Advancing writing research: an investigation of the effects of web-based peer review on second language writing
Date
2016-11-24
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Tekstiloomeoskus on vajalik oskus. Kaasaaegse tehnoloogia arenguga seoses on selle olulisus võrreldes varasemaga suurenenud. Kirjalikud tekstid ühendavad inimesi suuremal määral kui me mõnikümmend aastat tagasi oleksime osanud ette kujutada. Kuna tekstiloome tähtsus meie igapäevaelus üha kasvab, oleme me tunnistajateks ka tekstiloome uurimise kui teadusliku suuna arenemisele ning kasvule. Tekstiloome (interdistsiplinaarne) uurimine areneb uutesse suundadesse, tekivad uued žanrid, arendatakse välja uusi rakendusi ja nutikaid tehnoloogiaid. Haridussüsteemi üks eesmärke on õpetada tekstide loomist. Tekstiloome on keerukas protsess ning selle oskuse omandamine võtab aastaid. Kõrghariduses tuleb õppijate tekstiloome oskusi edasi arendada, õpetades üliõpilasi looma tekste akadeemilistest žanrites, ning toetada teadmise loomist kirjaliku eneseväljenduse teel. Siinne väitekiri on välja kasvanud praktilisest vajadusest uurida tekstiloomeprotsessi Eesti kontekstis. Vajadus sellise uurimuse järele ilmnes õpetades tekstiloomet kõrgharidussüsteemis, kus kirjaliku väljendusoskuse uurimine on suuresti alles lapsekingades. Siinses väitekirjas uuritakse tagasiside mõju tekstiloomeprotsessile sama teksti mustandite eri versioonides. Peamiste uurimistulemustena selgus, et parandusi soodustavad kaht tüüpi kommentaarid: 1) kui tagasisidestaja toob kommentaaris välja konkreetse probleemi ning pakub võimaliku muudatuse ning 2) kommentaarid, mis korduvad eri isikute tagasisides. Kuigi need tulemused võivad näida iseenesest mõistetavad, näitab praktika vastupidist. Kaasõppijate tekstide tagasisidestamine ei ole meie haridussüsteemis tavaline, see nõuab spetsiaalseid oskusi, sh keelelisi vahendeid, mida tuleb kõrgkoolides õpetada.
Writing is considered an essential skill to have. With the emergence of modern technology perhaps even more so than in the past. Writing connects us at a larger scale than we could have ever imagined just three decades ago. The World Wide Web offers a plethora of written text increasing daily exponentially in size. Not surprisingly, with the increasing demands writing has in our daily communication through media such as e-mail, text messages, or Facebook post, we see the field of writing research expanding into multiple directions, with new genres emerging, disciplines being crossed, writing and communication tools being developed, and intelligent writing technology being created. Education in general has a responsibility to teach writing to students. Writing, as we know, is a complex task and one that takes years to develop and master. Higher education, more specifically, has the responsibility to further hone the writing skills of their students through the practice of specific academic genres presented as example texts for reading and knowledge creation through writing. This study emerges from the practice of teaching writing to students in a higher educational establishment where the practice of writing is common, but the teaching of writing is still an emerging discipline. This study, therefore, investigates writing by applying a research approach informed by current writing theories and writing models. The results pinpoint two characteristic features that determine observable revision in subsequent drafts: a reviewer instructing with an explicit example what the writers should revise in a subsequent draft and multiple reviewers informing the writer about the same aspect in the text that needs revision in a subsequent draft. Although it seems obvious, practice demonstrates that it is not. In the context of this study, students giving each other peer feedback is not common practice and students often lack the language of evaluation. As a result, students provide feedback which is not effective and in some degrees harmful. Therefore, it is important to support students to give effective peer reviews, once we know what is considered effective.
Writing is considered an essential skill to have. With the emergence of modern technology perhaps even more so than in the past. Writing connects us at a larger scale than we could have ever imagined just three decades ago. The World Wide Web offers a plethora of written text increasing daily exponentially in size. Not surprisingly, with the increasing demands writing has in our daily communication through media such as e-mail, text messages, or Facebook post, we see the field of writing research expanding into multiple directions, with new genres emerging, disciplines being crossed, writing and communication tools being developed, and intelligent writing technology being created. Education in general has a responsibility to teach writing to students. Writing, as we know, is a complex task and one that takes years to develop and master. Higher education, more specifically, has the responsibility to further hone the writing skills of their students through the practice of specific academic genres presented as example texts for reading and knowledge creation through writing. This study emerges from the practice of teaching writing to students in a higher educational establishment where the practice of writing is common, but the teaching of writing is still an emerging discipline. This study, therefore, investigates writing by applying a research approach informed by current writing theories and writing models. The results pinpoint two characteristic features that determine observable revision in subsequent drafts: a reviewer instructing with an explicit example what the writers should revise in a subsequent draft and multiple reviewers informing the writer about the same aspect in the text that needs revision in a subsequent draft. Although it seems obvious, practice demonstrates that it is not. In the context of this study, students giving each other peer feedback is not common practice and students often lack the language of evaluation. As a result, students provide feedback which is not effective and in some degrees harmful. Therefore, it is important to support students to give effective peer reviews, once we know what is considered effective.
Description
Väitekirja elektrooniline versioon ei sisalda publikatsioone.