大学英语写作教学中的同伴反馈

写作教学向来是英语教学中的重点和难点,传统的作文评改模式制约了写作教学的发展。本文从过程教学法、协作学习理论及反馈理论出发,探讨了同伴反馈在大学英语写作教学中的应用,指出培训后的同伴反馈能增强学生的自我意识,对学生写作质量的提高有很大帮助。     

大学英语写作教学中的同伴反馈

写作教学向来是英语教学中的重点和难点,传统的作文评改模式制约了写作教学的发展。从过程教学法、协作学习理论及反馈理论出发,注重同伴反馈在大学英语写作教学中的应用,能增强学生的自我意识,对学生写作质量的提高有很大帮助。     

大学英语写作中的教师反馈和同伴反馈对比研究

通过实验、问卷和访谈等,对大学英语写作中的教师反馈和同伴反馈进行对比研究。结果发现:教师反馈和同伴反馈对学生的英语写作是必要的,也是有效的;两种反馈在提高学生的写作能力方面没有显著性差异,都可以有效地提高学生的写作成绩,两种反馈不存在孰优孰劣的问题;虽然,大部分学生也接纳同伴反馈,但相比教师反馈,学生对教师反馈更信任,更依赖。     

大学英语写作中同伴反馈的作用探究

同伴反馈改变了写作中单向的教师反馈状态,注重通过同伴反馈培养写作中的主体意识和责任感,帮助加强写作过程中的自我修改意识和自学能力。但同伴反馈的实际操作需得到教师有效的培训,且结合教师反馈才能真正提高学生的写作能力。     

构建英语写作同伴反馈有效模式

同伴反馈是英语作文修改的重要手段之一,随着过程教学法的提出而备受关注。同伴反馈在实施的过程中也呈现出一定的局限性与不足,如何在英语写作中有效实施同伴反馈则成为问题的关键。文章从评改培训,互评阶段,教师反馈和反思总结这四个阶段构建了英语写作同伴反馈的有效模式,这一模式综合考虑了反馈发出者、反馈接收者和反馈方式三方面因素,可以提高英语写作同伴反馈的有效性。     

大学英语写作教学中同伴反馈模式的运用

如何提高学生的英语写作水平是困扰广大师生的一个难题。近年来，在大学英语写作教学的课堂上采用同伴反馈进行教学的模式得到广泛的支持，但仍有许多的教研人员和学生对它持怀疑态度。本文通过讲述在英语教学中采用同伴反馈的原因，及其存在的潜在问题，阐明了只要在活动之前做好充分的准备，就能将同伴反馈活动中存在的问题降到最低限度，它的益处也就能得到充分的发挥。     

大学英语写作教学中同伴反馈模式的运用

如何提高学生的英语写作水平是困扰广大师生的一个难题。近年来,在大学英语写作教学的课堂上采用同伴反馈进行教学的模式得到广泛的支持,但仍有许多的教研人员和学生对它持怀疑态度。本文通过讲述在英语教学中采用同伴反馈的原因,及其存在的潜在问题,阐明了只要在活动之前做好充分的准备,就能将同伴反馈活动中存在的问题降到最低限度,它的益处也就能得到充分的发挥。     

同伴反馈在大学英语写作中的效能

作为一种合作互动学习,同伴反馈在英语写作教学中,能充分调动学生的学习兴趣和学习积极性。文章通过对78名大学生进行写作同伴反馈实验,研究其在大学英语写作中的效能问题,即同伴反馈是否有助于学生作文水平的提高,是否有助于降低学生学习的焦虑,使学生在一个相对轻松的环境中实现学习的意义协商等问题。     

同伴反馈与大学艺术生英语写作课堂

同伴反馈是一个动态的评价过程,很多研究者将它引入大学生英语写作的课堂并产生了一定的作用,艺术生是大学校园里一个特殊的群体,那么同伴反馈能否对艺术生的英语写作水平有帮助呢?本文将同伴反馈模式引入大学艺术生英语写作课堂,目的是验证它对提高其英语写作水平有一定的帮助。     

教师反馈与同伴反馈对大学英语写作的影响探究

在大学英语教学过程当中,英语写作开始受到越来越多的学生以及教师的高度重视,然而,如果想要顺利的写出一篇语言流利且连贯的英语文章,对于绝大多数的学生来说是相当困难的,再加上学生的英语写作水平普遍较低,因此,学生很难准确对英语写作加以掌握。本文结合我国大学英语写作教学的现状,通过实验,深入的探究了大学生英语写作当中的教师反馈和同伴反馈的影响,希望能够有助于促进大学生英语写作水平的提高。     

网络环境下同伴反馈与写作焦虑关系的实证研究

本研究探讨网络环境下同伴反馈对写作焦虑的影响。研究采用SPSS统计软件对受试者在实验前后的写作焦虑程度进行对比分析。同时,辅以访谈方式了解学生对该模式的态度。研究结果表明,网络环境下的同伴反馈在一定程度上能缓解学生写作焦虑,大部分学生认可该模式。     

Grade one peer and teacher feedback on student writing

This article examines a grade one teacher's support for her students’ writing development through formal peer and teacher feedback. The teacher modelled and provided examples of effective feedback and good writing in whole-class and small-group lessons and in her own one-on-one verbal feedback on student writing. She allocated time for the students to participate in formal peer-feedback sessions, in turn giving feedback to the students on the suggestions to one another during these sessions. Students gave more content-oriented than conventions-oriented feedback to each other. They revised the content and writing conventions of their writing in response to 90% of the feedback they received from their peers and teacher.     

A GEARed peer feedback model and implications for learning facilitation

This study proposes a model to view and analyse college students’ written peer feedback after they assess each other’s formative task assignment and provide comments. The model was developed by: (a) revisiting learning-oriented assessment and feedback theories, (b) reviewing and summarising existing peer feedback analysis approaches as detailed in published empirical studies, and (c) analysing a small set of primary learner peer feedback data. In the proposed GEARed model of peer feedback, each complete piece of comment on one improvable unit may have four cognitive elements, i.e. identification of the Gap between performance and goal, Explanation of the gap, gap-bridging Aspirations, and being Resourceful to reach beyond the current knowledge/skill level. Two social-affective-interactive elements also play a part, i.e. being encouraging to the peer feedback receiver and doubtful toward the provider self. Each feedback comment may contain any or all of these incremental elements rather than being assigned only to one category. It is argued that the absent or unresolved aspects in feedback leave room for the receiver to reflect and may suggest instructional actions for teachers. Finally, different patterns of GEARed component combinations are hypothesised and their implications for learning and teaching are discussed.     

An empirical review of anonymity effects in peer assessment,peer feedback,peer review,peer evaluation and peer grading

Abstract

Peer assessment has proven to have positive learning outcomes. Importantly, peer assessment is a social process and some claim that the use of anonymity might have advantages. However, the findings have not always been in the same direction. Our aims were: (a) to review the effects of using anonymity in peer assessment on performance, peer feedback content, peer grading accuracy, social effects and students’ perspective on peer assessment; and (b) to investigate the effects of four moderating variables (educational level, peer grading, assessment aids, direction of anonymity) in relation to anonymity. A literature search was conducted including five different terms related to peer assessment (e.g., peer feedback) and anonymity. Fourteen studies that used a control group or a within group design were found. The narrative review revealed that anonymous peer assessment seems to provide advantages for students’ perceptions about the learning value of peer assessment, delivering more critical peer feedback, increased self-perceived social effects, a slight tendency for more performance, especially in higher education and with less peer assessment aids. Some conclusions are that: (a) when implementing anonymity in peer assessment the instructional context and goals need to be considered, (b) existent empirical research is still limited, and (c) future research should employ stronger and more complex research designs.     

输入输出相关性在大学英语阅读教学中的实证性研究

如何提高大学生的英语阅读水平一直是大学英语教学的重点问题。语言的输入和输出问题是二语习得研究的一个关键领域。然而长期以来,在教学实践中,很少有人将输入理论与输出理论结合起来用于语言教学。但是在语言教学中,输入理论与输出理论有着极强的相关性,只有将二者结合应用,才能充分地发挥它们的作用。为此,特将其作为一项实证性研究,将输入输出理论结合起来应用于语言教学中,将阅读、口语与写作同时应用于阅读语言实践中。186名非英语专业本科生参加了该研究。通过期末阅读测试,用统计学中t检验法(t-test)对实验班与对照班的成绩进行比较,并与实验前的成绩进行对比分析。结果显示,实验班的各项成绩,尤其是阅读成绩明显优于对照班。从而验证了在大学英语阅读教学中输入和输出理论具有一定的相关性,二者结合对学生阅读水平的提高起到了积极有效的作用。     

Increasing the uptake of peer feedback in primary school writing: findings from an action research enquiry

This article reports on how an action research strategy was used to increase children's uptake of feedback during peer assessment in primary school writing. Several different strategies were used in the study that had been successful in increasing students’ uptake of peer feedback in contexts such as higher education. In order to evaluate how successful these actions were, several different data collection methods were drawn upon to triangulate findings including children's work, observations, informal interviews and mind mapping. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data generated. Findings are consistent with those from research in other settings which suggest that pupils make better use of feedback if: it is task-involving and useful; there is sufficient time given for them to act on it and discuss it with their peers; and they are asked to reflect on how it has been used to improve the quality of the assessed work.     

A comparison of peer and tutor feedback

We report on a study comparing peer feedback with feedback written by tutors on a large, undergraduate software engineering programming class. Feedback generated by peers is generally held to be of lower quality to feedback from experienced tutors, and this study sought to explore the extent and nature of this difference. We looked at how seriously peers undertook the reviewing task, differences in the level of detail in feedback comments and differences with respect to tone (whether comments were positive, negative or neutral, offered advice or addressed the author personally). Peer feedback was also compared by academic standing, and by gender. We found that, while tutors wrote longer comments than peers and gave more specific feedback, in other important respects (such as offering advice) the differences were not significant.     

Using peer feedback in a Master's programme: a multiple case study

This article draws on the findings of a longitudinal case study, which investigated the writing experiences of five students who spoke English as an additional language (EAL). The major interest was in examining what it was like to be an EAL writer and what changes occurred in EAL students' perceptions of academic writing and of themselves as academic writers during their one-year Taught Masters course at a major UK University. This article reflects on the perceptions of peer feedback held by research participants and their engagement with providing and receiving peer comments. Although peer feedback is often viewed as an attractive tool for supporting student writing, most participants did not fully capitalise on the benefits of these practices. Such factors as students' lack of prior peer feedback and their perceptions of peers' ability to provide valid feedback constituted potential barriers to the success of peer feedback. The article suggests that the use of well-structured collaborative activities and tutors' intervention are required for peer feedback to be effective.     

Using and rejecting peer feedback in the science classroom: a study of students’ negotiations on how to use peer feedback when designing experiments

Background: Research on peer assessment has noted ambiguity among students in using peer assessment for improving their work. Previous research has explained this in terms of deficits in the student feedback, or differences in student views of what counts as high-quality work.

Purpose: This study frames peer assessment as a social process in the science classroom. The aim is to explore peer assessment in science education as social practice in order to contribute to an understanding of the affordances and constraints of using peer assessment as a learning tool in science education.

Design and Method: The study was conducted in four lower secondary school classes, school years 8 and 9, in two different schools. An intervention study was designed focussing on the topic of experimental design. It involved the students in a process of peer assessment where they designed experiments individually, and then exchanged their designs, conducted each other’s experiments, provided feedback to each other and revised their original design after discussing the feedback in groups. Data were collected in the form of audio recordings of student discussions and written work.

Results: The results show that, although not all peer feedback resulted in revisions, peer feedback was useful to the students in group interaction when negotiating quality in their work.

Conclusions: To conclude, the potential for using peer assessment in science education should not only be evaluated through the students’ revisions but also in terms of in what ways the feedback constitutes interactional resources for defining quality in student work.     

Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective

Peer review is a reciprocal process whereby students produce feedback reviews on the work of peers and receive feedback reviews from peers on their own work. Prior research has primarily examined the learning benefits that result from the receipt of feedback reviews, with few studies specifically exploring the merits of producing feedback reviews or the learning mechanisms that this activates. Using accounts of their experiences of peer review, this study illuminates students’ perceptions of the different learning benefits resulting from feedback receipt and feedback production, and, importantly, it provides insight into the cognitive processes that are activated when students construct feedback reviews. The findings show that producing feedback reviews engages students in multiple acts of evaluative judgement, both about the work of peers, and, through a reflective process, about their own work; that it involves them in both invoking and applying criteria to explain those judgements; and that it shifts control of feedback processes into students’ hands, a shift that can reduce their need for external feedback. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. It is argued that the capacity to produce quality feedback is a fundamental graduate skill, and, as such, it should receive much greater attention in higher education curricula.