Peer and Self Review: A Holistic Examination of EFL Learners' Writing and Review Process

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/228470
Title:
Peer and Self Review: A Holistic Examination of EFL Learners' Writing and Review Process
Author:
Johnson, Kara Grace
Issue Date:
2012
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Abstract:
This dissertation uses a mixed methods design to explore the process of EFL students' writing and peer review, setting up a paradigm of peer compared to self review, with teacher support. The findings that surfaced were identified in themes, with the most overarching theme being that the value of peer review came not from the actual feedback that the peers gave each other, but rather from the collaborative process of peer review. Students who were actively engaged in peer review often did not take the exact advice given, but the process of exchanging feedback followed by face-to-face discussion prompted them to think of new ideas of their own that they incorporated into their revisions. The following findings are related to this major one. (1) Both the writing proficiency of the student writers and the understanding they have of the feedback given have a symbiotic relationship and greatly affect how they apply feedback. In this study, students at higher writing proficiencies tended to include some abstract feedback, but regardless of the students' writing levels, their partners' were able to make revisions at their own level of proficiency. (2) Both peer and self reviewing students made revisions based more on their own inspirations and ownership of ideas rather than on the exact advice exchanged between partners. Often, students developed and incorporated ideas that appeared to be generated from the peer feedback and discussion, pointing to the significance of peer collaboration and discussion in the writing process. (3) Although previous studies have suggested that non-native speakers' tendency to give feedback on grammatical issues as a drawback, the in-depth examination here reveals a more positive perspective. Even when comments, such as regarding grammar, were rated as "incorrect," students were often able to make positive changes, such as rewording or reorganizing. The results brings insights to the impact of abstract feedback for varying proficiency levels, ownership of ideas, internalization of concepts, and interdependence in the collaborative peer review process within a Vygotskian framework of concept development and the ZPD. Implications for research, writing program administrators, and writing instructors are identified.
Type:
text; Electronic Dissertation
Keywords:
peer feedback; peer review; process writing; writing ownership; Second Language Acquisition & Teaching; EFL writing; ESL writing
Degree Name:
Ph.D.
Degree Level:
doctoral
Degree Program:
Graduate College; Second Language Acquisition & Teaching
Degree Grantor:
University of Arizona
Advisor:
Liu, Jun

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.titlePeer and Self Review: A Holistic Examination of EFL Learners' Writing and Review Processen_US
dc.creatorJohnson, Kara Graceen_US
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Kara Graceen_US
dc.date.issued2012-
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.description.abstractThis dissertation uses a mixed methods design to explore the process of EFL students' writing and peer review, setting up a paradigm of peer compared to self review, with teacher support. The findings that surfaced were identified in themes, with the most overarching theme being that the value of peer review came not from the actual feedback that the peers gave each other, but rather from the collaborative process of peer review. Students who were actively engaged in peer review often did not take the exact advice given, but the process of exchanging feedback followed by face-to-face discussion prompted them to think of new ideas of their own that they incorporated into their revisions. The following findings are related to this major one. (1) Both the writing proficiency of the student writers and the understanding they have of the feedback given have a symbiotic relationship and greatly affect how they apply feedback. In this study, students at higher writing proficiencies tended to include some abstract feedback, but regardless of the students' writing levels, their partners' were able to make revisions at their own level of proficiency. (2) Both peer and self reviewing students made revisions based more on their own inspirations and ownership of ideas rather than on the exact advice exchanged between partners. Often, students developed and incorporated ideas that appeared to be generated from the peer feedback and discussion, pointing to the significance of peer collaboration and discussion in the writing process. (3) Although previous studies have suggested that non-native speakers' tendency to give feedback on grammatical issues as a drawback, the in-depth examination here reveals a more positive perspective. Even when comments, such as regarding grammar, were rated as "incorrect," students were often able to make positive changes, such as rewording or reorganizing. The results brings insights to the impact of abstract feedback for varying proficiency levels, ownership of ideas, internalization of concepts, and interdependence in the collaborative peer review process within a Vygotskian framework of concept development and the ZPD. Implications for research, writing program administrators, and writing instructors are identified.en_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeElectronic Dissertationen_US
dc.subjectpeer feedbacken_US
dc.subjectpeer reviewen_US
dc.subjectprocess writingen_US
dc.subjectwriting ownershipen_US
dc.subjectSecond Language Acquisition & Teachingen_US
dc.subjectEFL writingen_US
dc.subjectESL writingen_US
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineSecond Language Acquisition & Teachingen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
dc.contributor.advisorLiu, Junen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberReinhardt, Jonen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberHall, Anne-Marieen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberLiu, Junen_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.