedback has been used as one of the common methods to improve English majors’ writing ability at Can Tho University This study is conducted in an attempt to investigate the current situation of peer written feedback in the writing classes for first-year students, students’ perceptions of their peers’ written feedback, the effectiveness of peer feedback on students’ revision and writing ability as well as the correlation between students’ perceptions and their writing ability In order to achieve the desired aims, thanks to the help of 47 first-year English students as well as six teachers, the researcher has conducted a research using one survey questionnaire for first-year students, interview for teachers, and three writing assignments (final versions) are analyzed The findings from students’ questionnaires will provide the researcher with a comprehensive understanding of the current situation of peer written feedback at Can Tho University and students’ perceptions about their friends’ written feedback Generally, first-year students have a rather positive attitude towards this activity and highly appreciate the importance of peer feedback in improving their writing ability Thanks to the findings from analyzing three writing assignments the researcher can state that using peer written feedback have a good impact on first-year students Moreover, together with the findings from questionnaires, the findings from three writing assignments also support the researcher to find out the correlation between students’ insights and their writing ability Although there is no correlation between students’ insights and their writing ability, both good and bad students highly evaluate using peer written feedback to revise their writings Based on the findings from teachers’ interview, some pedagogical implications are then drawn up based on the findings for the betterment

of the current practice With careful and detailed investigations, hopefully this study will serve as a useful source of reference for teachers, students and those who concern about this subject matter

iv

TÓM LƯỢC

Đồng hành với cách giáo viên sửa bài viết cho sinh viên, sinh viên sửa lỗi bài viết của nhau bằng hình thức viết là một trong những phương pháp phổ biến nhằm cải thiện kĩ năng viết của sinh viên chuyên Anh văn trường Đại học Cần Thơ Bài nghiên cứu này được tiến hành với bốn mục đích Một là, tìm hiểu kỹ hơn về việc sử dụng phương pháp sửa lỗi cho nhau nhằm hoàn thiện bài viết của sinh viên chuyên Anh văn năm nhất trường Đại học Cần Thơ Hai là, tìm hiểu quan điểm của sinh viên về việc sử dụng phương pháp này Ba là, tính hiệu quả của việc sử dụng phương pháp này trong việc giúp sinh viên kiểm tra bài đã học đồng thời cải thiện kĩ năng viết của sinh viên Bốn là, tìm ra sự tương quan trong quan điểm của sinh viên đối với phương pháp sửa bài này và khả năng viết của từng đối tượng Trong quá trình nghiên cứu, được sự giúp đỡ tích cực của 47 sinh viên tiếng Anh năm nhất và sáu giáo viên, người nghiên cứu đã sử dụng một bảng câu hỏi cho sinh viên, một số cuộc phỏng vấn giáo viên, và kết quả tổng hợp từ ba phiên bản cuối cùng từ ba bài viết của sinh viên để phân tích

Từ bảng câu hỏi dành cho sinh viên, người nghiên cứu tìm ra một cách hiểu toàn diện hơn về tình hình sinh viên sửa bài viết cho nhau ở thời điểm hiện tại, cũng như quan điểm của họ về việc này Nhìn chung, sinh viên có thái độ tích cực đối với hoạt động giảng dạy này và họ cũng đánh giá rất cao vai trò của việc sinh viên sửa bài viết cho nhau và cách này đã góp phần làm cho sinh viên tiến bộ hơn Bên cạnh đó, người nghiên cứu cũng khẳng định rằng phương pháp này có tác động đến sự tiến bộ của sinh viên qua việc phân tích kết quả từ ba bài viết Cuối cùng, với việc phân tích kết hợp bảng câu hỏi và ba bài viết giúp cho người nghiên cứu có một cái nhìn sâu sắc hơn về mối quan hệ giữa khả năng viết của sinh viên và quan điểm của họ về việc sử dụng hoạt động này Mặc dù không có mối quan hệ nào, người nghiên cứu kết luận rằng sinh viên ở mọi trình độ đều đánh giá cao phương pháp này Ngoài ra, thông qua một số ý kiến từ các cuộc phỏng vấn giáo viên, các kết luận sư phạm được đưa ra nhằm giúp cho việc dạy và học kỹ năng viết tốt hơn Với sự nghiên cứu cẩn trọng, tỉ

mỉ hy vọng bài nghiên cứu này sẽ là một tài liệu tham khảo cho những giáo viên, sinh viên và những ai quan tâm đến vấn đề này

by the 1st- year students 17 Figure 4.2: The mean scores of the current situation of using peer written feedback among first-year students at Can Tho University 17 Table 4.3 Descriptive statistics of the student’s perceptions of using peer written feedback by the first- year students 18 Figure 4.4: The mean scores of three writing assignments 19 Table 4.4: Table of Compare means-Paired-Samples T-Test 19

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the rationale, the research aims, research questions, as well as hypothesis of doing this

research are introduced The organization of the thesis is also included afterwards

1.1 Rationale

In the light of Communicative Language Teaching, process approach to teaching writing, peer feedback can be regarded as one of the most significant applications in improving students’ writing ability

In fact, feedback plays a very crucial role in motivating further learning as it informs learners about the degree of their learning or their needs for improvement Many researchers such as Chiu (2008), Zhang (2008), Min (2006), and Paulus (1999) have proved that feedback which is employed in both forms of verbal and written commentary constitutes an important aspect of fostering the improvement of writing There are two kinds of peer feedback: oral and written peer feedback in which students can correct their friends’ writings Although group discussion in which peers exchange their ideas and giving their comments by speaking out is quite useful in cooperative writing, the researcher wants to investigate peer written feedback because the researcher can collect the data from the paper feedback more easily than oral feedback

Apart from teachers’ feedback on students’ writing, peer feedback, especially peer written feedback has been used as a teaching strategy in many writing classrooms in Can Tho University Paulus (1999) has found that peer feedback helps students discover whether they communicate their ideas successfully or not and encourages them to revise and improve their texts they produce Moreover, compared with the traditional feedback known as teacher responses, peer feedback is also regarded as a powerful way in improving students’ critical thinking of writing and evaluation (Berg,

1999, Hyland, 2003, Topping, 1998, cited in Chiu, 2008) However, despite the great effect of peer written feedback on students’ writing revision, the number of studies on peer written feedback is still limited and outnumbered by studies on teacher written feedback

Along with all the above-mentioned reasons, the researcher wishes to conduct a

study entitled: “The Impact of Peer Written Feedback on the First-year Students’ Writing Skill at English Department, School of Education, Can Tho University”

In this study, first-year students at Can Tho University are examined because their levels are not proficient enough to write a composition without any mistakes Moreover, first-year is the first stage to train students’ evaluation on their friends’ writings as well as their writings In conducting this study, the researcher hopes to gain more insights into the current situation of using peer written feedback in the

2

writing classes for first- year students at English Department, School of education, Can Tho University in general and its impact on students’ writing skill in particular Finally, the researcher will propose some suggestions for the betterment of the current practice

1.2 Aims of the study

In this research, the researcher wants to:

1 Investigate the current situation of using peer written feedback among first-year students at the English Department, School of Education, Can Tho University

2 Investigate students’ perceptions of written feedback provided by their peers on their writing assignments

3 Investigate the impact of peer written feedback on students’ writing revision

4 Investigate the correlation between students’ writing ability and their perceptions

of using peer written feedback on writing

1.3 Research questions

Basing on the research aims, the researcher has four research questions:

1 How is the current situation of using peer written feedback by the first- year students at the English Department, School of Education, Can Tho University?

2 What are these students’ perceptions of their peers’ written feedback?

3 To what extent does peer written feedback affect the first-year students’ writing ability?

4 Is there any correlation between students’ writing ability and their perceptions of using peer written feedback on writing?

1.4 Hypotheses

Basing on the research questions, the researcher has four hypotheses:

1 The current situation of using peer written feedback by the first-year students at

the English Department, School of Education, Can Tho University is positive

2 Students reveal high evaluation of peer written feedback

3 Peer written feedback can have a good impact on students’ writing ability

4 There is a high correlation between students’ writing ability and their perceptions of using peer written feedback on writing

1.5 Organization of the study

Chapter I – Introduction: The rationale, the aims as well as the organization of the thesis are introduced in this section

Chapter II – Literature review: A report of other researchers’ ideas and statements relating to the thesis will be mentioned in this part

Chapter III – Research methodology: five relevant parts included in this chapter will

be presented one by one They are research questions, research design, participants, instruments, and procedure of the study

3

Chapter IV– Results: In this chapter, data collected from the instruments (a questionnaire for students; the marks of three writing assignments, and some interviews) will be analyzed and synthesized, and then some conclusions will be withdrawn from those data

Chapter V – Discussions, Implication, Limitations, and Suggestions for writing course and further research The last chapter will mention discussions about the results, limitations of the research as well as suggestions for writing courses and for further research

4

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

In this chapter, an overview of writing teaching accompanied with an overview of peer written feedback on writing through the researches relating to this thesis are stated

2.1 AN OVERVIEW OF WRITING TEACHING

2.1.1 Conceptions of Writing

According to Byrne (1988), writing is defined as “the act of forming graphic symbols, which are arranged according to certain conventions to form words and words have to be arranged to form sentences” (p.1) From a different point of view, Lannon (1989) defines writing as “the process of transforming the material discovered by research inspiration, accident, trial and error, or whatever into a message with definite meaning- writing is a process of deliberate decision”(p.9) In language teaching and learning, according to Tribble (1996), writing is defined as a “language skill” that involves “not just a graphic representation of speech, but the development and presentation of thoughts in a structured way” (p.3) Tribble also states that writers not only need to have ideas in their minds but also know how to put their ideas in a logical and structured order Among the definitions mentioned above, this definition is considered the most thorough one because it nearly covers all aspects of writing including contents, grammar, and organization; especially emphasizing the aims of writing as well as the organization of writing This is also the

definition applied in this study by the researcher

2.1.2 Approaches to Teaching Writing

In the approaches to teaching writing, the researcher would present the nature of two most major approaches: product approach and process approach

2.1.2.1 Product Approach to Teaching Writing

In the light of product approach, the final outcome of a writing process is emphasized Pincas (1962) summarizes the shortcomings of this approach: “the learner is not allowed

to ‘create’ in the target language at all; the use of language is the manipulation of fixed patterns; these patterns are learned by imitation” (p.185) However, it cannot be denied that this approach can help students tend to see errors as something that they have a professional obligation to correct and, where possible, eliminate (Tribble, 1996)

2.1.2.2 Process Approach to Teaching Writing

In the mid-1970s, process approach began to replace product approach Process approach enables students to make clearer decisions about the direction of their writing “ by means

of discussion, tasks, drafting, feedback and informed choices encouraging students to be responsible for making improvements themselves” (Jordan, 1997, p.168)

In conclusion, it will be ideal if both of these approaches are integrated to make

up the most satisfactory means to teaching writing Writing teacher should encourage students not only to create but also to imitate This means that students can both imitate

5

the good points of the target language and create new good points based on discussion,

giving feedback

2.1.3 Stages in a Writing Process

In this section, the researcher would like to introduce two ways of dividing a writing

process in writing teaching by Tribble (1996) and Reid (1993) According to Tribble

(1996), the process approach includes four stages in writing: prewriting,

composing/drafting, revising, and editing

In this viewpoint, the readers’ role is not mentioned and paid attention to Reid

(1993) introduces a more detailed and thorough description of the writing process with

four basic stages which are generally the same as those stated by Tribble (1996) and

three more other stages which are responding, evaluating and post-writing Especially, in

responding stage, a kind of oral or written intervention by teachers or peers or other

possible readers is emphasized By mentioning the important role of responding in

writing process, Reid (1993) has asserted the indispensable part of feedback including

peer feedback in teaching and learning writing

So far, the concept of writing, two major approaches to teaching writing, stages in

a writing process, and the fundamental role of feedback which has been discussed serve

as a supportive background for the research

2.2 AN OVERVIEW OF PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK ON WRITING 2.2.1 Definitions of Peer Feedback

The most comprehensive definition of peer feedback is Liu & Hansen (2002) “the use of

learners as sources of information and interact for each in such a way that learners assume

roles and responsibilities normally taken on by formally trained teacher, tutor, or editor in

commenting on and critiquing each other’s drafts in both written and oral formats in the

process of writing” (p.175) Simply stated, peer feedback in writing involves sharing

one’s writing with a group of peer readers who offer feedback and suggestions for

improvement Due to the great effect of peer feedback on students’ writing skill, teachers

have increasingly required their students’ responsibility for not only their own writings

but also for those of their peers

2.2.2 Major Issues of Peer Written Feedback

2.2.2.1 Types of Peer Written Feedback

2.2.2.1.1 Tone of Feedback

Based on the tone of feedback, feedback can be classified into two main types: positive

feedback and negative feedback According to Hyland (1998), positive feedback refers to

comments on only strong points and praises on students’ writing while negative feedback

refers to comments on only weak points and even criticism Walk (1996) shows that

positive comments in fact are beneficial to students in their writing in most cases He

further states, “students need to know what works in their writing if they are to repeat

successful strategies and make them a permanent part of their repertoire as writers They

6

are also more likely to work hard to improve when given some positive feedback.” In general, positive feedback often helps students not only understand their problems with a specific text but also develops strategies and a critical approach used in future writing situations However, too much positive comment can make students feel over-confident and stop revising their writings as they suppose that their papers are good enough However, negative comment guides the writer to correct something in their paper (Mosher, 1998) Moreover, it is indicated that negative comments are more useful for many students who want their problems to be highlighted (Hyland & Hyland, 2001) In this way, writers can identify the weaknesses of their papers and work harder to make improvement However, too much negative feedback may adversely affect students’ writing as it makes them feel discouraged and stop trying to correct their mistakes It is advisable that the balance between positive and negative feedback should be considered carefully to yield the best results in students’ writing

to change their writings” (Reid, 1993, p.218) The researcher thinks that a combination of these two types of feedback should be encouraged because general comments can help students have a general view of their writings

2.2.2.2 Amount of Peer Written Feedback

According to Bartram and Walton (1991), like teacher written feedback, the amount of peer feedback on students’ writing is worth discussing Students can overcorrect their friends’ writing by pointing out and correct all errors appearing in their writings It may distract students to improve their writing As opposed to “overcorrection” is non-correction which refers to pointing out and correcting no mistakes, just giving general comments on their friends’ writing This way of giving feedback can supply little assistance to students in revising their writings In order to get the best results, students

7

should take the amount of feedback into great consideration and decide whether or not they should correct all mistakes, correct some typical and serious mistakes or just give general comments during the process of giving feedback (Ur, 1996)

2.2.2.3 Aspects of Peer Written Feedback

In fact, to create a good writing, the writers have to consider many factors in the writing process which need to be addressed when evaluating a writing and give feedback on it According to Raimes (1983), nine aspects are mentioned to consider in a writing process, namely, syntax (sentence structure, etc); content (ideas, clarity, logic, etc); grammar (rules for verbs, nouns, sentences, etc); mechanics (handwriting, spelling, punctuation, etc); organization (paragraphs, topic and supporting sentence, unity and cohesion, etc), word choice (vocabulary, idiom, tone, etc); purpose (the reasons for writing), audience (the readers) and the writer’s process (getting ideas, getting started, writing drafts, revising)

However, five aspects including grammar, mechanics, organization, word choice and content are the most common ones addressed by students, especially when they give feedback on their friends’ writing

2.2.3 Advantages of Using Peer Written Feedback on Writing

Many researchers have reported a large number of benefits which peer written feedback brings to students’ revision as well as their writing skills Among these researchers, Bartels (2003) is the one who mentioned the benefits of using peer written feedback in writing classrooms most thoroughly According to him, peer feedback can help create the feeling of being an audience for both the writers and the peer readers Unlike oral feedback, peer written feedback can bring students many chances for “communicative writing” Moreover, Bartels (2003) further states that students can have many opportunities for “instant feedback and negotiation of meaning”, thanks to peer written feedback They can request clarification, ask questions and even argue about their peers’ comments which can lead to more language learning In terms of response and revision, it has been shown that peer writers can revise effectively on the basis of comments from peer readers Moreover, Caulk (1994) also states that teacher feedback is rather general; whereas, student responses are more specific In the same line, Rollinson (2005) lists out some advantages of peer feedback over teacher feedback Peer response operates on a more informal level than teacher response This may encourage or motivate writers, or at least, provide a change from (and a complement to) the more one-way interaction between the teacher and the student, where student may end up making revisions without necessarily agreeing with or even understanding the teacher’s authoritative comments The writer receiving comments from peers retains the right to reject comments, and is thus more able to maintain the possession of her own texts Rollinson (2005:25) also adds that peers can have much more time providing feedback on their friends’ writing than their teachers Also, in large classes, teachers often do not have enough time to provide

response (Bartels, 2003)

Despite many advantages, peer written feedback has its own shortcomings because it

is a very complex process that requires training and structure in order to be effective, both

in first language and second language classrooms (Villamil & de Guerrero, 1996) Besides, peer review procedures also take up much of the classroom time Therefore, a combination of various kinds of feedback is encouraged by many researchers to ensure the best results

2.2.4 Features of a Good Peer Written Feedback

In this section, the researcher would like to introduce some different sets of criteria for the readers to have a general view on the whole matter According to Coffin et al (2003:101), good feedback must have three vital elements, namely, ‘positive comment’, ‘criticism’ and ‘suggestions for improvements’ Hirsh (1977,p.161) states that effective feedback is non-judgmental and provides students with criteria by which to measure their skills, knowledge, and attitudes and also provides the students with information to validate their own feelings and impressions about how well or poorly they performed However, these sets of criteria are not clear enough to give a good feedback Michaelsen & Schultheiss (1998), feedback should be (1) descriptive, not evaluative and is “owned” by the sender, (2) specific, not general, (3) honest and sincere, (4) expressed in terms relevant to the self – perceived needs of the receiver, (5) timely and in context, (6) desired by the receiver, not imposed on him or her, (7) usable, concerned with behavior over which the receiver has control Mosher (1998) adds that good feedback should not contain complicated abbreviations and codes; contradictory assessments or directions and too much or too little commentary

So far, the researcher suggests some criteria of good peer written feedback Firstly, the written feedback should be specific, descriptive and honest Secondly, the written feedback should be included positive comment, criticism, and suggestions for improvements

2.2.5 Effects of Peer Written Feedback on Students’ Writing Revision

Many researches has been carried out to find out whether peer feedback has influence on students’ writing revision and there have also been many different results Tsui & Ng M (2000) have found that too general and vague peer feedback or feedback with too many

9

correction codes or new words can lead to little or no improvement in students’ revision when they cannot understand what their peers imply and suggest through their feedback Moreover, Chiu (2008) also find that many students devaluate peer written feedback on their writings because they think their friends are not competent and professional enough

to provide them with helpful comments Last but not least, students who receive too negative comments or comments which completely contradict their own ideas also find it hard to revise effectively on the basis of peer written feedback (Tang & Tithecott, 1990), Ziv (1983) found that in the early semester, the writers did not always revise accordingly

to the reactions of their peers, and sometimes resented the criticisms However, later in the semester, advice from peers was more likely to be heeded because rather than more general criticisms, the students offered each other concrete suggestions for revision According to Nelson & Murphy (1993, cited in Paulus, 1999), many students incorporate peer comments in their drafts and it is stated that peer comments facilitate 53% of revisions in students’ essays, which is quite a convincing proof of the effectiveness of peer comments Paulus (1999) has also found that peer response comments can lead to meaningful revisions, and that compared with teacher feedback, revisions based on peer comments can be better in vocabulary, organization and content Following this line of argument, Chaudron (1984) concludes that students’ scoring on the final draft after receiving peer comments is relatively higher Chiu (2008) has carried out a study to investigate the effectiveness of peer evaluation on EFL college students’ writing and his study indicates some findings which clearly show the positive effects of peer feedback on writing skill (1) students improved significantly after peer evaluation comparing their first and final versions of the first topic; (2) students also improved significantly when they wrote another new topic; (3) students showed satisfactory ability to evaluate their peers’ writing in the area of content, organization, and mechanics, but they were less competent in the evaluation of grammar and diction; (4) students generally showed positive attitudes towards peer evaluation (Chiu, 2008) In conclusion, peer feedback could be an alternative technique in writing classrooms to improve students’ revision as well as their writing performance

2.3 RELATED STUDIES

As confessed in the rationale, a modest number of research on the same topic have been conducted to the best of the researcher’s knowledge, or at least, is accessible to the researcher Rather, more studies on teacher feedback are available In an effort to seek reliable foundation, the researcher came across an interesting paper on a similar area titled

“The Effectiveness of Peer Written Feedback on First Year Students’ Writing Skill” by Bui (2009) In this study, 100 first-year students were taught English in which students gave written feedback to together A survey questionnaire and 36 papers (including 12 students’ writing assignments writing with three versions) were analyzed The conclusion was that first-year students had a rather positive attitude towards this activity and highly

10

appreciate the importance of peer feedback in improving their writing ability in general They also used various types and forms of feedback when giving comments on writings Moreover, students tended to give helpful comments especially on grammar and mechanics to help their friends’ revision However, first-year students seemed to give rather general feedback on their friends’ writings and have many difficulties in making suggestions to improve the content of their peers’ writings, which limits the effectiveness

of this technique in helping students revise their writings In order to conclude, the researcher also suggested some implication for both teachers and students The teachers should design pre-training activities, intervention activities, and discussion in the whole class For the students, they had better balance and appropriate all kinds of written feedback

Another study titled “Peers correction vs teachers' correction of writing” by Pierson (1967) had something in common with this present research In his case study a review of

a few pertinent studies indicates that peer-correction is at least as effective as correction The study was conducted in seven months to compare the writing growth of ninth-graders taught by either the teacher- or peer-method of correction They demonstrated that using the teacher-method required eight times as many hours after school as the peer-method did Thus, the peer-method appeared to be more efficient, if not more effective, its use implies the following steps (1) preliminary training of students

teacher-in editteacher-ing, (2) the teachteacher-ing of a short unit on composition before each new including initiatory activities, writing, correcting, and revision, and (3) the production of check lists or guide sheets to show students what to seek and to say in correcting the compositions of their peers

project-“Using wiki-based peer-correction to develop writing skills of Brazilian EFL learners”

by Franco (2008) is another study sharing some similarities with this paper In his study, students gave written feedback to their friend on the Internet The data were collected and analyzed by means of qualitative and quantitative methods Findings show that students highly appreciate using peer written feedback to revise their writing assignments Apart from maximizing opportunities related to writing, learners accurately developed their social skills in the sense that they cooperated instead of competing The results also suggest that peer written feedback on the Internet provide learners with many benefits in developing their writing skills

“Some suggestions on improving the correction of English written work” by Tran (2004) is another study sharing some suggestion with this paper This paper is first aimed

at finding out the problems that both students and teachers are likely to face when the responsibility of correcting English written work is totally placed in the teachers’ hands Then, it will recommend some correction procedures in which the students are actively involved in the process of editing a piece of written work for themselves (self correction and peer correction) with some necessary help and strict supervision from the teachers of

11

writing The teachers should know every student’s writing ability to assign students for group work’s correction or pair work’s correction Pre-training activity for giving written feedback including introducing and teaching students how to use the checklist at the beginning of the semester needs participating in class

“The effects of peer feedback on the writing anxiety of prospective Turkish teachers

of EFL” by Kurt & Atay (2007) is showing the effects of peer feedback on the writing anxiety of Turkish prospective teachers of English (PTs) A total of 86 PTs of English were divided into two groups: experimental group and control group participated in this study during eight weeks Data were collected by means of the Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory (SLWAI) given at the beginning and end of the study and by means of interviews carried out with 20 experimental group PTs at the end of the term Results of the quantitative data showed that the peer feedback group experienced significantly less writing anxiety than the teacher feedback group at the end of the study The interview results revealed that the PTs benefited from the peer feedback process as with the feedback of their friends they became aware of their mistakes Moreover, during the process they received opinions from their friends to elaborate on, and this collaboration helped them look at their essays from a different perspective

Briefly, a look at five related studies brings to light the fact that feedback has always been traditionally investigated However, the previous researchers concerned much with peer oral feedback, peers written feedback on the Internet, peer written feedback versus teacher feedback, the students’ attitude toward peer written feedback, and making suggestions for correcting English written work Moreover, there were few studies carried out to have a thorough observation about the impact of peer written feedback on first-year students In the present study, the researcher would like to investigate the comprehensive impact of peer written feedback on first-year students

2.4 CONCLUSIVE REMARKS

In this chapter, the researcher gets a comprehensive understanding of some issues regarding the focus of this study The chapter has discussed teaching writing, some major issues of peer written feedback as well as the effects of peer written feedback on students’ revision Views and results of previous studies in this chapter will serve as the basis for the researcher to carry out her research and draw some implications to improve the overall situation of using peer written feedback among first-year students at English Department, School of Education, Can Tho University Moreover, this chapter presents the research context which helps the researcher further understand the setting of the study

12

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, (1) the research design, (2) participants, (3) instruments, and the procedure of the research will be presented

3.1 Research design

This research follows a descriptive design involving the use of interviews, questionnaires and three writing assignments The use of interviews and questionnaires are analyzed to survey the current situation of using peer written feedback by the first-year students, and their perceptions of their peers’ written feedback The final marks of three writing assignments are considered to find out the impact of peer written feedback on students’ writing revision Moreover, to answer the fourth research question, the use of questionnaires and final marks of three writing assignments follows correlation coefficients to examine correlations between students’ perceptions of using peer written feedback and students’ writing ability

3.2 Participants

3.2.1 Student participants

47 English majors course 35 at Can Tho University were randomly invited to participate in this research They consist of 38 females and 9 males from an education class Their ages are not much different, commonly from 18 to 20 The first- year students were chosen because they are at pre-intermediate level

3.2.2 Teacher participants

In order to conduct this research, the researcher also invited the teacher who taught these students course 35 at Can Tho University She instructed and asked these students to use peers’ written feedback when they revised their friends’ writing (see table 3.4.3 for syllabus for practicing to write argumentative paragraph) Moreover, in order to have more insights into the impact of peer written feedback on first-year students, the researcher interviewed four other teachers who have experience in

teaching writing at Can Tho University

3.3 Research instruments

3.3.1 Questionnaire:

In order to investigate the current situation of using peer written feedback at Can Tho University, the students’ perceptions of their friends written feedback as well as the correlation between students’ writing ability and their perceptions of using peer written feedback on writing, the questionnaire (see Appendix 1 for the adapted version) was designed according to Hyland (1998), Ferris et al (1997), Ferris & Hedgecock (1998), (Ur, 1996), Raimes (1983), and Coffin et al (2003) on the literature review (see Appendix 3 for questionnaire’s adaptation) and some were

13

adapted to suit her research (question 10, supplemental question 1 and 2 in Appendix 1) The researcher piloted it in 42 students of course 35 at Can Tho University to guarantee reliability of the questionnaire She conducted the questionnaire after deleting some items which made this questionnaire not reach the reasonable reliability Moreover, the researcher also designed the Vietnamese version of the questionnaire (see Appendix 2) so that first-year students could understand the questionnaire thoroughly After being piloted, the reliability of the questionnaire was

at an acceptable value (α = 757)

In the questionnaire, there are 11 items that were arranged in random order A five-point scale (1 - strongly disagree, 2 - disagree, 3 - neutral, 4 - agree and 5 - strongly agree) was used to survey the effectiveness of peer written feedback on students’ writing Table 3.3.1 shows the factors of the questionnaire items

Table 3.3.1: Factors of the questionnaire items

Tone of feedback 1 Using positive feedback Specificity of feedback 2 Generic feedback Position of feedback 3 Marginal feedback Amount of peer written

Pointing out all mistakes and correcting some serious ones Aspects of peer written

feedback

5, 6,7,8, and 9

Content, grammar, mechanics, organization, word choice

The current situation of

using peer written

feedback by the 1st-

year students

Features of a Good Peer Written Feedback 11

Positive comment, criticism and suggestions for improvements are three vital factors of a feedback Students’ perceptions of

their peers’ written

written feedback at Can Tho University

3.3.2 Interview

The open questions in the teachers’ interview (see Appendix 4 for adapted questionnaires for interviewing teachers) were designed according to Tran (2004) and Raimes (1983) on the literature review (see Appendix 5 for the adaptation of questions for interviewing teachers) and some were adapted to suit her research (see question 5,6 and a supplemental question in Appendix 4) The researcher designed seven questions, and the aims of her research in order to know more the insights on the impact of peer written feedback Thanks to the teacher’s experience, the researcher

14

collected some suggestions to improve the current situation of using peer written

feedback at Can Tho University

3.3.3 Writing assignments

Three students’ writing assignments were chosen and employed because they could help the researcher get in-depth information to investigate the effectiveness of peer written feedback on students’ writing ability based on analyzing three final versions Each final version was the result of two peer-written feedbacks of the two first versions, and only teacher marked on the final one The three topics of argumentative paragraphs in students writing’s assignments (from control to less control) collected for analysis were as followed:

 Free topics

 Write an argumentative paragraph about a hot issue in Can Tho University

 According to you, what are the best methods of improving your writing’s ability among peer written’s feedback, teacher feedback, or combination both

of them? Write an argumentative paragraph about this issue

There were six criteria for the teacher to mark their final versions with the maximum mark for each piece of writing was 100 They are including:

3.4.1 Administering the questionnaire

After the students had used peer written feedback to correct their friends’ writing in eight weeks, the Vietnamese versions of the questionnaire were administered to 47 students in English Language Teaching classes of the English Department in the eighth week Before the students started, the researcher gave them a clear instruction

to make sure they understood what to do After checking, the researcher had them begin completing the questionnaires in 15 minutes Finally, 47 questionnaires were fully collected

3.4.2 Administering the interviews

At the end of the week eight, the researcher administered five interviews to Ms Le, who taught these students and four other teachers at English Department, Can Tho University All the teachers’ ideas and teachers’ suggestions were taken note carefully

3.4.3 Administering the writing assignments

15

It took about 8 weeks for the teacher to collect three writing assignments The schedule was described as the following table:

Table 3.4.3: Syllabus for practicing to write argumentative paragraph

1 Reviewing how to write a paragraph

2 Instructing how to write an argumentative

paragraph

Preparing portfolio

3 Practicing in class: writing assignment 1 Peer correction in class and at home

(using peer written feedback)

4

Collecting final version of writing assignment 1

Practicing in class: writing assignment 2 Peer correction in class and at home

(using peer written feedback)

5

Writing feedback 1 ( Teacher collects and

explains to students about all their mistakes )

Collecting final version of writing assignment 2

6

Writing feedback 2 ( Teacher collects and

explains to students about all their mistakes )

Practicing in class: writing assignment 3 Peer correction in class and at home

(using peer written feedback)

7 Collecting final version of writing assignment 3 Collecting all the papers for the portfolio

8

Writing feedback 3 ( Teacher collects and

explains to students about all their mistakes )

Delivering questionnaire

Deadline: portfolio submission

All of the students used the editing checklist (see Appendix 6) to correct their friends’ writing

All the data from the questionnaire and the scores of three writing versions were collected and the SPSS package was used to analyze the data

16

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

In this section, the researcher will report the results of the data collected from the questionnaire, the marks of three writing assignments, and the interview

4.1 General questionnaire analysis and writing assignments analysis

4.1.1 General questionnaire analysis

To answer the two first research questions, the questionnaire of 11 items was used These items cover the two main ideas: the current situation of using peer written feedback by the first- year students, students’ perceptions of their peers’ written feedback The students marked their responses to each item on a five-point scale: from

1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)

With the aim of investigating the two main ideas mentioned above, the researcher administered the questionnaire At the end of week eight of the schedule, the researcher collected the questionnaires and analyzed them with the SPSS program First, she ran the scale test to test the reliability of the questionnaire The reliability of

the questionnaire was at a relatively high value (α = 802)

4.1.2 General writing assignments analysis

To answer the third and the fourth research questions, three final versions of three writing assignments were used, which helps her investigate the impacts of peer written feedback on students’ writing revision, the correlation between students’ writing ability and their perceptions of using peer written feedback on writing (between three writing assignments and questionnaire)

With the aim of investigating the two main ideas mentioned above, the researcher collected three final marks of three writing assignments from her teacher Next, she analyzed them with the SPSS program First, she ran the scale test to test the reliability of three writing assignments The reliability of the marks was at an

17

Number of cases (N)

Minimum (Min.)

Maximum (Max.)

Mean (M)

Std

Deviation (SD) Total mean (questionnaire

Table 4.2 Descriptive statistics of the current situation of using peer written

feedback by the 1st- year students

From table 4.2, we could see that the total mean score of students’ perception on the current situation of using peer written feedback by the first- year students is

relatively high in the scale of five levels, M = 4.170 (SD= 351) The researcher can

infer that most of the students in this writing class quite agree with the way of using peer written feedback in the questionnaire

As the researcher mentioned in the methodology, the current situation of using peer written feedback among first-year students was divided into six categories: tone of feedback, specificity of feedback, position of feedback, amount of peer written feedback, aspects of peer written feedback, features of a good peer written feedback

In order to have a better observation about the current situation of using peer written feedback, the researcher will present the mean scores of each factor

Through the chart, we can see that the mean score of each factor is very high

(3.94 ≤M ≤4.36, 425≤SD ≤.640) As a result, the researcher can state that first-year

students take into account most of the factors when giving feedback to their friends In addition, the mean score’s difference of each factor is not worth considering Indeed,

position of feedback has the highest mean scores (M = 4.47, SD=.504), whereas tone

of feedback has the lowest mean scores (M = 3.94, SD=.604)

4.3 Students’ perceptions of their peers’ written feedback

In this section, the researcher will present the mean scores of the students’ perceptions

of their peers’ written feedback

Figure 4.2: The mean scores of the current situation of using peer

written feedback among first-year students at Can Tho University

f eedback

Aspects of peer w ritten

f eedback

Features of a Good Peer Written Feedback