Adolescent ELLs' collaborative writing practices in face-to-face and online contexts: From perceptions to action

Vorobel, Oksana; Kim, Deoksoon

doi:10.1016/j.system.2017.01.008

Cited by 39 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This current study has addressed whether there is correlation between student's perspective on the usefulness of peer review session and the students' writing performance since many previous studies proved that student's has positive response on the use of peer review session in writing classes e.g. [4], [6], [8], [10]- [12], [15], [18], [19], etc.). However, the finding in this current research shows that correlation between students' respond on the use of peer review and students' writing performance is having weak positive correlation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Influencing the Usefulness of Peer Review towards EFL Learners’ Writing Performance

Tyas¹,

Safitri²

2019

Proceedings of the First International Conference on Advances in Education, Humanities, and Language, ICEL 2019, Malang, Indone

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study attempts to present the correlation of students' perspective on the use of peer review towards students' writing performance in Essay Writing Class in English Education Program, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya. The research subjects were 118 students of the third semester in academic year 2018/2019 taking Essay Writing Class. In collecting data, writing scores were used to represent students' writing performance and a questionnaire to know students' satisfaction with peer review sessions. The result of the study proved the correlation to be weak. The paper then discusses some factors that influence the usefulness of peer review session in helping students revising their drafts, such as students' background knowledge of the topic being written; students' scant proficiency in English; students' attitudes and time allotment in doing peer review session; and interpersonal relationship among students.suggested that further researchers can focus more on students' attitudes/perceptions of peer review session. Considering those gaps, this current study attempts to investigate students' perspective on the use of peer review towards students' writing performance in Essay Writing Class in English Language Education Program, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya by posing a research hypothesis "There is a significant positive correlation between students' perspective on the use of peer review and students' writing performance".Peer view or also known as peer feedback or peer response is defined as an activity in which students exchange draft one another in order to give and receive comment, suggestion, and revision from other students in the form of oral, written, or both oral and written. Generally, peer review is focused on some elements of writing. It covers global and local writing aspect [14]. The global aspect is given when the review is emphasized on the content, cohesion/coherence, and text organization, while the local aspect is assessed when the criticism focuses on the grammar, vocabulary, and punctuation. In addition, peer review can also be conducted using some media, such as face to face, commuter-medicated communication (CMC), asynchronous (e-mail), and synchronous (chats) [1], [9]. Therefore, by using the media and focused elements, peer review is stressed to get many feedbacks in order to improve the writing quality.There is a common believe that writing is not only the product, but also the process, since then peer review is needed. Some previous researchers [9], [12], [12], [15] state that peer review involves thought, process of writing, and social cognitive aspect, and social constructionism. In the process of writing, peer review contributes in the beginning of writing process such as brainstorming and outlining and it also involves in the writing cycles that are started by brainstorming, outlining, drafting, and revising. Chang [14] also adds that peer review may also involve between drafting and final revision. Seen from the social cognitive and social constr...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Influencing the Usefulness of Peer Review towards EFL Learners’ Writing Performance

Tyas¹,

Safitri²

2019

Proceedings of the First International Conference on Advances in Education, Humanities, and Language, ICEL 2019, Malang, Indone

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Learners in the majority of the studies showed positive attitude towards CMC in writing in terms of linguistic gains, social and personal goals, gains in grammar, vocabulary and cultural content (Ducate et al, 2011). A heightened awareness of their language use and content creation from Wiki writing (Chao & Lo, 2011;Kost, 2011), an additional perspective on writing, linguistics assistance from peer editing, and the development of communicative skills (Shang, 2007;Vorobel & Kim, 2017) were also reported. Learners acknowledged that collaborative writing improved the overall quality of their writing as they focused on both local and global aspects of their writing (Elola & Oskoz, 2010;Lee, 2010), and expressed a positive disposition towards the ease of translation using online tools (Miyazoe & Anderson, 2010).…”

Section: Claim 4: Learner Attitudes Towards Cmc In Writing Are Generamentioning

confidence: 93%

“…While some learners were motivated to give and to receive feedback, the lack of confidence in their own linguistic competence meant that they were more comfortable giving interactive than corrective feedback (Lee, 2010). This discomfort in editing peers' mistakes was reported by a number of studies (Castañeda & Cho, 2013), due to learners' perceived uncertainty in the accuracy of peers' feedback (Castañeda & Cho, 2013;Vorobel & Kim, 2017). Learners in Vorobel and Kim's (2017) study found discussing and providing feedback to peers easier than doing so with the teacher, though they believed that the instructor's feedback would be more honest compared to their peers.…”

Section: Training For Peer Reviewmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Learners complained about different writing styles, disputes over specific roles in the team, and sharing the responsibility for a shared grade (Kost, 2011). Concerns over being sensitive to others' feelings when providing explicit feedback via a Web 2.0 tool for collaborative work and an unwillingness to incorporate others' feedback were also reported (Vorobel & Kim, 2017). Technical difficulties were also an issue, as difficulties with network issues and the inconvenience of having to use a computer mediation tool to do work might affect learners' inclination towards CMC tools in writing (Chao & Lo, 2011).…”

Section: Claim 4: Learner Attitudes Towards Cmc In Writing Are Generamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Second and Foreign Language Writing and Computer-Mediated Communication: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis of Recent Research

Tay¹,

Cheung

2019

ILS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in the classroom is common nowadays. The bulk of literature produced so far has done little in informing us the factors that facilitate the role of CMC in language writing, and the nature of the interaction that takes place via CMC in a systematic manner. This paper examines what empirical research has found out about the factors that facilitate the use of CMC in second/ foreign language writing instruction and learning, and the nature of interaction that takes place via CMC in an educational context. 60 peer-reviewed published primary studies from 2007-2017 were reviewed. The key findings are as follows. First, instructor support plays a critical role in ensuring the successful implementation of a CMC tool in the classroom. Second, the affordances of CMC in enhancing the writer’s identity and the presence of an audience can increase learners’ motivation to write. Third, both asynchronous and synchronous CMC have shown to be beneficial, and the provision of training can further enhance the effectiveness of peer reviews. Last, the participatory patterns of CMC in writing are influenced by factors such as task type, personal goals, native-speaker status, and self-perceived competencies. Pedagogical implications are suggested.

show abstract

“…Adopting verbal protocol methods can provide a window to examine social factors involved in ELLs’ reading comprehension (Kim, ; Smith & King, ; Kim, ). We are beginning to learn more about how verbal reports may provide insight not only into LLs’ cognition but also about how they mobilise social tools to facilitate literacy development (Bowles, 2010a; Cohen, , , , ; Vorobel & Kim, ; Kim, ). The calls for greater attention to social processes involved in using verbal reports for second‐language reading have resulted in studies such as those by Kim () that point out the importance of integrating cognitive and sociocultural perspectives.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Verbal reports in the reading processes of language learners: A methodological review

Smith

Kim

Vorobel

et al. 2019

Review of Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This methodological review highlights the trends in empirical studies where a methodological construct (i.e. verbal reports) intersects with content (i.e. literacy research). Specifically, we synthesise research on language learners’ reading in which verbal reports were deployed as a methodological tool. Questioning the long‐standing assumption that verbal report methods validated in first‐language verbal report reading studies necessarily constitute a basis for validation of second‐language verbal report reading studies, we consider the broader educational frameworks within which studies are embedded. In our synthesis of language learners’ verbal report literacy research published between 2000 and 2015, we attend to the social, demographic and geographic realities characteristic of studies reviewed and of the participants involved. Our findings demonstrate the following: (a) tendency to report quantitative information regardless of the type of verbal reporting method and the component of reading explored; (b) predominance of independent concurrent methods that emphasised the reading product; (c) predominance of integrated verbal reports (i.e. concurrent and other forms of reporting) in sociocultural studies that reflected the reading process; (d) concerns about validity in studies premised on cognitivist models of verbal reports; (e) a tendency to use solely concurrent verbal reports in quantitative studies; (f) high reliance on integrated concurrent methods in qualitative studies; and (g) preponderance of qualitative‐to‐quantitative versus a qualitative‐to‐quantitative‐to‐qualitative verbal reporting paradigms across studies. Based on these findings, we make several recommendations to be considered when verbal reports are used to study language learners’ reading processes.

show abstract

Adolescent ELLs' collaborative writing practices in face-to-face and online contexts: From perceptions to action

Cited by 39 publications

References 33 publications

Factors Influencing the Usefulness of Peer Review towards EFL Learners’ Writing Performance

Factors Influencing the Usefulness of Peer Review towards EFL Learners’ Writing Performance

Second and Foreign Language Writing and Computer-Mediated Communication: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis of Recent Research

Verbal reports in the reading processes of language learners: A methodological review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About