Two Collaborative Feedback Models in EFL Writing Instruction: Do They Make a Difference?

Research in L1 writing has found numerous benefits of employing collaborative learning in the classroom. The research findings on group work provide clear evidence that engaging learners in group activities increases opportunities for students to engage in the negotiation of meaning, which further leads to better acquisition. The present study, implementing two different collaborative feedback models, based on various sources and modes of feedback, examines the effect of each on the students’ writing quality. Sixty Iranian students, majoring in English Translation, were assigned into three homogeneous groups based on their obtained scores on Oxford Placement Test (OPT) and sample paragraph writing. They covered five topics in a sequence of ten written texts − before and after receiving feedback − over a 15-week semester. The results revealed that students incorporated both the teacher’s and peers’ oral/written comments in the process of draft editing, and that they benefited from the two collaborative feedback models almost equally. The interview results also confirmed co-operative learning as an effective teaching strategy that could be used to enhance achievement and socialization among students and to improve attitudes towards learning and working in groups, especially in EFL settings.

[1]  Tim Ashwell,et al.  Patterns of Teacher Response to Student Writing in a Multiple-Draft Composition Classroom: Is Content Feedback Followed by Form Feedback the Best Method? , 2000 .

[2]  Olga S. Villamil,et al.  Peer Revision in the L2 Classroom: Social-Cognitive Activities, Mediating Strategies, and Aspects of Social Behavior. , 1996 .

[3]  Ilona Leki,et al.  Second Language Writing: Coaching from the margins: issues in written response , 1990 .

[4]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[5]  T. Pica,et al.  "Information Gap" Tasks: Do They Facilitate Second Language Acquisition? , 1986 .

[6]  Alan Hirvela Collaborative Writing Instruction and Communities of Readers and Writers , 1999 .

[7]  K. Mangelsdorf,et al.  Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think? , 1992 .

[8]  A. Green,et al.  A Successful Peer Writing Assistant Program , 2001 .

[9]  Dana R. Ferris,et al.  ERROR FEEDBACK IN L2 WRITING CLASSES: HOW EXPLICIT DOES IT NEED TO BE? , 2001 .

[10]  T. Boswood,et al.  From Marking to Feedback: Audiotaped Responses to Student Writing. , 1996 .

[11]  Jun Liu,et al.  Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classrooms , 2002 .

[12]  ZhaoHong Han Rethinking the Role of Corrective Feedback in Communicative Language Teaching , 2002 .

[13]  Anne Ruggles Gere,et al.  Writing Groups: History, Theory, and Implications , 1987 .

[14]  D. Ferris The Influence of Teacher Commentary on Student Revision , 1997 .

[15]  Kate Mangelsdorf,et al.  Parallels Between Speaking and Writing in Second Language Acquisition , 1989 .

[16]  R. Roebuck Teaching Composition in the College Level Foreign Language Class: Insights and Activities from Sociocultural Theory , 2001 .

[17]  Olga S. Villamil,et al.  Social-cognitive dimensions of interaction in L2 peer revision. , 1994 .

[18]  Ken Hyland,et al.  PROVIDING PRODUCTIVE FEEDBACK , 1990 .

[19]  Frederick J. Dicamilla,et al.  Repetition in the Collaborative Discourse of L2 Learners: A Vygotskian Perspective , 1997 .

[20]  Jean Chandler,et al.  THE EFFICACY OF VARIOUS KINDS OF ERROR FEEDBACK FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THE ACCURACY AND FLUENCY OF L2 STUDENT WRITING , 2003 .

[21]  E. Berg,et al.  The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality , 1999 .

[22]  Michelle G. Paterno Responding to Student Writing , 2002 .

[23]  Kate Mangelsdorf,et al.  ESL student response stances in a peer-review task , 1992 .

[24]  Michael H. Long,et al.  Group Work, Interlanguage Talk,and Second Language Acquisition. , 1985 .

[25]  N Bartels WRITTEN PEER RESPONSE IN L2 WRITING , 2003 .