Search

A study examined whether a program of writing instruction based on peer feedback would improve writing better than instruction based on teacher feedback. It was hypothesized (1) that experimental peer feedback classes would perform better than control classes on certain writing achievement variables and would display more positive attitudes toward writing and evaluation, and (2) that writing processes in the experimental classes would differ from those in the control classes. A writing program based on peer evaluation of essays was developed and refined. The control groups and the experimental groups followed exactly the same process, except that teachers in the control groups provided the feedback. A pretest, an intermediate test, and a posttest were administered; 792 essays, from pupils at eight different Dutch secondary schools on two different class levels, were evaluated. Results indicated that there was no difference between the programs on writing performance and psychological variables. Findings suggest that perhaps feedback received from peers is of lower quality than that received from teachers, or perhaps feedback is not all that important. Findings also suggest that peer feedback and teacher feedback might be in equal competition, and that intensive peer evaluation is a good, but not a better, alternative to intensive teacher feedback. (Tables of data are included, and extensive references are appended.) (NKA)

A study examined the effects of peer evaluation on writing performance and attitudes of ninth-grade students. Data were collected from 11 teachers in eight different schools. Each teacher taught two ninth grade English classes, one according to traditional methods and one with the experimental condition in which students taught each other by commenting on each other's essays in writing. All students wrote discursive essays making use of printed documentation. Five hundred sixty-one students participated in the main attitude survey; 792 essays were written. Results revealed that the difference between peer feedback and teacher feedback produced no differences on writing performance and psychological variables. Also, sex and proficiency level showed little or no effect in relation to type of feedback. (Two figures and 13 tables of data are included; 142 references and a list of the 47 SCO documents available for purchase are attached.) (KEH)

A study tested the validity of a speaking apprehension questionnaire developed by Marshall that monitors the performance of secondary school teaching in oracy in the Netherlands. This questionnaire, intended for 11- to 16-year-old students, was administered to 86 secondary school students. The improved instrument, the Speaking Apprehension Measure (SAM) was then subjected to several validation tests. Nearly 500 15-year-olds at three secondary school levels were administered questionnaires on speaking apprehension, fear of failure, and writing apprehension. One hundred of these students were then randomly selected for oracy testing and administered the SAM, as well as fear of failure and writing attitudes measure tests. Students were then given a speaking task to determine oracy, for which performance was assessed based on content and usage. Results indicated that the instrument constructed for measuring speaking apprehension was internally consistent. Testing results indicated the validity of the instrument, which correlates moderately well with fear of failure and with concepts related to writing apprehension. Evidence was found for the supposition that speaking apprehension is situational. Findings support the validity of the SAM in the demonstration of a relation between speaking apprehension and speaking situations. (Figures, tables of data, references, and a sample questionnaire are appended.) (NKA)

To evaluate composition programs based on peer feedback, a study compared the improvement in written composition skills of two sets of eighth grade students in 11 classes at eight Dutch schools. The control group was enrolled in teacher feedback programs, the experimental group was enrolled in peer feedback programs. Students wrote a discursive essay and responded to an attitude inventory questionnaire before, during and after the course. Writing aloud protocols were elicited from a small number of students. A random sampling of each class yielded 792 essays which were typed out and evaluated by two raters for the writing achievement variables of goal orientation, audience orientation, organization and style. The hypotheses predicted that, as compared with the control group, the experimental classes would exhibit (1) higher test scores on the writing achievement variables, (2) a lower level of writing apprehension, (3) more planning activities such as self-instruction and generation of ideas, (4) more frequent interruptions of the writing process by a choice process, and (5) more frequent evaluation and revision in the revision process. These hypotheses were not supported. The results showed no differences between the two groups, except for some differences in the writing process variables; self-instruction rose in the experimental group and fell in the control group; interruptions by a choice process rose in the control condition, and fell in the experimental. (A 19-page bibliography includes listings of numerous articles in Dutch.) (JG)