A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writing
Abstract This paper is a review of previous studies on learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face peer review (FFPR) and computer-assisted peer review (CAPR) of English as Second/Foreign Language (ESL/EFL) writing. The review attempted to (1) identify the patterns of interactional fe...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41239-017-0084-8 |
| _version_ | 1819239630094991360 |
|---|---|
| author | Murad Abdu Saeed Kamila Ghazali Musheer Abdulwahid Aljaberi |
| author_facet | Murad Abdu Saeed Kamila Ghazali Musheer Abdulwahid Aljaberi |
| author_sort | Murad Abdu Saeed |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract This paper is a review of previous studies on learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face peer review (FFPR) and computer-assisted peer review (CAPR) of English as Second/Foreign Language (ESL/EFL) writing. The review attempted to (1) identify the patterns of interactional feedback, (2) search an empirical evidence of learners’ incorporation of peer interactional feedback in their text revisions and (3) identify the factors affecting learners’ interactional feedback as reported in these previous studies. To achieve this, a search of previous studies on peer review in writing from 1990 to 2016 was conducted. However, only 37 out of 58 peer reviewed studies were extensively reviewed and systematically analyzed by two independent coders. The findings showed that in terms of the language functions, learners’ interactional feedback exchanges are categorized as (1) exploratory (showing learners’ reflection and interpretation of the task), (2) procedural (showing how learners handle the task of revising their texts) and (3) social (showing how learners maintain good relationships). In relation to the nature and focus areas, learners’ interactional feedback exchanges are revision-oriented (targeting problems or errors in written texts) and non-revision-oriented (do not target any problems). Results of some previous reviewed studies also provided evidence of learners’ integration of peer feedback into their text revisions. However, peer interactional feedback is affected by several factors: training learners on feedback, mode of peer review, type of written tasks, learners’ roles in peer review activties, learners’ proficiency in English and other factors, including learners’ gender differences and configuration of peer review dyads as well as context of peer review. Synthesizing the findings of the reviewed studies, we proposed a dual space-interactional feedback model that comprises the learning space and the social space of interactional feedback in peer review. Several pedagogical, research and technological implications were also drawn from the major findings. Future researchers should pay attention to both spaces of interactional feedback and identify further factors affecting interactional feedback in peer review. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-23T13:55:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-ae97b56bf0814a1b924a47981098d419 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2365-9440 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-23T13:55:10Z |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education |
| spelling | doaj.art-ae97b56bf0814a1b924a47981098d4192022-12-21T17:44:29ZengSpringerOpenInternational Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education2365-94402018-01-0115112510.1186/s41239-017-0084-8A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writingMurad Abdu Saeed0Kamila Ghazali1Musheer Abdulwahid Aljaberi2Faculty of Languages and Linguistics, University of MalayaFaculty of Languages and Linguistics, University of MalayaFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra MalaysiaAbstract This paper is a review of previous studies on learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face peer review (FFPR) and computer-assisted peer review (CAPR) of English as Second/Foreign Language (ESL/EFL) writing. The review attempted to (1) identify the patterns of interactional feedback, (2) search an empirical evidence of learners’ incorporation of peer interactional feedback in their text revisions and (3) identify the factors affecting learners’ interactional feedback as reported in these previous studies. To achieve this, a search of previous studies on peer review in writing from 1990 to 2016 was conducted. However, only 37 out of 58 peer reviewed studies were extensively reviewed and systematically analyzed by two independent coders. The findings showed that in terms of the language functions, learners’ interactional feedback exchanges are categorized as (1) exploratory (showing learners’ reflection and interpretation of the task), (2) procedural (showing how learners handle the task of revising their texts) and (3) social (showing how learners maintain good relationships). In relation to the nature and focus areas, learners’ interactional feedback exchanges are revision-oriented (targeting problems or errors in written texts) and non-revision-oriented (do not target any problems). Results of some previous reviewed studies also provided evidence of learners’ integration of peer feedback into their text revisions. However, peer interactional feedback is affected by several factors: training learners on feedback, mode of peer review, type of written tasks, learners’ roles in peer review activties, learners’ proficiency in English and other factors, including learners’ gender differences and configuration of peer review dyads as well as context of peer review. Synthesizing the findings of the reviewed studies, we proposed a dual space-interactional feedback model that comprises the learning space and the social space of interactional feedback in peer review. Several pedagogical, research and technological implications were also drawn from the major findings. Future researchers should pay attention to both spaces of interactional feedback and identify further factors affecting interactional feedback in peer review.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41239-017-0084-8Feedback exchangesText revisionFace-to-face-peer reviewComputer-assisted peer review |
| spellingShingle | Murad Abdu Saeed Kamila Ghazali Musheer Abdulwahid Aljaberi A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writing International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education Feedback exchanges Text revision Face-to-face-peer review Computer-assisted peer review |
| title | A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writing |
| title_full | A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writing |
| title_fullStr | A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writing |
| title_full_unstemmed | A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writing |
| title_short | A review of previous studies on ESL/EFL learners’ interactional feedback exchanges in face-to-face and computer-assisted peer review of writing |
| title_sort | review of previous studies on esl efl learners interactional feedback exchanges in face to face and computer assisted peer review of writing |
| topic | Feedback exchanges Text revision Face-to-face-peer review Computer-assisted peer review |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41239-017-0084-8 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT muradabdusaeed areviewofpreviousstudiesoneslefllearnersinteractionalfeedbackexchangesinfacetofaceandcomputerassistedpeerreviewofwriting AT kamilaghazali areviewofpreviousstudiesoneslefllearnersinteractionalfeedbackexchangesinfacetofaceandcomputerassistedpeerreviewofwriting AT musheerabdulwahidaljaberi areviewofpreviousstudiesoneslefllearnersinteractionalfeedbackexchangesinfacetofaceandcomputerassistedpeerreviewofwriting AT muradabdusaeed reviewofpreviousstudiesoneslefllearnersinteractionalfeedbackexchangesinfacetofaceandcomputerassistedpeerreviewofwriting AT kamilaghazali reviewofpreviousstudiesoneslefllearnersinteractionalfeedbackexchangesinfacetofaceandcomputerassistedpeerreviewofwriting AT musheerabdulwahidaljaberi reviewofpreviousstudiesoneslefllearnersinteractionalfeedbackexchangesinfacetofaceandcomputerassistedpeerreviewofwriting |