Using peer written feedback in improving students’ paragraph writing skills

USING PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING
STUDENTS’ PARAGRAPH WRITING SKILLS
Le Thi Minh Phuong1
Phan Thi Mai Huong2
1. INTRODUCTION
Within the higher education context, peer feedback is frequently considered one of the
important dominant tools in enhancing the process of learning English writing. According
to Hyland (1990), providing effective written feedback is one of the most important tasks
for English writing teachers. Ferris (1995) shares the same belief when claimed that
teacher feedback has been indicated to be desirable for the development of student writing.
Bitchener, Young & Cameron (2005) debate that written feedback should be provided as it
is often neglected and misunderstood by students.
There are some main reasons why a lot of teachers have chosen to use peer written
feedback in the writing classroom. First, peer feedback has great influence on the success
of teaching and learning. In this method, students exchange their papers to their peers. It
means that there are more opportunities for collaboration, consideration and reflection than
oral negotiation and debate. This is very necessary to the progress of teaching and learning
English. Second, peer feedback is essential to the teaching and learning writing because
peer readers can provide useful feedback so that peer writers can do revision effectively on
the basis of the comments from peer readers. Last, it is found that when students become
critical readers of others’ writings, they will be more critical readers and revisers of their
own writings. However, using peer written feedback is not easy because students’ level of
English proficiency is not always the same and this method also takes a lot of time from
teachers and students.
Therefore, peer feedback is frequently applied but its effectiveness is yet undetermined.
With an aim to have a deeper insight into this issue, a research on two classes of Vietnam
Maritime University (VIMARU) in Hai Phong was carried out. By applying survey approach
and analyzing documents of 80 third-year students, the writer learned more about the way
students give feedback in paragraph writing, the difficulties students might encounter when
giving feedback; and the effectiveness of this tool, hence, have a better decision whether to
use this method in teaching the writing skills in the future or not.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Definition
Various researchers define the term “feedback” in different ways, among which the
definition from Hyland & Hyland (2006) is one of the most comprehensive. Hyland views
1. MA., Vietnam Maritime University
2 . MA., Vietnam Maritime University

61


USING PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING STUDENTS...
feedback is crucial for both encouraging and consolidating learning and this significance
has also been recognized in the area of second language writing. Indeed, “feedback is a key
component of second language writing programs around the world, with product, process
and genre approaches all employing it as a central part of their instructional repertoires”
(Hyland & Hyland, 2006: 15).
According to Chaudron (1988:33), feedback which is contrasted with the narrower
notion of correction is therefore “an evitable constituent of classroom interaction” and “from
the teacher’s point of view, the provision of feedback is a major means by which to inform
learners of their accuracy of both their formal target language production of their classroom
behavior and knowledge”. It is a significant concern of students and teachers alike and both
feel it is an important part of the writing process (Cohen & Cavalcanti, 1990; Ferris, 2002).
It is therefore not surprising that much has been written about the issue both in teacher
education and second language research literature.
2.2. Different views of peer written feedback in the teaching and learning of writing
2.2.1. Arguments in favor of students’ peer written feedback in the teaching and
learning of writing
Peer feedback in many famous researchers’ point of view has a lot of advantages that
help to make the teaching and learning of writing more effective.
One of key advantages of peer feedback is that both givers and receivers of feedback

improved their writing ability and also enhanced their critical thinking skills. Peer readers can
provide useful feedback so that peer writers can and do revision effectively on the basis of
comments from peer readers. And when students become critical readers of others’ writing,
they will be more critical readers and revisers of the own writings. In addition, Lundstrom
and Baker (2009) carried out a study in a similar context to investigate whether it is receivers
or givers of peer feedback who benefit most. The authors point out that although the givers
and receivers of feedback benefitted equally, students who gave feedback surpassed their
peers in their writing abilities. This strongly implies that students are able to look at their
own writing in a more critical manner while they participate in the process of providing
feedback.
Peer written feedback also gives the teacher a better chance of closely following the
progress of individuals and groups (Rollinson, 2005). First, peer written feedback helps
teachers check if students are giving the proper type of feedback and can provide actual
examples of positive and negative feedback, which is difficult to do with accuracy and
depth in oral feedback. Second, when writing assignments are turned in accompanied by
the previous draft(s) and the peers’ comments, it is easier for teacher to ascertain which
ideas originated with the student author and how well the student was able to respond to
and incorporate the feedback and suggestions from peers, something that would not even
be possible with. What is more, teacher’ time may be saved by eliminating certain editing
task, especially in large classes, thus freeing them for more helpful instructions and guidance
62


LÊ THỊ MINH PHƯƠNG, PHAN THỊ MAI HƯƠNG
(Rollinson, 2005). Also, in large classes, teachers often do not have enough time to write
students with thorough feedback because peer reviewers will notice different aspects of the
paper.
2.3.2. Argument against peer written feedback in teaching and learning of writing
While some of the above studies suggest positive aspects of peer feedback, other
researchers point out that peer review is a difficult task. According to them, this is due to

various reasons.
A major problem with peer response is that students find it hard to identify problem
areas and may even offer inaccurate or misleading advice (Horowitz, 1986). Students also
find it difficult to judge the validity of their peers’ comments (Leki, 1990). Aspects such
as cultural and educational backgrounds as well as a lack of training are significant factors
that can contribute to the success or failure of peer feedback (Leki, 1992; Nelson & Carson,
2006).
Another issue requiring some consideration is that student characteristics. Rollinson
(2005) also affirms that many students may not easily accept the idea that their peers
are qualified enough to evaluate their writing, so they may need a significant amount of
initial persuasion of the value of peer written feedback. Besides, some students may feel
uncomfortable to give critical comments either because they want to maintain group
harmony or because they were reluctant to claim a degree of authority.
2.3. Using written comments in peer feedback in writing
There are various tools can be applied in peer feedback in writing such as oral
comments, using checklists etc. However, in this study, the researchers focus on students’
practice of giving written peer-feedback, the difficulties they might encounter, and whether
the practice is effective in improving their writing skill.
In the written comment method, students, after reading their peers’ writings, give
comments by writing down their notes or ideas on those. Written comments that take the
form of a paraphrase of the ideas, expresses, praises, questions, or suggestions are more
productive than an end comment like “Good”, “Not Bad”, “Well done”.
An effective way for students to provide feedback to their peers is written comments
on assignments and assessments. Written feedback is concrete and permanent. Their peers
can read and reread the feedback to better understand and then improve their writing sheets
better. Shepherd (2005) and Black et al. (2004) point out that students are more likely to
meet their learning goals when commenting focus on the specifics of the learning task and
the student’s learning issues. The best comments help the student think about what he is
doing well, identify what he needs to do to improve and understand how to improve.
In this research, data was gathered through the analysis of the content of the feedback

provided by peers. For that purpose, a guideline of analysis have been designed based on the
proposal of Nicol (2011) which evaluated the feedback through the following categories:
- Task development
63


USING PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING STUDENTS...
Feedback is centered on the objectives of the task
Feedback is oriented towards the learning results
Feedback could be transferred to other learning tasks or practical activities
Feedback is balanced between the negative and positive aspects of assignment
Feedback enhances students’ reflection
Feedback stimulates the students’ implication and engagement with the task
Feedback refers to the students’ competences
- Formal aspects
Language correctness
Structural aspects of the assignment
Use of norms of written communication
Ability to produce changes
- Motivational aspects
Feedback is able to motivate and improve students’ self-esteem
Assertiveness
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In order to accomplish the objectives, exploratory research was conducted between
February to March 2020, among a non-random sample of 80 students from VIMARU
undergraduate programs in third-year English major. The participants were all the students
involved in the subject Writing 2 which types of paragraph writing imparted in the first year.
During the course, students have been introduced and involved in an experience based on
the use of peer-assessment. During this process, learners revise first draft of their peer’s
piece of writing and give peer-feedback with the first time of free writing and the second

time based on a given form. In order to perform this task, at the beginning of the course
specific guidelines on how they have to provide feedback, what kind of feedback they could
provide and also they have been trained on the procedure.
At the end of the experience, a guideline for the analysis of the feedback has been
designed. Data was also collected through the administration of two questionnaires: one for
students and another for the teachers.
3.1. Research questions
With such aforementioned aims, the study was carried out in order to answer these
three research questions:
1. What types of feedback do the third-year students of VIMARU provide to their
peers?
2. What are the benefits of using peer assessment in writing from the students and
teachers’ perspective?
3. What are the shortcomings of using peer assessment in writing from the students
and teachers’ perspective?
64


LÊ THỊ MINH PHƯƠNG, PHAN THỊ MAI HƯƠNG
In order to obtain adequate information, this study used two methods including
document analysis of students’ peer written feedback and survey questionnaire for students.
3.2. Data collection and analysis procedure
The author divided the process of the data collection into 2 stages.
At the first stage, 80 students were asked to complete the feedback form. Each one of
the indicators in the feedback form is evaluated with a Likert scale from 1 (less) to 4 (a lot).
The guideline was validated and piloted by the research team. At the end of the
process, all students provided a total of 237 feedback units.
Data gathered through semantic analysis was completed with information obtained
through two questionnaires: one for the teacher and the other for the students. Both contained
closes items, in which each item had to be evaluated in a scale from 1 to 4. The participants

could also freely express their opinions in an open section of the questionnaire.
The two questionnaires contain items organized around the following aspects:
a. Satisfaction in relation to the activity: satisfaction with regard to the frequency of
the feedback, to the workload, to the training received at the beginning of the activity.
b. Aspects related to the feedback received: feedback helps to develop competences,
to enhance the learning process, to improve future learning, and to improve engagement
with learning.
All 80 students involved in the experience have answered the questionnaires at the
end of the process. In addition, all four teachers teaching the subject were also asked to
complete the questionnaires.
4. DATA ANALYSIS
This part demonstrates the result of data gathered from both teachers and students and
the semantic analysis responses obtained from the final evaluation questionnaires.
The results are divided in two main sections: on the one hand, a descriptive analysis
of the type of feedback that the students have given to their colleagues; and on the other
hand, the data of the questionnaires of the students and teachers on their experience of peerassessment developed in the classroom.
4.1. Student’s practice of giving peer written feedback
4.1.1. Feedback on paragraph organization
The four main points in paragraph organization the students were expected to give
feedback to are the topic sentence, supporting ideas, the conclusion and the coherence of the
whole paragraph. Students were informed to focus on these four main points when giving
feedback to their peers. The data analysis shows that not many students focused on the
mistakes related to the paragraph organization.
From the data analysis, it is revealed that percentage of students who gave feedback
on coherence is the least (only 20%). Coming after is conclusion (30 %). The percentage of
65


USING PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING STUDENTS...
students who gave feedback on supporting ideas was higher but not much which takes up

only 35%. And the highest percentage of area students gave feedback on was topic sentence.
It makes up 45%.
And among 9 students gave feedback on paragraph organization, there is 3 students
(30%) providing suggestions for their peers to correct the mistakes while the rest did not.
4.1.2. Feedback on grammar
In contrast to paragraph organization, all students paid attention to grammar when
they gave feedback to their peers. They indicated the mistakes for their peers by underlining
the mistakes and using the symbols to call out the name of mistakes.
Although all students indicated the mistakes of grammar, not all of them provided
suggestion for correcting mistakes. 55% the students provided suggestion while 45% of
them did not.
The most common mistakes related to grammar that students made were use of verbs,
articles, preposition and punctuation. Therefore, only these kinds of mistakes were examined
more closely to see how students gave feedback on grammar.
There are totally 138 indicated mistakes of the four types. However, the mistakes
indicated in each type have different percentage. The highest percentage belongs to the
mistakes related to the use of verbs (72%). The number of mistakes related to articles and
preposition are nearly the same (one is 8% and the other is 7%). The number of punctuation
mistakes indicated is the lowest. It is only 5%.
Among 138 mistakes indicated, students only provided 61 suggestions (44%). And
there are only 53 correct suggestions and the rest are incorrect. Although the percentage of
the indicated punctuation mistakes is the lowest, the percentage of the correct suggestion
for it is the highest (50% equally to the article (50%). In contrast, the percentage of correct
suggestions for verb mistakes is lowest (11%) while the percentage of correct suggestion for
mistakes related to the use of preposition is 40 %.
4.1.3. Feedback on vocabulary
Beside grammar, vocabulary is also important to students when they want to improve
their writing. Therefore, students pay much attention to vocabulary when giving written
feedback to their peers’ writing. It is reason why all students indicated the mistakes and
used symbols to call out the names of mistakes. However, after showing the mistakes, not

all of students provided suggestions to correct the mistakes. The percentages of suggestion
provided makes up only 38% while 62% did not.
Of all the vocabulary mistakes in writing, the most mistakes that students made were
those related to word form, word order, word choice. Therefore, only these kinds of mistakes
were examined more closely to see whether the feedback actually helped students improve
their use of vocabulary in writing or not.
There are totally 292 indicated mistakes of the four types. However, the mistakes
66


LÊ THỊ MINH PHƯƠNG, PHAN THỊ MAI HƯƠNG
indicated in each type have different percentage. The highest percentage belongs to the
mistakes related to the word choice (57%). The percentage of mistakes related to word form
is 24%. And the rest is the word order
Among 292 mistakes indicated, students only provided 80 suggestions. And
there are only 56 correct suggestions and the rest are incorrect. The percentage of the
word choice it is the highest (85%). The percentage of correct suggestions for word
order mistakes is lowest (10%). The percentage of correct suggestion for mistakes
related to the word form is 20%.
4.1.4. General comments feedback
The data show that not all students gave general comments on their peers’
writing sheets. Only 65% of them gave while 35% did not. However, students tended
to give short statements or general comments not specific. They are usually “Good”,
“good content”, “good idea” “very good”, “Not bad”, “Need improved”, “To many
mistakes”, “bad writing”.
4.1.5. Students’ using the checklist when giving feedback
Analysis of the students’ feedback showed that all the students followed the
checklist when giving feedback to their peers. 12 of them (15%) gave some specific
comments with clear suggestions for improvement concerning both the organization
and the lexico-grammatical mistakes (although the feedback givers themselves made

several mistakes while giving their comments), e.g.: “This topic sentence is very good.
That’s interesting memory. Your written have many mistakes about tense. You should
use the past simple tense in your written. The reader can understand the relationship
between the ideas in the paragraph. It’s a paragraph so you shouldn’t write with essay
form” (feedback on Phung Thi Hoa’s writing).
However, for most of the students (85%), the feedback is general, without much
specific desirable information. The students pointed out the mistakes but not all gave
specific suggestions for their peer correcting the writings. For example, when they
gave their general comments, they only wrote “content is very simple, and it isn’t
clear” without giving the reasons why the content is simple or in what ways it is not
clear, and how to make the content sophisticated and clearer.
4.2. Students’ difficulties when giving written feedback to their peers’ writings
Analysis of this session is to answer question 2 and is based on the students’
responses to the questionnaire. When giving feedback to their peers’ writing, students
were encouraged to indicate the mistakes and provide correct suggestions. Therefore,
this survey questionnaire was used to examine the difficulties students coped with
when indicating the mistakes and providing correct suggestions. And of course, in
this part, the author only focusses on the difficulties directly related to the paragraph
writing only.
67


USING PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING STUDENTS...
4.2.1. Students’ difficulties in indicating the mistakes in their peers’ writings
As shown in the table below, with different aspect students have different levels
of agreement.
(Percentage of students)
Students’ difficulties in
Strongly
Strongly

indicating the mistakes related
Agree Neutral Disagree
agree
disagree
to or commenting on:
a. The grammatical structure of
40
16
8
0
16
the topic sentence
b. The controlling idea conveyed
24
36
16
4
0
in the topic sentence
c. Whether the topic sentence is
28
24
8
8
12
too general or too specific
d. The relevance of the supporting
16
24
20

8
12
ideas
e. The use of transitional devices 12
28
12
12
16
f. The use of verbs
0
12
8
20
40
g. The use of articles
8
12
4
24
32
h. Punctuations
4
8
8
28
32
i. Prepositions
16
20
8

20
16
j. Word order
20
24
16
8
12
k. Word choice
24
28
8
12
8
l. Word form
20
8
12
8
8
Table: Students’ difficulties in indicating the mistakes in their peers’ writings
4.2.2. Students’ difficulties in providing suggestion the mistakes in the peers’ writings
When giving the feedback to their peers’ writing, beside help the peer indicates the
mistake, the students also are encouraged to provide suggestion to help their peers improve
the writing sheets. Therefore, this part would investigate the difficulties students coped with
when providing suggestion to improve the mistakes.
(Percentage of students)
Students’ difficulties in providing Strongly
Strongly
Agree Neutral Disagree

suggestion the mistakes related to
agree
disagree
a. The grammatical structure of the
28
32
4
8
8
topic sentence
b. The controlling idea conveyed in
36
28
4
4
8
the topic sentence
c. Whether the topic sentence is too
24
36
12
4
4
general or too specific
d. The relevance of the supporting
20
24
20
12
4

ideas
e. The use of transitional devices
12
32
16
12
8
68


LÊ THỊ MINH PHƯƠNG, PHAN THỊ MAI HƯƠNG
f. The use of verbs
4
12
4
20
40
g. The use of articles
16
24
8
20
12
h. Punctuations
20
16
12
24
8
i. Prepositions

20
16
24
12
8
j. Word order
16
16
28
16
8
k. Word choice
24
32
20
4
0
l. Word form
24
20
16
16
4
Table: Students’ difficulties in providing suggestion the mistakes in the peers’
writings
4.2.3. Students’ improvement in grammar after receiving peer written feedback
Like paragraph organization, in order to find out answer for the question whether
peers written feedback helps students improve their writing or not, the author compared
between the students’ first drafts and their second ones. The author focuses on the mistakes
indicated in the first drafts and the way they were corrected in the second ones.

The number of mistakes The number of mistakes changed
indicated in the first drafts
correctly in the second drafts
The use of verbs
448
372
Articles
44
36
Prepositions
40
28
Punctuation
28
20
Table: Students’ improvement in grammar after receiving peer written feedback
4.2.4. Students’ improvement in vocabulary after receiving peer written feedback
Types of mistakes

The number of mistakes The number of mistakes changed
indicated in the first drafts correctly in the second drafts
Word order
52
36
Word form
72
32
Word choice
164
60

Table: Students’ improvement in vocabulary after receiving written feedback
5. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
5.1. Findings
Firstly, the data shows out that when giving the feedback to their peers ‘writing,
with four main areas (paragraph organization, grammar, vocabulary and general written
comment), students tended to pay much attention to the grammar and vocabulary. All of
students indicated the mistakes related to grammar and vocabulary. And besides, a great
number of students also give suggestions to correct those mistakes. Students pay little
attention to paragraph organization. About the general written comment, students did not
know how to give useful comment to help their peers to improve their writing.
The second, the data shows the difficulties of students when giving feedback to their
Types of mistakes

69


USING PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING STUDENTS...
peers’ writing. The percentage of students who had difficulties in indicating the mistakes and
in providing suggestions to improve mistakes is higher than the percentage of those who did
not. In addition, there were still a large number of students who stayed neutral.
The last is the result related to the improvement after receiving the feedback from
their peer. According to the data, there was little improvement in paragraph organization
of the second draft. About grammar and vocabulary, with the written feedback from their
peers, students improved their writing much. However, the percentage of grammar is higher.
5.2. Implications for teaching of writing using peer written feedback.
5.2.1. Pre-training activity
First, the teacher should train their students the way to evaluate their writing. The
teacher should introduce a checklist with the basic criteria for students to follow. Base
on this set of criteria, students could decide whether their writing is good or not. While
introducing those criteria, teacher should explain each criterion specially and clearly to

avoid misunderstanding and ambiguity. For example, the teacher can provide students with
some examples or small tasks and then ask them to work individually, in pairs or groups
to decide whether they are good paragraph or not. In this way, students not only know
what they should focus when giving comments on their peers’ writing, but also know which
aspects they should pay attention to when creating a paragraph.
Secondly, the teacher should raise the students’ awareness of importance of peer
written feedback to their writing and ask them not only to revise their own work but also
give their friends comments with greater responsibility. The teacher should show that they
themselves highly appreciate the work of giving peer feedback and promise to give critical
responders some bonus remarks.
5.2.2. Intervention activity
The intervention activity is an on-going activity which means that the teacher has
a great responsibility for maintaining a close contact with students and intervene in their
process of practicing peer written feedback because although students can provide their
friends helpful feedback, they still encounter with a lot of difficulties which need to be
solved with the teacher’ help. The teacher can move around or sit beside students to provide
support and sometimes can express their own opinion of students’ work or students’ way of
commenting. In this way, both students and teacher can get benefits from the on-going process
because the students can have chance to ask their teacher about some misunderstanding
problems and the teacher can have an overall picture of peer written feedback activity.
5.2.3. Communicative discussion after peer written feedback activity
Teacher can pick out some typical writing mistakes and problems and give students
chances to comment and make suggestions on such mistakes. The teacher can give the writers
time to raise questions about their uncertainties about peer feedback and the reviewers have
chances to give full explanation for their comments. This activity helps students understand
more about each other.
70


LÊ THỊ MINH PHƯƠNG, PHAN THỊ MAI HƯƠNG

5.3. Implication for learning of writing using peer written feedback
Firstly, students should read and remember all criteria in the checklist introduced by
the teacher. During the process of giving feedback, if students encounter with any difficulty,
they should ask the help from their teacher.
Secondly, students should be responsible when giving feedback to their peers’ writing
because these comments help their friends improve their writing better or worse. Moreover,
when giving feedback to their friends, they become more critical and this helps them become
the good writers.
Lastly, when giving feedback, students should try their best to cover all the criteria
in the checklist, students should avoid pay too much attention on one aspect and ignore the
other.
6. CONCLUSION
Peer feedback is an important and effective tool in improving students’ paragraph
writing skills. When giving feedback to their peer, students tended to pay much attention
to the grammar and vocabulary while paying little attention to the paragraph organization.
They also do not know how to give general written comments. The percentage of students
indicating the mistakes and providing suggestions related the grammar and vocabulary is
higher than other aspects. Besides, students also had a lot of difficulties in indicating the
mistakes and in providing suggestions to improve mistakes. The most difficult aspect for
student is the paragraph organization.
To help students give peer written feedback more effectively, the teacher should
carry out some activities including pre-training activity, intervention activity and some
communicative discussion after peer written feedback. Regarding pre-training, the teacher
should pre-train the students to evaluate writings as well as how to give feedback on these
writings effectively. The teacher also raises the students’ awareness of practicing of giving
peer written feedback. Moreover, regarding intervention activity, the teacher can support
students during writing by helping them find the solutions to some problems they cope with
while practicing the peer written feedback. In addition, organizing some communicative
discussion after peer written feedback is also necessary to give students chances to share
their experience and understand each other.

Finally, students should read and remember all criteria in the checklist introduced by
the teacher. During the process of giving feedback, if students encounter with any difficulty,
they should ask the help from their teacher. In addition, students should be responsible when
giving feedback to their peers’ writing because these comments help their friends improve
their writing better or worse. And students should try their best to cover all the criteria in the
checklist and avoid paying too much attention on one aspect while ignoring the other.
REFERENCES
[1] ƠBitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). “The effect of different types of
71


USING PEER WRITTEN FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING STUDENTS...
corrective feedback on ESL student writing”. Journal of Second Language Writing,
14, 191-205.
[2] Black et al. (2004). Assessment for Learning: putting it into practice. Buckingham:
Open University Press.
[3] Chaudron, C. (1988). “The effects of feedback on students’ composition revisions”,
RELC Journal, 15, p.1-14.
[4] Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Longman.
[5] Ferris, D. (1995). “Can advanced ESL students become effective self-editors?” The
CATESOL Journal, 8, p.41-61.
[6] Hyland, K; & Hyland, F., (2006). “Feedback on second language students’ writing.”
Language Teaching, 39, 2, p. 83-101.
[7] Horowitz. (1986). Feedback in second language writing: Teacher and student attitudes
and preferences. Cambridge University Press.
[8] Leki, L. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in oral and written responses.
Cambridge University press.
[9] Keh, C.L. (1990). “Feedback in the writing process: a model and methods for
implementation”, ELT Journal, 44, p.294-303.
[10] Rollinson, P. (2005). “Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class”, ELT Journal, 59,

p.23-29.
SỬ DỤNG Ý KIẾN PHẢN HỒI TỪ BẠN HỌC TRONG VIỆC CẢI THIỆN
KỸ NĂNG VIẾT ĐOẠN CỦA SINH VIÊN
LÊ THỊ MINH PHƯƠNG
Trường Đại học Hàng hải Việt Nam
PHAN THỊ MAI HƯƠNG
Trường Đại học Hàng hải Việt Nam
Tóm tắt: Trong giáo dục đại học, phương pháp sửa lỗi đồng đẳng thường được sử
dụng để cải thiện kỹ năng viết tiếng Anh của sinh viên, tuy nhiên, mức độ hiệu quả của
phương pháp này vẫn chưa được kiểm chứng. Để tìm hiểu thêm về cách thức sinh viên phản
hồi bài viết của bạn, những khó khăn họ gặp phải khi viết phản hồi, và tìm ra công cụ hữu
hiệu cho sinh viên khi viết phản hồi, tác gỉả đã sử dụng phương pháp nghiên cứu khảo sát và
phân tích bài viết sửa lỗi của 20 sinh viên năm thứ ba của một trường đại học. Kết quả cho
thấy sinh viên sửa lỗi ở tất cả các khía cạnh của đoạn văn, đặc biệt là cách sử dụng từ vựng
và ngữ pháp. Phương pháp này mang lại hiệu quả nhất định trong việc cải thiện kỹ năng viết
của sinh viên. Tuy nhiên, rất nhiều sinh viên vẫn gặp khó khăn trong việc chỉ ra lỗi và gợi ý
sửa lỗi. Để giải quyết vấn đề này, một số gợi ý về việc dạy và học sử dụng phương pháp sửa
lỗi đồng đẳng được tác giả đưa ra và thảo luận thêm ở phần cuối chương.
Từ khóa: Phản hồi ngang hàng, phản hồi ngang hàng cho bài viết, tính hiệu quả, ngữ
pháp, từ vựng.
72