The Effects of Peer Feedback in addition to

1

• The Effects of Peer Feedback in addition to
• Teacher Feedback versus Teacher-only
• Feedback on the Writing Skills of Generation
• 1.5 Students in a Content-based Class
• Robert A. CoteMay 1, 2006

2
Introduction

• Many empirical studies in SLA that focus on peer
  editing with respect to writing tasks address the
  interactions between NNS and other NNS who are
  enrolled in ESL, IEP or sheltered content classes
  (see De Guerrero Villamil 1996, 2000 Fassler
  1998 Ferris Hedgecock 2005 Hansen Liu 2002,
  2005 Huang 2004 Leki 2001 Liu Sadler 2003
  Nelson Carson 1998 Strever Newman 1997).

3
Generation 1.5

• Neither traditional ESL nor native
  English-speaking students.
• U.S.-educated former ESL students who arrived in
  the country usually between the ages of 10 and
  15.
• Very fluent in informal spoken English, yet their
  spoken language can reflect fossilized errors
  (Blumenthal, 2002, p. 49).

4
Generation 1.5

• They are usually less skilled in the academic
  language associated with school achievement,
  especially in the area of writing (Harklau,
  2003, p. 2).
• Their grammar and pronunciation may regularly
  contain second-language errors (Blumenthal, 2002,
  p. 49).

5
Statement of the Problem

• Three-fold involves the ever-increasing
  percentage of incoming college students who fall
  into this category, their deficient academic
  abilities and substandard performance with
  respect to college level work and their
  self-image.

6
Research Questions

• What are the effects of NS peer feedback in
  addition to teacher-feedback versus teacher-only
  feedback on NNS writing?
• Do NNS independent writing samples in the form of
  article summaries improve over time?
• Is there any effect on close-reading skills
  resulting from peer-editing focused on writing?

7
Participants

• Junior senior college-bound NNS
• Arrived in the US between ages 10 and 15
• Minimum 3 years in the US
• Completed all ESL classes, thus meeting the
  criteria of a Generation 1.5 student.
• The NS must be in good academic standing (GPA
  above 3.0) and have received no less than a B in
  any previous high school English class.

8
Methodology

• Classes will meet twice per week for 1 hour.
• Articles on current world events will be read and
  discussed in class.
• All students will be asked to write a one page
  summary of the article.

9
Methodology Continued

• Summaries will be collected and graded by two
  readers certified in TOEFL iBT Online Scoring
  Network (OSN).
• Control group will rewrite essays only using
  correctors comments.
• Experimental group will rewrite their essays
  under the direction of their NS peer.

10
Data Analysis

• Comparison of first versus second weekly writing
  sample with and without NS peer interaction.
• Comparison of all first weekly writing samples
  over four month period.
• Pre and post reading comprehension tests to
  determine if students with NS peer interaction
  performed better than those without peer review.

11
Benefits of the Project

• Clearer awareness of academic needs of Generation
  1.5 students, including
• Their English language communicative competence
  but academic deficiencies.
• Relationship between prior ESL academic
  experiences and current content class.
• Their diverse linguistic and social needs.

12
Conclusion

• It is hoped that the implementation of peer
  collaboration with NS will improve the Generation
  1.5 students writing and reading abilities for
  academic purposes to the extent that it would be
  beneficial for high schools and colleges to
  create classes that require semester-long peer
  work between NS and NNS students in various
  general education classes.
•