Pre-Service English Teachers’ Experiences of Peer-Reviewing in L2 Writing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23887/jpi-undiksha.v11i1.34438Keywords:
Peer review, feedback, L2 writing, secondary data analysis, case studyAbstract
This case study explored pre-service English teachers’ experiences in peer review activities in second language (L2) writing class through secondary data analysis of the participants’ final reflections and peer review documents. The present study used secondary qualitative document analysis as the method. It used two types of secondary data. The study found that learners were still unconfident in giving feedback on grammar and considered assessing peers’ works objectively tricky. However, conducting peer review compelled them to study independently and facilitated them to realise their mistakes. Learners realised the importance of giving clear and accurate feedback but at times struggled to do so due to limited ability. The findings showing learners’ repeated concerns on grammatical aspects in their reflections whilst the peer review activities also included organisation and coherence aspects may indicate that learners prioritised accuracy more than organisation of ideas. Furthermore, several learners appreciated their peers' feedback regardless of quality as a part of learning. It is suggested that peer reviewing is conducted regularly to facilitate learners to learn from each other and to conduct studies on the extent the peer reviewers’ feedback is used to improve the reviewees’ writing.
References
Ahmed, R. (2020). Peer review in academic writing: Different perspectives from instructors and students. TESOL Journal, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.537.
Azarnoosh, M. (2013). Peer assessment in an EFL context: attitudes and friendship bias. Language Testing in Asia, 3(11), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-3-11.
Baker, K. M. (2016). Peer review as a strategy for improving students’ writing process. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787416654794.
Bharuthram, S., & van Heerden, M. (2020). To use or not to use? Understanding the connection between using peer and tutor feedback and self-regulated learning. The Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, 15, 24–35.
Bolourchi, A., & Soleimani, M. (2021). The impact of peer feedback on EFL learners’ writing performance and writing anxiety. International Journal of Research in English Education, 6(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.52547/ijree.6.1.1.
Cahyono, B. Y., & Amrina, R. (2016). Peer feedback, self-correction, and writing proficiency of Indonesian EFL students. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 7(1), 178–193. https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol7no1.12.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods. In Approaches: Fourth edition. Sage Publication.
Danniels, E., Pyle, A., & DeLuca, C. (2020). The role of technology in supporting classroom assessment in play-based kindergarten. Teaching and Teacher Education, 88(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102966.
Dewi, E. W., Nurkamto, J., & Drajati, N. A. (2019). Exploring peer-assessment practice in graduate students’ academic writing. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 22(1), 58–65. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.24071/llt.2019.220106.
Esfandiari, R., & Myford, C. M. (2013). Assessing writing severity differences among self-assessors, peer-assessors, and teacher assessors rating EFL essays. Assessing Writing, 18(2), 111–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2012.12.002.
Farahani, A. A. K., Nemati, M., & Montazer, N. (2019). Assessing peer review pattern and the effect of face-to-face and mobile-mediated modes on students’ academic writing development. Language Testing in Asia, 9(18), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-019-0094-7.
García-Peñalvo, F. J., Corell, A., Abella-García, V., & Grande-de-Prado, M. (2021). Recommendations for Mandatory Online Assessment in Higher Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic. In Radical Solutions for Education in a Crisis Context Springer., 1(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7869-4_6.
Gupta, S. D., Abdullah, F. A., & Xueshuang, Y. (2019). Peer assessment in writing: A critical review of previous study. Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 10, 1478–1487. https://doi.org/10.24297/jal.v10i0.7992.
Izati, R. A. (2018). The influence of friendship bias toward peer assessment in EFL classroom. RETAIN, 6(2), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1186/2229-0443-3-11.
Kuyyogsuy, S. (2019). Promoting peer feedback in developing students’ English writing ability in L2 writing class. International Education Studies, 12(9), 76–90. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n9p76.
Lam, R. (2015). Assessment as learning: examining a cycle of teaching , learning, and assessment of writing in the portfolio-based classroom. Studies in Higher Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.999317.
Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves giving and receiving feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 525–536. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00968.x.
Lin, Y. (2020). Effects of Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) peer review in an EFL writing course. International Journal of English Linguistics, 10(6), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v10n6p417.
Loan, N. T. T. (2017). A case study of combined peer-teacher feedback on paragraph writing at a university in Thailand. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v7i2.8345.
Loretto, A., DeMartino, S., & Godley, A. (2016). Secondary students’ perceptions of peer review of writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 51(2), 134–161.
Mauliate, H. D., Rahmat, A., & Wachidah, S. (2019). Evaluation the Lesson Plan of English Language Learning in Junior High School, Seraphine Bakti Utama West Jakarta. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management, 7(07), 1078–1086. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v7i7.el02.
McLucas, M. A. (2021). Adopting a basic student peer review process in EAP A/B writing. Reports from English Teachers’ Seminars, 4, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n4p138.
Meihami, H., & Razmjoo, S. A. (2016). An emic perspective toward challenges and solutions of self- and peer-assessment in writing courses. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 1(9), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-016-0014-7.
Moloudi, M. (2011). Online and face-to-face peer review: Measures of implementation in ESL writing classes. Asian EFL Journal, 13(4), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.911245.
Schut, A., van Mechelen, M., Klapwijk, R. M., Gielen, M., & de Vries, M. J. (2020). Towards constructive design feedback dialogues: guiding peer and client feedback to stimulate children’s creative thinking. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09612-y.
Subekti, A. S. (2017). A study of the mastery of complex sentences of pre-service English teachers. Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies (ADJES), 4(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.26555/adjes.v4i2.6399.
Subekti, A. S. (2018a). Error analysis in complex sentences written by Indonesian students from the English Education Department. Studies in English Language and Education, 5(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v5i2.10686.
Subekti, A. S. (2018b). L2 writing proficiency and mastery of complex sentence: A study of Indonesian English education major university students. IJEFL (Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics), 3(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.21462/ijefll.v3i1.48.
Subekti, A. S. (2019). A study of Introduction to Colllege English’s teachers’ beliefs in their teaching roles. International Journal of Indonesian Education and Teaching, 3(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.24071/ijiet.2019.030103.
Sudarmaji, I., & Lifanie, M. B. (2020). A comparison study: Teacher, peer, and self-feedback on students’ essay writing. Journal of Indonesian Student Assessment and Evaluation, 6(2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.21009/jisae.v6i2.16743.
Tahir, I. H. (2012). A study on peer evaluation and its influence on college ESL students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 68, 192–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.219.
Topping, K. (2017). Peer assessment: Learning by judging and discussing the work of other learners. Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, 1(7), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.31532/InterdiscipEducPsychol.1.1.007.
Tsai, Y. C., & Chuang, M. T. (2013). Fostering revision of argumentative writing through structured peer assessment. Perceptual & Motor Skills: Physical Development & Measurement, 116(1), 210–221. https://doi.org/10.2466/10.23.PMS.116.1.210-221.
Yu, S., & Hu, G. (2017). Understanding university students’ peer feedback practices in EFL writing: Insights from a case study. Assessing Writing, 33(March), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2017.03.004.
Zafar, A. (2016). Error analysis: a tool to improve English skills of undergraduate students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 697–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.122.
Zhao, H. (2014). Investigating teacher-supported peer assessment for EFL writing. ELT Journal, 68(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct068.
Zhu, Q., & Carless, D. (2018). Dialogue within peer feedback processes: Clarification and negotiation of meaning. Higher Education Research & Development, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1446417.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 JPI (Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with the Jurnal Pendidikan Indnesia agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. (See The Effect of Open Access)
