Cover not available

In:Languaging in Language Learning and Teaching: A collection of empirical studies
Edited by Wataru Suzuki and Neomy Storch
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 55] 2020
► pp. 111–128

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 5
Languaging when providing and processing peer feedback

 | The University of Melbourne, Australia
 | King Saud University, Saudi Arabia
Published online: 14 August 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.55.05sto
Abstract
Two commonly used activities in second language (L2) writing classes are collaborative writing and peer response. Our study compared the quantity and quality of languaging generated by these two activities. In this study, conducted in Saudi Arabia, 34 college English language learners worked in the same self-selected small groups (predominantly pairs) on three successive activities. They completed a collaborative writing task, provided written feedback on a text written by another group, and revised their text in response to the peer feedback received. Analysis of recorded talk during these three activities found that the collaborative writing activity generated more languaging episodes than the other activities. We discuss the implications of these findings for L2 writing pedagogy and propose research directions.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Collaborative writing and peer response activities: Language learning opportunities
  • The study
  • Data analysis
  • Findings
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
References (51)
References
Alegría de la Colina, A., & García Mayo, M. d. P. (2007). Attention to form across collaborative tasks by low-proficiency learners in an EFL setting. In M. d. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in foreign language learning (pp. 91–116). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alshuraidah, A., & Storch, N. (2019). Investigating a collaborative approach to peer feedback. ELT Journal, 73(2), 166–174. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brooks, L., & Swain, M. (2009). Languaging in collaborative writing: Creation and response to expertise. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction in SLA (pp. 58–89). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interation. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1994). Writing groups: Cross-cultural issues. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(1), 17–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51–71.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández-Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(1), 40–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Peer interaction and learning: A focus on the silent learner. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 33–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández-Dobao, A., & Blum, A. (2013). Collaborative writing in pairs and small groups: Learners’ attitudes and perceptions. System, 41(2), 365–378. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garcia Mayo, M. P. (2002). Interaction and advanced EFL pedagogy: A comparison of form-focused activities. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3-4), 323–341. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guardado, M., & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 443–461. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guerrero, M. C. M. de, & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 51–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hu, G., & Lam, S. (2010). Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy: Exploring peer review in a second language writing class. Instructional Science, 38(4), 371–394. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamimura, T. (2006). Effects of peer feedback on EFL student writers at different levels of English proficiency: A Japanese context. TESL Canada Journal, 23(2), 12–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Y. (2008). The contribution of collaborative and individual tasks to the acquisition of L2 vocabulary. The Modern Language Journal, 92(1), 114–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of L2 development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, I. (2017). Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts. Singapore: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, M., & Zhu, W. (2013). Patterns of computer-mediated interaction in small writing groups using wikis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 61–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ma, J. (2010). Chinese EFL learners’ decision-making while evaluating peers’ texts. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 99–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Min, H. -T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mozaffari, S. H. (2017). Comparing student-selected and teacher-assigned pairs on collaborative writing. Language Teaching Research, 21(4), 496–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nelson, G. L., & Carson, J. G. (1998). ESL students’ perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(2), 113–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. (1992). An ESL writing group: Task and social dimensions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), 171–193. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niu, R. (2009). Effect of task-inherent production modes on EFL learners’ focus on form. Language Awareness, 18(3–4), 384–402. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rahimi, M. (2013). Is training student reviewers worth its while? A study of how training influences the quality of students’ feedback and writing. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 67–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rouhshad, A., & Storch, N. (2016). A focus on mode: Patterns of interaction in face-to-face and computer-mediated modes. In S. Ballinger & M. Sato (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 267–290). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Storch, N. (1998). A classroom-based study: Insights from a collaborative, text reconstruction task. ELT Journal, 52(4), 291–300. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language Teaching Research, 5(1), 29–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153–173. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Metatalk in pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness, 17(2), 95–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Collaborative writing as peer feedback in K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (2nd ed., pp. 143–162). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Storch, N., & Aldossary, K. (2019). Peer feedback: An activity theory perspective on givers and receivers’ stances. In M. Sato & S. Loewen (Eds.), Evidence-based second language pedagogy:
A collection of instructed second language acquisition studies (pp. 123–144). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Suzuki, W. (2012). Written languaging, direct correction, and second language writing revision. Language Learning, 62(4), 1110–1133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64–81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced second language learning. In H. Byrnes (Ed.) Advanced language learning: The contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95–108). London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Talking-it-through: Languaging as a source of learning. In R. Batstone (Ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning (pp. 112–130). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsui, A., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Villamil, O. S., & Guerrero, M. C. M. de. (1998). Assessing the impact of peer revision o L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 491–514. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vorobel, O., & Kim, D. (2017). Adolescent ELLs’ collaborative writing practices in face-to-face and online contexts: From perceptions to action. System, 65, 78–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121–142. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179–200. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2015). Understanding EFL students’ participation I group peer feedback of L2 writing: a case study from an activity theory perspective. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 572–593. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing, 15(1), 3–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Michaud, Gabriel, Kim McDonough & Mariane Parent
2025. The impact of timing in written corrective feedback on collaborative writing and L2 accuracy development. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 28:1 ► pp. 22 ff. DOI logo
Li, Mimi
2024. Leveraging ChatGPT for Second Language Writing Feedback and Assessment. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 14:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Stell, Annita & Noriko Iwashita
2024. Enhancing collaboration: Exploring regulated learning strategies in the co-regulatory processes of collaborative L2 writing. System 125 ► pp. 103410 ff. DOI logo
Carr, Nicholas
2023. Feedback on writing through the lens of activity theory: An exploration of changes to peer-to-peer interactions. Assessing Writing 56 ► pp. 100720 ff. DOI logo
Coyle, Yvette, Florentina Nicolás-Conesa & Lourdes Cerezo
2023. Overview of methodological procedures in research on written corrective feedback processing. In Research Methods in the Study of L2 Writing Processes [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 5], ► pp. 60 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue