Effects of a mixed-mode peer response on student response behavior and writing performance

Journal of Educational Computing Research

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 233-256

  Wang, Jen Hang ^a   Hsu, Shih Hsun ^a   Chen, Sherry Y ^a   Ko, Hwa Wei ^a   Ku, Yu Min ^a   Chan, Tak Wai ^a  

^a NATIONAL CENTRAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84928201054     PISSN: 07356331     EISSN: 15414140     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/EC.51.2.e     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Artemeva, N., & Logie, S. (2002). Introducing engineering students to intellectual teamwork: The teaching and practice of peer feedback in the professional communication classroom. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 6(1), 62-85.
2. Beauvois, M. H. (1998). Conversations in slow motion: Computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 54(2), 198-217.
3. Boscolo, P., & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children's ability to write understandable narrative texts. In G. Rijlaarsdam, L. Allal, L. Chanqouy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes. Studies in writing (Vol. 13; pp. 157-170). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
4. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1-19.
5. Chanquoy, L. (2001). How to make it easier for children to revise their writing: A study of text revision from 3rd to 5th grades. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 15-41.
6. Chen, M., Wang, H., & Ko, H. W. (2009). Using latent semantic analysis to create a Chinese semantic space and the validation of psychological reality. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 51(4), 397-417.
7. Cheng, W., Lam, S., & Chan, C. (2008). When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: The roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project-based learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 205-221.
8. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A Web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48(3), 409-426.
9. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260-294.
10. Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of peer e-feedback on Turkish EFL students' writing performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61-84.
11. DiPardo, A., & Freedman, S. W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretic foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58(2), 119-149.
12. Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
13. Faigley, L., & Witte, S. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 400-414.
14. Flynn, E. (1982). Effects of peer critiquing and model analysis on the quality of biology student laboratory reports. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English, Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 234 403).
15. Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906-914.
16. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G., & Simmons, D. C. (1997). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 174-206.
17. Gedera, D. (2012). The dynamics of blog peer feedback in ESL classroom. Teaching English with Technology 12(4), 16-30.
18. Ghaith, G. M. (2001). Learners' perceptions of their STAD cooperative experience. System, 29(2), 289-301.
19. Goldberg, A., Russell, M., & Cook, A. (2003). The effect of computers on student writing: A meta-analysis of studies from 1992 to 2002. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 2(1), 1-52.
20. Guardado, M., & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students' experiences of online peer feedback. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 443-461.
21. Hansen, J. G., & Liu, J. (2005). Guiding principles for effective peer response. ELT Journal, 59(1), 31-38.
22. Ho, M., & Savignon, S. J. (2007). Face-to-face and computer-mediated peer review in EFL writing. CALICO Journal, 24(2), 269-290.
23. Howell, D. C. (2007). Statistical methods for psychology (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
24. Jacobs, G. M., Curtis, A., Braine, G., & Huang, S.-Y. (1998). Feedback on student writing: Taking the middle path. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 307-317.
25. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction.
26. Kellogg, R. T. (1999). The psychology of writing. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
27. Leki, I. (1990a). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 57-68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
28. Leki, I. (1990b). Potential problems with peer responding in ESL writing classes. CATESOL Journal, 3(1), 5-19.
29. Liang, M. Y. (2010). Using synchronous online peer response groups in EFL writing: Revision-related discourse. Language Learning and Technology, 14(1), 45-64.
30. Lin, S. S., Liu, E. Z.-F., & Yuan, S.-M. (2001). Web-based peer assessment: Feedback for students with various thinking-styles. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(4), 420-432.
31. Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
32. Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1993). How useful is peer response. Perspectives, 5(1), 17-29.
33. Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think? ELT Journal, 46(3), 274-284.
34. Mendonça, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), 745-769.
35. Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), 293-308.
36. Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118-141.
37. National Commission on Writing. (2004). Writing: A ticket to work... or a ticket out. New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board.
38. Nelson, G. L. (1997). How cultural differences affect written and oral communication: The case of peer response groups. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 70, 77-84.
39. Nelson, M., & Schunn, C. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401.
40. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
41. Peckham, I. (1996). If it ain't broke, why fix it?: Disruptive and constructive computermediated response group practices. Computers and Composition, 13(3), 327-339.
42. Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23-30.
43. Sims, D. (2001). Improving elementary school students' writing using reading and writing integration strategies. Illinois. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED454502).
44. Stoddard, B., & MacArthur, C. A. (1993). A peer editor strategy: Guiding learningdisabled students in response and revision. Research in the Teaching of English, 27(1), 76-103.
45. Tiene, C. D. (2000). Online discussions: A survey of advantages and disadvantages compared to face-to-face discussions. Journal of Educational Multimedia & Hypermedia, 9(4), 371-384.
46. Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170.
47. Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and Composition, 21(2), 217-235.
48. Yang, J. C., Ko, H. W., & Chung, I. L. (2005). Web-based interactive writing environment: Development and evaluation. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 214-229.
49. Yang, Y. F. (2011). A reciprocal peer review system to support college students' writing. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 687-700.