The Impact of Observer Ring Technique on the Writing Achievement: A case of Iranian EFL Learners
محورهای موضوعی : language teaching
جهانبخش نیکوپور
1
(Tehran North Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran,
Iran)
محمد امینی فارسانی
2
(Tehran North Branch, Young Researchers Club, Islamic
Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
فهیمه محمودی
3
(Tehran North Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
کلید واژه: Writing Ability, Iranian EFL learners, observer ring technique, Peer Feedback,
چکیده مقاله :
This study was conducted to probe the effect of the observer ring technique on the participants’ writing achievement. In so doing, the researchers utilized a quasi-experimental design with 20 participants in the control group and 18 in the experimental group. Instrumentation included a writing handout, an Oxford Placement Test (standard proficiency test), and a rating scale of writing. As a treatment, the participants in the experimental group were asked to write at home and bring their papers to the class to be corrected by their classmates and the teacher was the supervisor. In the control group, the papers were corrected by the teacher. The results of the pre-test indicated that the participants of the two groups were homogeneous with regard to proficiency level as well as their writing ability. The results of the post-test revealed that the writing ability of the participants in the experimental group had improved during the study. Moreover, the observer ring technique had a positive and significant effect on the participants' writing ability. The findings may promise implications for incorporating this new interactive feedback model into EFL writing classes.
مطالعه ی حاضر به بررسی تاثیر تکنیک حلقه ناظربرعملکرد آزمون شوندگان در مهارت نوشتن می پردازد.در این مطالعه تعداد 20 آزمودنی در گروه کنترل و 18 نفر در گروه آزمایش شرکت داشتند.ابزارجمع آوری داده ها عبارت است از برگه نگارش ، آزمون تعیین سطح آکسفورد، و مقیاس ارزیابی نگارش. از شرکت کنندگان در گروه آزمایش در خواست شد تا متنی را در خانه نوشته و نوشته های خود را به کلاس آورده تا توسط همکلاسی های شان و تحت نظارت معلم تصحیح گردند. در گروه شاهد، مقالات توسط معلم تصحیح شد. نتایج حاصل ازپیش آزمون نشان داد که شرکت کنندگان در دو گروه همگن، با توجه به سطح مهارت و همچنین توانایی نوشتن خود قرار گرفته اند. نتایج حاصل از پس آزمون نشان داد که توانایی نوشتن شرکت کنندگان در گروه آزمایش در طی این مطالعه بهبود یافته است. علاوه بر این، تکنیک حلقه ناظر تاثیر مثبت و قابل توجهی در توانایی نوشتن شرکت کنندگان نشان داد.این یافته ها پیامدهای آموزشی برای قرار دادن این مدل جدید بازخورد تعاملی در کلاس های آموزش مهارت نگارش نوشتن پیشنهاد می کند.
AminiFarsani, M. &Nikoopour, J. (2010).On the relationship between cognitive styles and language learning strategies among EFL Iranian learners. Paper presented at the CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) Conference. University of Antwerp, Belgium.
Amores, M. J. (1997). A new perspective on peer-editing.Foreign Language Annals, 30 (4), 513-523.
Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., &Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427–441.
Bartels, N. (2003). Written peer response in L2 writing. English Teaching Forum, 41 (1), 34-36.
Beykmohammadi., M., Mohebi., A.&AminiFarsani, M.(2011).On the relationship between Iranian EFL learners ' goal oriented and self-regulated learning and their writing performance. ? Proceedings of the International Conference on language, literature, and linguistics (ICLLL). Dubai, UAE.
Brown, J. D. and Bailey, K. M.(1984). A categorical instrument for scoring second language writing skills.Language learning, 34(4), 21-38.
Byrd, R. D. (2003). Practical tips for implementing peer editing tasks in the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 36 (3), 434-439.
Caulk, N. (1994).Comparing teacher and student responses to written work.TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 181–188.
Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2005). Peer assessment of language proficiency. Language Testing, 22(1), 93–121.
Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1997).Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise.Studies in Higher Education, 22, 233–239.
Conner, U., &Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes. How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3 (3), 257-276.
Han, Z. (2002). Rethinking the role of corrective feedback in communicative language teaching.RELC Journal, 33 (1), 1-25.
Hatch, E., Lazaraton, A., (1991).The Research Manual: Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics.Heinle&Heinle Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts.
Keh, C.L. (1990). Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation. ELT Journal, 44 (4), 294-304.
Kroll, B. (1990). Second language writing classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B.Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press, 57-68.
Liu, J. & Hansen, J.C. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think? ELT Journal, 46(3), 274–283.
Mendonca, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28 (4), 745- 769.
Mittan, R. (1989). The peer review process: Harnessing students' communicative power. In D.m. Johnson & D.H. Roen (Eds,), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. White Plains, NY: Longman, 207-219.
Muncie, J. (2000). Using written teacher feedback in EFL composition classes.ELT Journal, 54 (1), 47-53
Patri, M. (2002).The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills.Language Testing, 19(2), 109–131.
Polio, C., Fleck, C., &Leder, N. (1998). If I only had more time: ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7 (1), 43-68.
Rabiee, B. (2006). Interactive feedback model modeling: A collaborative learning approach in providing feedback in writing classroom.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Islamic Azad University, Science and Technology Campus, Iran.
Richards, J. C. &Renandya, W. A. (Eds.).(2002). Methodology in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rivers, W.M. (1981). Teaching Foreign Language Skills (2nd Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing classes.ELT Journal, 59 (1), 23-30.
Rothschild, D., &Klingenberg, F. (1990). Self and peer evaluation of writing in the interactive ESL classroom: An exploratory study. TESL Canada Journal, 8, 52–65.
Saito, H., & Fujita, T. (2004). Characteristics and user acceptance of peer rating in EFL writing classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 8, 31–54.
Semke, H.D. (1984). Effects of the red pen.Foreign language Annals, 17, 195-202.
Somervell, H. (1993). Issues in assessment, enterprise and higher education: The case for self-, peer and collaborative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18, 221–233.
Villamil, O.S., &DeGuerrero, M.C.M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5 (1), 51-75
Zhang, S. (1995).Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class.Journal of Second Language Writing, 4 (3), 209-222.
