Negotiation of Meaning in Peer Revision Sessions in a College English Composition Classroom
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Peer revision provides English writing learners with a collaborative learning experience in which they discuss problems in the text with their peers for its revision. It is assumed in the revision activity that successful negotiation of meaning among peers is critical for the successful revision of the text. For the purpose of examining how meaning is negotiated in peer revision sessions, this study was conducted for Korean college EFL writing learners. They were asked to revise their papers with the peers twice for each of their writing assignments. Their meaning-negotiation process in the class was recorded, transcribed and analyzed for the study, and five episodes, which clearly represent the negotiation process, were selected and presented in the study. Among the factors that influence the negotiation are their ability to provide and determine valid feedback for revision, the writer's authorship, and stances each student takes toward the peers identified as important factors influencing the interaction and the successful completion of the task. This study also identified the need for examining the interaction between the readers as an area for further research.
Abstract
Peer revision provides English writing learners with a collaborative learning experience in which they discuss problems in the text with their peers for its revision. It is assumed in the revision activity that successful negotiation of meaning among peers is critical for the successful revision of the text. For the purpose of examining how meaning is negotiated in peer revision sessions, this study was conducted for Korean college EFL writing learners. They were asked to revise their papers with the peers twice for each of their writing assignments. Their meaning-negotiation process in the class was recorded, transcribed and analyzed for the study, and five episodes, which clearly represent the negotiation process, were selected and presented in the study. Among the factors that influence the negotiation are their ability to provide and determine valid feedback for revision, the writer's authorship, and stances each student takes toward the peers identified as important factors influencing the interaction and the successful completion of the task. This study also identified the need for examining the interaction between the readers as an area for further research.
참고문헌 (38)
- Allaei, S. K., "Exploring dynamics of cross-cultural collaboration in writing classrooms", Writing Instructor, 10(1), pp.19~28 (1990)
- Bruffee, K. A., "Collaborative learning and conversation of mankind", College English, 46(7), pp.635~652 (1984)
- Byrd, D. R., "Practical tips for implementing peer editing tasks in the foreign language classroom", Foreign Language Annals, 36(3), pp.434~441 (2003)
- Carson, J. G., "Chinese students' perception of ESL peer response group interaction", Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), pp.1~19 (1996)
- Cho, K., "Student revision with peer and expert reviewing", Learning and Instruction, 20, pp.328~338 (2010)
- Corrigan, A., "Michigan test of English language proficiency(Form P)" (1979), English Language Institute, University of Michigan
- De Guerrero, M. C. M., "Activating the ZPD : Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision", Modern Language Journal, 84(1), pp.51~68 (2000)
- DiPardo, A., "Peer response groups in the writing classroom : Theoretical foundations and new directions", Review of Educational Research, 58(2), pp.119~149 (1988)
- Donato, R., "Vygotskian approaches to second language research", pp.33~56 (1994), Ablex
- Emig, J., "The composing processes of twelfth graders" (1971), NCTE Press
- Fitzgerald, J., "Towards knowledge in writing : Illustrations from revision studies" (1992), Springer-Verlag
- Flower, L., "Writer-based prose : A cognitive basis for problems in writing", College English, 41(1), pp.19~37 (1979)
- Hu, G., "Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy : Exploring peer revision in second language writing class", Instructional Science, 38(4), pp.371~394 (2010)
- Lee, G., "Constructing trust between teacher and students through Feedback and revision cycles in an EFL writing classroom", Written Communication, 25(4), pp.506~537 (2008)
- Lee, I., "How do Hong Kong English teachers correct errors in student writing?", Education Journal, 31(1), pp.153~169 (2003)
- Liou, H., "Training effects on computer-mediated peer revision", System, 37(3), pp.514~525 (2009)
- Lockhart, C., "Analyzing talk in ESL peer response groups : Stances, functions, and content", Language Learning, 45(4), pp.605~655 (1995)
- Mangelsdorf, K., "ESL student response stances in a peer revision task", Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, pp.235~254 (1992)
- McGroarty, M. E., "Triangulation in classroom research : A Study of peer revision", Language Learning, 47(1), pp.1~43 (2010)
- Mendoça, C., "Peer revision negotiations : Revision activities in ESL writing instruction", TESOL Quarterly, 28(4), pp.745~769 (1994)
- Min, H., "Training students to become successful peer revisioners", System, 33(2), pp.293~308 (2005)
- Min, H., "The effects of trained peer revision on EFL students' revision types and writing quality", Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), pp.118~141 (2006)
- Min, H., "Reader stances and writer perceptions in EFL peer revision training", English for Specific Purposes, 27, pp.285~305 (2008)
- Mittan, R., "Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students", pp.207~219 (1989), Longman
- Murray, D. M., "Research on composing: Points of departure", pp.85~104 (1978), National Council of Teachers of English.
- Nelson, G. L., "Peer response groups: Do L2 writers use peer comments in revising their drafts?", TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), pp.135~141 (1993)
- Newkirk, T., "How students read student papers : An exploratory study", Written Communication, 1, pp.283~305 (1984)
- Perl, S., "The composing processes of unskilled college writers", Research in the Teaching of English, 13, pp.317~336 (1979)
- Prior, P., "Tracing authoritative and internally persuasive discourses : A case study of response, revision, and disciplinary enculturation", Research in the Teaching of English, 29(3), pp.288~325 (1995)
- Ryu, Ho-Yeol., "Threshold level of English-language proficiency for EFL writing: Effect of the interaction between English-language proficiency and writing skills on Korean college students' EFL writing", 박사, pp.1997
- Stanley, J., "Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators", Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), pp.217~233 (1992)
- Steendam, E., "The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL", Learning and Instruction, 20(4), pp.316~327 (2010)
- Suzuki, M., "Japanese learners' self revisions and peer revisions of their written compositions in English", TESOL Quarterly, 42(2), pp.209~233 (2008)
- Tsui, A. B., "Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?", Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, pp.147~170 (2000)
- Villamil, O. S., "Peer revision in the L2 classroom : Social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior", Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), pp.51~75 (1996)
- Zhang, S., "Thoughts on some recent evidence concerning the affective advantage of peer feedback", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), pp.321~326 (1995)
- Zhao, H., "Investigating learners' use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing : A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom", Assessing Writing, 15(1), pp.3~17 (2010)
- Zhu, W., "Interaction and feedback in mixed peer response groups", Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, pp.251~276 (2001)