The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing

Journal of English for Academic Purposes

Volumn 2, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 193-227

  Liu, Jun ^a   Sadler, Randall W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer mediated communication; Face to face interaction; Feedback; Peer review; Revision; Second language writing

Indexed keywords

EID: 21644476755     PISSN: 14751585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00025-0     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Amores, M. J. (1997). A new perspective on peer-editing. Foreign Language Annals, 30(4), 513-523.
2. Beauvois, M. H., & Eledge, J. (1996). Personality types and megabytes: Student attitudes toward computer mediated communication (CMC) in the language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13, 27-45.
3. Belcher, D. (1990). Peer vs. teacher response in the advanced composition class. Issues in Writing, 2(2), 128-150.
4. Belcher, D. (1999). Authentic interaction in a virtual classroom: leveling the playing field in a graduate seminar. Computers and Composition, 16, 253-267.
5. Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215-241.
6. Braine, G. (1997). Beyond word processing: Networked computers in ESL writing classes. Computers and Composition, 14, 45-58.
7. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. D. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Caulk, N. (1994). Comparing teacher and student responses to written work. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 181-188.
9. Chaudron, C. (1984). The effects of feedback on students' composition revisions. RELC Journal, 15, 1-16.
10. Cheong, L. K. (1994). Using annotation in a process approach to writing in a Hong Kong classroom. TESL Reporter, 27(2), 63-73.
11. Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: how much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(3), 257-276.
12. Egbert, J., Chao, C., & Hanson-Smith, E. (1999). Computer-enhanced language learning environments: an overview. In J. Egbert, & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments (pp. 1-16). Virginia: Alexandria: TESOL Publishers.
13. Fanderclai, T. L. (1995). MUDs in education: New environment, new pedagogies. Computer-Mediated Communication Magazine, 2, 8-10.
14. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction rituals: essaya on face-to-face behavior. New York: Anchor Books.
15. Harris, K. (1995, Autumn). Internet in the classroom: a gold mine or a lot of hype? (15 paragraphs). CALL Review: The Journal of the IATEFL Computer Special Interest Group. Available http://www. iatefl.org/calrevnv.html.
16. Hedgcock, J., & Lcfkowitz, N. (1992). Collaborative oral/aural revision in foreign language writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 255-276.
17. Kasper, G., & Kellerman, E. (1997). Communication strategies. New York: Longman.
18. Kern, O. R. (1992). The use of synchronous computer networks in second language instruction: a preliminary report. Foreign Language Annals, 25, 441-454.
19. Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476.
20. Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: research insights for the classroom (pp. 57-68). New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Liu, J. (2000). Understanding Asian students' oral participation models in American classrooms. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 10(1), 155-189.
22. Liu, J. (2001). Asian students' classroom communication patters in US universities: an emic perspective. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
23. Liu, J., & Hansen, J. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
24. Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1995). Analyzing talk in peer response groups: stances, functions, and content. Language Learning, 45, 605-655.
25. McGroarty, M. E., & Zhu, W. (1997). Triangulation in classroom research: a study of peer revision. Language Learning, 47(1), 1-43.
26. Mendonça, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), 745-769.
27. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1992). An L2 writing group: task and social dimensions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 171-193.
28. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1993). Peer response groups: do L2 writers use peer comments in revising their drafts? TESOL Quarterly, 27, 135-142.
29. Partridge, K. L. (1981). A comparison of the effectiveness of peer vs. teacher evaluation for helping students of English as a second language to improve the quality of their written compositions. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu.
30. Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language. Writing, 5(3), 265-289.
31. Reid, E. (1994). Cultural formations in text-based virtual realities. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Available http://people/we.mediaone.net/elizrs/cult-form.html.
32. Rheingold, H. (1993). A slice of life in my virtual community. In Linda M. Harasim (Ed.), Global networks: computers and international communication (pp. 57-80). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Snookes, P. (1995, Autumn). Using the Internet for interactive text-based communication and learning (15 paragraphs). CALL Review: The Journal of the IATEFL Computer Special Interest Grou. Available: http://www.iatefl.org/ calrevnv.html.
34. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 217-233.
36. Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: a computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29, 491-501.
37. Tsui, A. (1999). Young ESL writers' responses to peer and teacher comments in writing. The Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 95-109). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Co. Ltd.
38. Tsui, A., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170.
39. Villamil, O. S., & de Guerrero, M. C. M. (1998). Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 491-514.
40. Vygotskii, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
41. Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13, 7-26.
42. Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.