Scholarlink

<p>In the context of process-oriented writing instruction, the significance of engaging students in draft revision is widely acknowledged (McGarrell and Verbeem, ELT Journal 61:228–236, 2007). Nevertheless, L2 learners often exhibit limited motivation for writing, leading to inadequate revision efforts. This quasi-experimental study investigates the use and efficacy of technology-enhanced peer feedback workshops (PFWs) in comparison to traditional teacher oral feedback (TOF) in promoting student motivation for draft revision and revision quality. Over a 10-week academic English course, 18 EFL business freshmen received TOF for 3 writing tasks while they participated in PFWs facilitated by PeerMark for another 3 writing tasks in the first and second halves of the term respectively. Analysis of survey responses, interviews, peer feedback, students’ written works, and the teacher’s field notes reveals that PeerMark-based PFWs were well-received by students and had a positive impact on their motivation for draft revision and revision quality. Implications for pedagogical practices are discussed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Promoting draft revision motivation and quality through technology-enhanced peer feedback workshops

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月26日

查看全文
  • Qiufang Zheng

摘要

In the context of process-oriented writing instruction, the significance of engaging students in draft revision is widely acknowledged (McGarrell and Verbeem, ELT Journal 61:228–236, 2007). Nevertheless, L2 learners often exhibit limited motivation for writing, leading to inadequate revision efforts. This quasi-experimental study investigates the use and efficacy of technology-enhanced peer feedback workshops (PFWs) in comparison to traditional teacher oral feedback (TOF) in promoting student motivation for draft revision and revision quality. Over a 10-week academic English course, 18 EFL business freshmen received TOF for 3 writing tasks while they participated in PFWs facilitated by PeerMark for another 3 writing tasks in the first and second halves of the term respectively. Analysis of survey responses, interviews, peer feedback, students’ written works, and the teacher’s field notes reveals that PeerMark-based PFWs were well-received by students and had a positive impact on their motivation for draft revision and revision quality. Implications for pedagogical practices are discussed.