Revision behaviors in a peer-reviewed multi-draft writing context
2
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
EFL writing is a cognitively demanding task and asks the writer to pay attention to a large number of elements involved in producing the text. It is unreasonable for our student writers to deal with the overwhelming cognitive demand of writing effectively with a single attempt. Therefore, revision should be a key component of their writing process. The necessity of revision prompts us to consider the integration of multi-draft writing into our teaching practice since it provides students with more opportunities to shape and refine their texts. Peer review has been also recommended as a helpful pedagogical instrument for them to cope with revision tasks successfully. In line with these theoretical underpinnings, this study examined the impact of these two writing pedagogies on Korean college students’ revising behaviors and the improvement of their text quality in an English composition class in a Korean university. The participants in the study received a training on how to review their peers’ writings and went through multi-draft writing process in which they were asked to revise their writings three times on each topic. The results identified the pattern of their revision behaviors and confirmed the writing quality improvements on the subsequent drafts. Some pedagogical suggestions were also proposed to reap the benefits of multi-draft writing and peer review practices in the classroom.
Abstract
EFL writing is a cognitively demanding task and asks the writer to pay attention to a large number of elements involved in producing the text. It is unreasonable for our student writers to deal with the overwhelming cognitive demand of writing effectively with a single attempt. Therefore, revision should be a key component of their writing process. The necessity of revision prompts us to consider the integration of multi-draft writing into our teaching practice since it provides students with more opportunities to shape and refine their texts. Peer review has been also recommended as a helpful pedagogical instrument for them to cope with revision tasks successfully. In line with these theoretical underpinnings, this study examined the impact of these two writing pedagogies on Korean college students’ revising behaviors and the improvement of their text quality in an English composition class in a Korean university. The participants in the study received a training on how to review their peers’ writings and went through multi-draft writing process in which they were asked to revise their writings three times on each topic. The results identified the pattern of their revision behaviors and confirmed the writing quality improvements on the subsequent drafts. Some pedagogical suggestions were also proposed to reap the benefits of multi-draft writing and peer review practices in the classroom.
참고문헌 (32)
- Cho, K., "Student revision with peer and expert reviewing", Learning and Instruction, 20, pp.328~338 (2010)
- Cho, K., "Commenting on writing : Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter Experts", Written Communication, 23, pp.260~294 (2006)
- Dave, A. M., "Drafting and revision using word processing by undergraduate student writers : Changing conceptions and practices", Research in the Teaching of English, 44(4), pp.406~434 (2010)
- Eckstein, G., "Multi-draft composition : An iterative model for academic argument writing", English for Academic Purposes, 10, pp.162~172 (2011)
- "TOEFL iBT test independent writing rubrics" (2008)[URL]
- Faigley, L., "Analyzing revision", College Composition and Communication, 32(4), pp.400~414 (1981)
- Ferris, D. R. B., "Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms", TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), pp.33~53 (1995)
- Flowers, L., "The cognition of discovery : Defining a rhetorical problem", College Composition and Communication, 31(1), pp.21~32 (1980)
- Gielen, S., "Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning", Learning and Instruction, 20, pp.304~315 (2010)
- Harris, M., "Composing behaviors of one-and multi-draft writers", College English, 51(2), pp.174~191 (1989)
- Hu, G., "Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy : Exploring peer review in second language writing class", Instructional Science, 38(4), pp.371~394 (2010)
- Lee, G., "Meeting in the margins : Effects of the teacher-student relationship on revision processes of EFL college students taking a composition course", Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3), pp.165~182 (2008)
- Liou, H., "Training effects on computer-mediated peer review", System : An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 37(3), pp.514~525 (2009)
- Mangelsdorf, K., "Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom : What do the students think", ELT Journal, 46(3), pp.274~284 (1992)
- McGroarty, M. E., "Triangulation in classroom research : A study of peer revision", Language Learning, 47(1), pp.1~43 (2010)
- Min, H., "Reviewer stances and writer perceptions in EFL peer review Training", English for Specific Purposes, 27(3), pp.285~305 (2008)
- Min, H., "Training students to become successful peer reviewers", System : An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 33(2), pp.293~308 (2005)
- Min, H., "The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality", Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), pp.118~141 (2006)
- Nelson, G. L., "Peer response groups: Do L2 writers use peer comments in revising their drafts?", TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), pp.135~141 (1993)
- Olson, V. L. B., "The revising processes of sixth-grade writers with and without feedback", Journal of Educational Research, 84(1), pp.22~29 (1990)
- Perl, S., "Understanding composing", College Composition and Communication, 31(4), pp.363~369 (1980)
- Prater, D. L., "Using bilingual groups with limited English proficient writers", Bilingual Research Journal, 17(1-2), pp.99~116 (1993)
- Ritchie, J., "Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers" (2003), SAGE Publications
- Romova, Z., "Teaching and assessing academic writing via the portfolio : Benefits for learners of English as an additional language", Assessing Writing, 16, pp.111~122 (2011)
- Sengupta, S., "An Investigation into the effects of revision strategy instruction on L2 secondary school learners", System, 28, pp.97~113 (2000)
- Strijbos, J., "Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency?", Learning and Instruction, 20, pp.291~303 (2010)
- Sze, C., "A case study of the revision process of a reluctant ESL student writer", TESL Canada Journal, 19(2), pp.21~36 (2002)
- Tsui, A. B., "Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?", Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, pp.147~170 (2000)
- Villamil, O. S., "Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing", Applied Linguistics, 19(4), pp.491~514 (1998)
- 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)
- Yang, Y., "The influence of social interaction on meaning construction in a virtual community", British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), pp.287~306 (2010)
- 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)