Date of Graduation

2022

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)

College/School

School of Education

Department

Learning and Instruction

Program

Learning & Instruction EdD

First Advisor

Sedique Popal

Second Advisor

Xornam Apedoe

Third Advisor

Kevin Oh

Abstract

This study was conducted to examine the effectiveness of peer-review in college English as Second Language writing classes to improve ESL students’ writing scores. It also investigated a statistically significant difference in college ESL students’ writing scores between those who use the self-check list and peer review worksheet and those who only use the self-check list in writing paragraphs and essays. More specifically, this study was conducted to determine the influence of different areas on students’ English writing scores, i.e., format/content/structure, grammar, vocabulary, and spelling. In addition, this study explored students’ attitudes and opinions on peer-review in writing class.

This research was a mixed-methods study with a quasi-experimental design, including qualitative and quantitative components. The quantitative part included participants’ essay writing scores on the baseline writing and post-writing assignments. The quantitative component was an online survey for the treatment group. There were two groups of participants (n=25) in this study. There were 13 students in the comparison group and 12 students in the treatment group.

The independent variables in this research design were the peer-review worksheets and the self-checklist interventions. The dependent variables in this study were students’ writing scores on the baseline writing assignment, which used a self-review checklist, and the post writing assignment, which used a peer-review editing worksheet.

The results show no statistically significant difference in the baseline writing scores between the treatment and comparison groups. The corresponding significance values for F/C/S scores, grammar scores, spelling scores, vocabulary scores, and the total scores were 0.953, 0.758, 0.955, 0.846, and 0.857, respectively. Those values were much higher than 0.05, demonstrating that the students’ English writing skills were similar between the treatment and comparison groups on all criteria. There was a statistically significant difference in grammar scores, spelling scores, and total scores between the self-review results and peer-review results for the post writing scores within the treatment group. Corresponding significance values were 0.016, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively. For F/C/S scores and vocabulary scores, the corresponding significance values were 0.093 and 0.071, respectively. Therefore, there was no statistically significant difference in F/C/S scores and vocabulary scores between self-review and peer-review results. There was a statistically significant difference in grammar scores, spelling scores, and total scores between the treatment group (with peer-review) and the comparison group (with self-review) for the post writing scores between the two groups. Corresponding significance values were 0.029, 0.002, and 0.002, respectively. For F/C/S scores and vocabulary scores, the corresponding significance values were 0.066 and 0.078, respectively. Therefore, there was no statistically significant difference in F/C/S scores and vocabulary scores between the two groups. There was also a statistically significant difference in absolute score changes between the treatment group and the comparison group for grammar scores, spelling scores, and total scores regarding the score improvement from the baseline writing scores to the post writing scores. Corresponding significance values were 0.049, 0.004, and 0.028, respectively. The corresponding significance values for F/C/S and vocabulary score changes were 0.184 and 0.449, respectively. Therefore, there was no statistically significant difference in F/C/S and vocabulary score changes. Similarly, there was also a statistically significant difference in the percentages of the score improvement between the treatment group and the comparison group for grammar scores, spelling scores, and total scores. Corresponding significance values were 0.045, 0.029, and 0.047, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in F/C/S and vocabulary score-change percentages between the two groups since the corresponding significance values were 0.289 and 0.434 (which were all higher than 0.05). Feedback from the treatment group student’s survey also revealed that students had a positive attitude toward peer-review. More students found that peer-review can better help them improve their English writing scores. Survey results also indicated that more students would like to recommend using peer-review to other students.

This study has implications and provides recommendations for future research and practice in second language acquisition, writing skills, language research, educational technology, and teaching methodology.

Download

Share

COinS