Giving feedback and peer editing as the main components in writing process | Статья в журнале «Молодой ученый»

Отправьте статью сегодня! Журнал выйдет 29 января, печатный экземпляр отправим 2 февраля.

Опубликовать статью в журнале

Автор:

Рубрика: Педагогика

Опубликовано в Молодой учёный №13 (199) март 2018 г.

Дата публикации: 03.04.2018

Статья просмотрена: 33 раза

Библиографическое описание:

Кобилова, А. Б. Giving feedback and peer editing as the main components in writing process / А. Б. Кобилова. — Текст : непосредственный // Молодой ученый. — 2018. — № 13 (199). — С. 124-126. — URL: https://moluch.ru/archive/199/49119/ (дата обращения: 18.01.2022).



Feedback is a dominant component in writing process. It can increase minimal or deep learning.

Keywords: writing, peer editing, feedback, technique, process, review, cognitive, effective.

Nowadays language researchers and methodologists have been carrying out experiments in order to find the ways of teaching students to access effective writing skills. Writing is a skill which allows the learner to write different types of letters, narrative stories, argumentative essays and etc.

Language learners encounter many difficulties when writing at the essay level. Besides limitations in grammar, spelling, and vocabulary they also have challenge with western-style logic and rhetorical structures. When a single draft style of writing and evaluation is included to the situation, students’ writing will not grow as it should. This is due to the fact that a single draft concept of the writing procedure tends to foster a “throw it against the wall and see what sticks” mentality where the student creates all of their writing in a short burst without the benefit of review or reflection, usually just before a dead line. In addition, this single draft approach produces a situation where the students do not rely on their own editing and reviewing skills but instead charge headlong towards a finished product.

Feedback is a dominant component in writing process. It can increase minimal or deep learning. Hattie and Timperely state that feedback is «information that aims to reduce the gap between what is now and what should or could be, specifically, feedback is information provided by an agent regarding some aspects of one's task performance» [1, 81].

Narciss also defines feedback as «all post-response information that is provided to a learner to inform the learner on his or her actual state of learning or performance» [3, 127]. What is clear from these definitions is that feedback is intended to provide an understanding of interpretation through giving guidance on the knowledge that they possess. One of the factors which appear to be of great significance in dealing with feedback is that it helps students to find out their knowledge or skill to what is desired.

Mory discusses four techniques on how feedback supports learning [2, 745]. First, feedback can be regarded as a motivation for increasing response rate and/or accuracy. Second, feedback can be considered as a reinforce that automatically links answers to prior stimuli (based on correct responses). Third, feedback can be regarded as information that learners can use to confirm or revise a previous response (focused on erroneous responses). Finally, feedback can be regarded as the main technique to help students create internal schemata and analyze their learning processes. Apart from this point of view on how feedback supports learning, the type of feedback diversifies considerably as well.

Peer feedback is regarded as a significant powerful tool in improving the procedure of learning English writing. It also is considered as a social process. Some scholars regard peer feedback as an inexpedient approach for increasing students' writing and prefer teacher feedback to peer feedback. But generous number of researchers have demanded that peer feedback in writing classes is important technique because of the cognitive, and social benefits of peer feedback.

Preparing students to write in reasonable drafts is more than having them write the same paper again and again with minor alterations, or having them write the same paper once in pen or pencil and once on a word processor. Each draft should have a particular ambition and the parameters should be well explained. The concept of distinct, individual drafts may have become less important from the students’ point of view due to the nearly universal availability of word processing software and its evaluating potentiality. Although, there is something to be said for having individual drafts written on separate pieces of paper. Firstly, drafts provide the students with a concrete record of what they have done and where they have been. This gives students to assimilate and diverse what they have done previously with what they are currently working on. Secondly, individual drafts give the students an opportunity to recognize their papers expound with each succeeding variation. This allows the student a knowledge of having made regress on their paper and reveals them to the concept of writing an essay as a progress rather than a goal.

Peer editing of drafts means that for each draft made a peer, a classmate or fellow student if there is more than one section of the class, will read the draft and write observations and reflections with consideration to the essay within the clearly writing and editing parameters of each draft. Peer editing gives students to have a large perspective on the content and form of their essays by regarding others to read them. This makes their writing more interesting and helps them to focus on their audience, who they are writing for, rather than just worrying about page length or the number of words they need to fulfill. Peer editing also allows students the chance to become aware what their classmates are doing with a specific writing assignment. This gives them to observe their own writing more profoundly and allows them a better admiration of the process of writing. The contents and purpose of each draft of a student’s essay should be distinct and have a particular, clearly stated purpose. This section of the article will look at each draft in a typical three draft writing process that might be referred to an essay.

The first draft (ideas and organization). The first draft of a paper should be dealt with the ideas, themes, in the paper and how they are organized. It is considered that students have done some kind of pre-writing at this stage and have a rough idea what their main theme will be and know how they want to continue. This prewriting stage may be done in the form of an scheme, thinking on a sheet of paper, or orally in auditory. When the prewriting is finished it uses as the scheme for the first draft. The first draft should be written rapidly while the student’s ideas are still fresh. The students should concentrate on writing the ideas and themes of their essays (work) and not care too much about their grammatical accuracy or the depth to which they learn more about each topic or theme that they are writing about. The most significant point of the first draft for the students is to get their thoughts written on a sheet of paper. Between the First and Second Drafttheit should be peer review “Number One”. At this step in the writing process it is substantial for the students to get review on their first draft. This is where the notion of peer review comes in. Students should change their papers with their group mates and have them read the first draft. The group mates should then comment on the ideas of their peers and themes in the essay with respect to which points need more knowledge or detail, which have sufficient quantum, and which need less. Besides the peer reviews should focus on the quality of the ideas in the paper and if they are easy to comprehend. Thesuggestion at this point is that the writer is having somebody unprecedented with what they have written read their paper and give them suggestion on what they should include or exclude. Peer editors should check each paragraph of the paper, then look at the all parts as a whole. This kind of strategy will help them a notion of the inner logic of the paper as well as its whole construction. Peer editors should attempt to be as elaborated and very accurate as possible when they are observing on the ideas and thoughts of the paper. They have to stop from obscure remarks such as, “This is good.” when observing their partner’s paper and, rather, try to make less the areas in their partner’s essay that need to be modified.

The Second Draft. The aim of the second draft is to get the ideas from the first draft and join them with the suggestions and comments from the first peer editing stage in order to create a new draft of the paper with ideas and thoughts that are very obvious, more bright, included many details, and not difficult to understand. The second draft will include rewriting part of the paper as well as comprehending new information and releasing unnecessary information from others. Giving feedback between the first and second drafts is the most difficult one for students to do. This stage demands that the students read and correct mistakes in each other’s papers with consideration to grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

The final draft of the paper is the third draft. This stage is moved to the teacher who estimates it applying the criteria from the first and second peer editing stages. That is, the ideas are circumstantial, very obvious, and not difficult to understand and the paper is free of grammatical and spelling mistakes. The students’ papers should be sent back to students after they are checked by the teacher for a final version in which the students correct mistakes and then give the paper back.

Concluding the article, I can say that peer editing advances self respect and affection. It serves as an important way of exchanging the ideas and thoughts between learners and the teacher who worked with them. It is true that peer editing has many advantages to students in improving their writing. It helps them develop not only writing skills, but also critical thinking skills, reading skills, and self-evaluation skills.

References:

  1. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 2007. 1(77), 81–112.
  2. Mory, E. H. Feedback research revisited. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 745–783). New York Macmillam.2003
  3. Narciss, S. Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D.2008


Ключевые слова

writing, feedback, process, technique, peer editing, review, cognitive, effective
Задать вопрос