The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality

TLDR

Peer response to writing has attracted increasing attention since the late 1980s, yet its impact on ESL students’ revision patterns and writing quality remains largely unexplored. This study examines whether training ESL students to participate effectively in peer response influences their revision types and the quality of their writing. Forty‑six ESL students were split into trained and untrained groups; revision types were coded using a taxonomy distinguishing meaning‑altering from non‑meaning changes, and writing quality was assessed with a holistic rating of first and revised drafts. Training in peer response led to more meaning‑altering revisions and higher overall writing quality compared to the untrained group.

Abstract

Since the late 1980s, peer response to writing has gained increasing attention in the English as Second Language (ESL) field. Whereas affective benefits have been reported in the literature, little is known about the effects of peer response on ESL students' revision and writing outcomes. This study investigates these effects and also considers an often-cited suggestion for successful peer response, that is, training students to effectively participate in the peer response activity. The principal question addressed by the study is whether trained peer response shapes ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Effects of trained peer response were investigated through a comparison of 46 ESL students divided into two groups, one trained in how to participate in peer response to writing and the other not trained. Revision types were identified based on a taxonomy that discriminates between two types of changes: those that affect text meaning and those that do not (Faigley & Witte, 1981). Writing quality was determined by a holistic rating procedure of first versus revised drafts. Results of the investigation indicate that trained peer response positively affected ESL students' revision types and quality of texts.