Written feedback plays a key role in the acquisition of academic writing skills. Ideally, this feedback should include feed up, feed back and feed forward. However, written feedback alone is not enough to improve writing skills; students often struggle to interpret the feedback received and enhance their writing skills accordingly. Several studies have suggested that dialogue about written feedback is essential to promote the development of these skills. Yet, evidence of the effectiveness of face-to-face dialogue remains inconclusive. To bring this evidence into focus, we conducted a literature review of face-to-face dialogue intervention studies. The emphasis was on key elements of the interventions and outcomes in terms of student perceptions and other indicators, and the methodological characteristics of the studies. Subsequently, we analysed each selected intervention for the presence of feed-up, feed-back and feed-forward information. Most interventions used all three feedback elements -notably assessment criteria, student feedback, and revision, respectively -and combined lecturer-student as well as student-student dialogue. Students generally perceived the interventions as beneficial; they appreciated criteria and exemplars because they clarified what was expected of them and how they would be assessed. With regard to student outcomes, most interventions positively affected performance. The literature review suggests that feedback dialogue shows promise as an intervention to improve academic writing skills, but also call for future research into why and under which specific conditions face-to-face dialogue is effective.
Academic writing is a complex competence in higher education. To develop this competence, teachers' written feedback is vital, especially if it contains feed-up, feedback and feedforward information. However, academic writing does not always improve after provision of written feedback. The purpose of this study was to explore if peer-to-peer dialogue between students about teachers' written feedback does enhance students' understanding of written feedback. Sixtythree second-year university students participated in a pretest-post-test design with mixed methods. Questionnaire data showed that peer-to-peer dialogue increased students' understanding of feed-up, feedback and feed-forward information. Focus group data demonstrated that the dialogue helped students to understand the assessment criteria better (feed up) and offered suggestions for improvement (feed forward). High quality teachers' written feedback was perceived as an important condition. Peer-to-peer dialogue among students about teachers' written feedback seems promising in enhancing students' understanding on how to improve their academic writing assignments.
Feedback plays a vital role in the process of mastering writing in many academic disciplines. Although peer feedback has been proven helpful to develop students' academic writing competency, the role of additional face-to-face peer dialogue in this context remains indistinct. Face-to-face peer dialogue on written peer feedback is expected to improve students' understanding; however, it is unclear under which conditions it might do so. The purpose of this exploratory study is to explore students' beliefs about peer feedback and to investigate both the instructiveness of face-to-face peer dialogue and the conditions for achieving improved understanding. Second-year university students (N = 84) participated in a mixed-method study that included questionnaires and focus groups. The intervention comprised face-to-face dialogue in small groups about the participants' written peer feedback on a draft report. Quantitative data showed students perceived peer feedback as meaningful, useful and a very important skill to possess. They felt confident about feedback quality, both provided and received. Overall, students perceived written feedback and faceto-face dialogue to be instructive, although no significant difference between the two forms was established. Qualitative findings revealed that face-to-face dialogue stimulates peers to elaborate on their written feedback, helps them deliver constructive comments and feel responsible for the feedback process. Important conditions appeared to be the quality of the written feedback, the non-anonymous character of the dialogue, and the opportunity to revise the report. It can be concluded that face-to-face peer dialogue is a useful variation within peer feedback, which enhances further elaboration and students' engagement with feedback. This study provides insight in important conditions to design and implement face-to-face dialogue peer interventions in higher education in the context of academic writing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.