Student engagement with peer feedback in L2 writing: Insights from reflective journaling and revising practices

IF 4.2 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessing Writing Pub Date : 2023-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2023.100784
Zhe (Victor) Zhang , Ken Hyland
{"title":"Student engagement with peer feedback in L2 writing: Insights from reflective journaling and revising practices","authors":"Zhe (Victor) Zhang ,&nbsp;Ken Hyland","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2023.100784","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The torrent of research into peer feedback in academic writing in recent years has largely overlooked student revision process – how individual students engage with this feedback to revise their texts and why certain changes are made in their texts. In other words, the cognitive dimension of student engagement with peer feedback in revision is little known. Drawing on multiple student drafts, peer feedback on these drafts, reflective journals and interviews with students, this study examines how two L2 students engage with peer feedback to conduct revisions. We found that the two participants differed considerably in their revision processes and identified two patterns of engagement: deep engagement, characterized by self-regulated revising practices, and surface engagement, concerned with other-regulated revision operations. We were not only interested in students’ revision operations in their drafts, but also their reflective practices in their reflective journals that their teacher had assigned. The study suggests that effective student engagement with peer feedback largely depends on how they make use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in the revision process. The study recommends that teachers seek to provide instructional scaffolding to facilitate student cognitive engagement with peer feedback on L2 writing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessing Writing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293523000922","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The torrent of research into peer feedback in academic writing in recent years has largely overlooked student revision process – how individual students engage with this feedback to revise their texts and why certain changes are made in their texts. In other words, the cognitive dimension of student engagement with peer feedback in revision is little known. Drawing on multiple student drafts, peer feedback on these drafts, reflective journals and interviews with students, this study examines how two L2 students engage with peer feedback to conduct revisions. We found that the two participants differed considerably in their revision processes and identified two patterns of engagement: deep engagement, characterized by self-regulated revising practices, and surface engagement, concerned with other-regulated revision operations. We were not only interested in students’ revision operations in their drafts, but also their reflective practices in their reflective journals that their teacher had assigned. The study suggests that effective student engagement with peer feedback largely depends on how they make use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in the revision process. The study recommends that teachers seek to provide instructional scaffolding to facilitate student cognitive engagement with peer feedback on L2 writing.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
二语写作中学生与同伴反馈的互动:反思性日记和复习实践的启示
近年来,学术写作中对同伴反馈的大量研究在很大程度上忽视了学生的复习过程——学生如何利用这种反馈来复习他们的课文,以及为什么在他们的课文中做出某些改变。换句话说,学生在复习中参与同伴反馈的认知维度鲜为人知。本研究利用多份学生草稿、同行对这些草稿的反馈、反思性期刊和对学生的采访,考察了两名二语学生如何利用同行的反馈进行修改。我们发现,两名参与者在修订过程中存在很大差异,并确定了两种参与模式:以自我监管的修订实践为特征的深度参与和与其他受监管的修订操作相关的表面参与。我们不仅对学生在草稿中的复习操作感兴趣,还对他们在老师布置的反思日记中的反思实践感兴趣。研究表明,学生对同伴反馈的有效参与在很大程度上取决于他们在复习过程中如何使用认知和元认知策略。该研究建议教师寻求提供教学支架,以促进学生对二语写作的认知参与和同伴反馈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Assessing Writing
Assessing Writing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
17.90%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Assessing Writing is a refereed international journal providing a forum for ideas, research and practice on the assessment of written language. Assessing Writing publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges concerning writing assessments of all kinds, including traditional (direct and standardised forms of) testing of writing, alternative performance assessments (such as portfolios), workplace sampling and classroom assessment. The journal focuses on all stages of the writing assessment process, including needs evaluation, assessment creation, implementation, and validation, and test development.
期刊最新文献
Validating an integrated reading-into-writing scale with trained university students Understanding the SSARC model of task sequencing: Assessing L2 writing development Exploring the use of model texts as a feedback instrument in expository writing: EFL learners’ noticing, incorporations, and text quality Exploring the development of noun phrase complexity in L2 English writings across two genres L2 master’s and doctoral students’ preferences for supervisor written feedback on their theses/dissertations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1