published_or_final_version / abstract / Education / Master / Master of Education

published_or_final_version / Education / Master / Master of Education

Informed by a sociocognitive view of writing, this study investigated six Chinese EFL students’ focus of decision-making and extent of criteria use in evaluating student texts, their decision-making in response to peer feedback and factors affecting their decision-making and criteria use in computer-mediated criterion-referenced peer review in one Chinese university setting. A multiple-case design was adopted and data were collected from a variety of sources, including think-aloud protocols, stimulated recall, semi-structured interviews, document analysis and classroom observations. An examination of the think-aloud and stimulated recall data revealed that five out of the six students displayed language-oriented decision-making while evaluating peers’ texts. The students also tended to emphasize consistently specific elements of student writing within language, content and organization regardless of task type. They used part of the assessment criteria to the extent that particular elements evaluated by them coincided with specific components of the criteria. In response to peer feedback, the students decided to incorporate it selectively into revision, with one student being an exception. Data analysis indicated that the students’ focus of decision-making and criteria use while evaluating peers’ texts were affected by the following factors: students’ own writing beliefs, conceptions and knowledge; teacher’s writing beliefs, conceptions and associated classroom practices; writing task types and features of student texts. The students’ decision-making in response to peer feedback was found to be subject to the influence of four categories of factors: student writer factors, especially their writing beliefs and knowledge; student reviewer factors; teacher factor and writing task factor. The findings provide an in-depth look into both the cognitive and social dimensions of peer review. On the basis of the findings, the study proposes a tentative exploratory model of Chinese EFL university students’ decision-making in criterion-referenced peer review. It captures the interplay between cognitive and social dimensions of peer review and throws light on the interaction between cognition and context in the case of learning to write through peer review. Particularly regarding the social dimension of peer review, the variety of factors influencing the students’ decision-making and criteria use in this activity indicate that their evaluation of peers’ texts and response to peer feedback were not linear processes, but were mediated by multiple factors. Among the various factors identified, the strong influence of the writing beliefs and conceptions held by the students, their peers and the teacher suggest the crucial role played by learner and teacher beliefs in affecting L2 students’ learning to write through peer review. This study also highlights the interactional effect of views about writing and learning to write exhibited by the students, their peers, the teacher and the “methodology” of criterion-referenced peer review on the students’ decision-making and extent of criteria use. Finally, the study makes pedagogical recommendations concerning how to enable students to make informed decisions in criterion-referenced peer review to bring its theoretical potential into full play. Recommendations for further research are also proposed. / published_or_final_version / Education / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

Recent developments in technology have increased the potential uses of electronic peer feedback. Because both computer-mediated and traditional peer review modes have their own strengths, some researchers have suggested that these two different modes can be used together; however, this combination mode of peer review has not been widely investigated. This study examines the impact of combining electronic commenting using editing features of Microsoft word and a course management system (Moodle) with face-to-face interaction as a two-step peer review process and compares this with a more traditional mode (pen-and-paper commenting and oral talk). It investigates students’ perceptions and attitudes toward these different modes of peer review and examines whether there are differences in the types of peer feedback given and the use of peer feedback in students’ subsequent revisions. Adopting a case study approach, both qualitative and quantitative data—students’ written and electronic texts (draft, peer feedback, and revisions), transcriptions of oral interactions, and pre-, mid-, post-stage interviews— were collected from eight ESL sub-degree students in Hong Kong. The results revealed that the majority of participants preferred the combination mode of peer review because it merged some of the most useful features of e-feedback and oral talk. In terms of feedback, students in both the combination group and the traditional group liked to receive revision-oriented comments; however, their preferences for feedback on their own writing were not always consistent with the types of comments they actually provided. The findings also indicated that the combination mode was more effective in terms of number of comments and different types of feedback provided. It was found that there was a complex relationship between different aspects of peer feedback, including area (global versus local), function (evaluation, question, explanation, suggestion, and alteration), and medium (written, electronic, and oral). Oral responses and comments on the Moodle forum focused more on global evaluation and suggestions, while large amounts of written comments and e-feedback generated by the editing features were corrections for surface level errors. With respect to revisions, both groups made a similar total number of changes to their texts but changes from the combination group included more frequent direct use of peer feedback, whereas a larger percentage of self-initiated changes were made by the traditional group. In addition, this study shows how other individual factors influence the efficacy of peer review, including relationship between peers; students’ attitudes and stances; motivation, and participation; (mis)match between writer’s expected feedback and reviewer’s comments and students’ prior experiences with peer response. This study has demonstrated the considerable benefits of using both electronic and face-to-face peer feedback in a combination mode and shed light on the changing roles of the instructor, students and technology in the twenty-first century writing classroom. This study has also yielded a number of pedagogical insights to help teachers to effectively implement new technologies when planning to use peer response in their writing classrooms. / published_or_final_version / Education / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

published_or_final_version / Linguistics / Master / Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics