Developing Peer Corrective Skills in Business Letter Writing in English as a Foreign Language
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22364/BJELLC.09.2019.03Keywords:
peer corrective feedback, feedback quality, writing skills, undergraduates, EFL case studyAbstract
Peer corrective feedback (PCF) implementation is a topical issue in writing skills development at tertiary level. Those researchers who explore the application of PCF in higher education (e.g. Liu and Sadler, 2003; Hyland, K. and Hyland, F., 2006) admit that students face difficulties in providing qualitative feedback that determines the effectiveness of this teaching tool. Therefore, the goal of this paper was to investigate what actions could be taken in order to develop students’ PCF skills and, consequently, foster the quality of PCF. The primary research method was a case study in which the participants were 24 second-year undergraduates majoring in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) at a university in Latvia. The materials of the case study involve the genre of a business letter, which plays a vital role in people’s professional and everyday life. The results of the research revealed that providing students with an assessment scale and teaching how to apply it increase the quality of PCF.
References
Amores, M. (1997) A new perspective on peer editing. Foreign Language Annals 30 (4): 513–523. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1997.tb00858.x
Andrade, S. M. and Evans, N. W. (2013) Principles and Practices for Response in Second Language Writing: Developing Self-Regulated Learners. New York: Routledge.
Azizi, M., Behjat, F. and Sorahi, M. (2014) Effect of metalinguistic teacher corrective feedback on writing performance of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2 (6): 54–63.
Cambridge English Language Assessment (2016) Cambridge English Business Certificates Handbook for Teachers. Cambridge: The University of Cambridge.
Chang, C. Y. H. (2016) Two decades of research in L2 peer review. Journal of Writing Research, 8 (1): 81–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2016.08.01.03
Council of Europe (2001) The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Council of Europe (2017) The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume with New Descriptors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farneste, M. (2005) Benefits and drawbacks of peer co-operation in the course of academic writing. Contrastive and Applied Linguistics, XIII: 20–37. Rīga: Moderno valodu fakultāte, Sastatāmās valodniecības un tulkošanas nodaļa.
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P. and Struyven, K. (2010) Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20 (4): 304–315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007
Grabe, W. and Kaplan, R. B. (1996) Theory and Practice of Writing. Pearson Education, Longman.
Hyland, F. (2000) ESL writers and Feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4 (1), 33–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880000400103
Hyland, K. (2003) Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667251
Hyland, K. and Hyland, F. (2006) Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39 (2): 83–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Leki, I. (1990) Potential problems with peer responding in ESL writing classes. CATESOL Journal, 3, 5–17.
Liu, J. and Hansen, J. (2002) Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classrooms. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.8952
Liu, J. and Sadler, R. W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purpose, 2 (3), 193–227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00025-0
Lyster, R. and Ranta, L. (1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19: 37–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034
Maas, C. (2017) Receptivity to learner-driven feedback in EAP. ELT Journal, 71 (2): 127–140.
Mahmoud, A. (2012) Strategy-based peer assistance in EFL writing. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2 (10): 87–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.10.1987-1992
Nassaji, H. and Kartchava, E. (2017) Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning: Research, Theory, Applications, Implications. New York: Routledge.
Nicol, D. J. and MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31 (2): 199–218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Rollinson, P. (2005) Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59: 23–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci003
Sackstein, S. (2017) Peer Feedback in the Classroom: Empowering Students to Be the Experts. Virginia: ASCD.
Sluijsmans, D.M.A., Brand-Gruwel, S. and van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (2002) Peer assessment training in teacher education: effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27 (5): 443–454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009311
Tsui, A.B.M. and Ng, M. (2000) Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9: 147–170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00022-9
Vyatkina, N. (2011) Writing instruction and policies for written corrective feedback in the basic language sequence. L2 Journal, 3: 63–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/L2319070
SOURCES USED FOR TASKS DEVELOPMENT
Ashley, A. (2003) Oxford Correspondence Workbook. New York: Oxford University Press.
Carey, J. A. (ed.), (2002) Business English for Busy People: Time Saving, Ready-to-use Letters for Any Occasion. New York: The Career Press.
Stephens, M. (2005) New Proficiency Writing. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
