The Application of Peer Feedback in EFL Writing Teaching In Senior Secondary Schools
论文作者：留学生论文论文属性：essay登出时间：2010-10-02编辑：anne点击率：34

论文字数：17650论文编号：org201010021359058548语种：English地区：China价格：$ 60

收藏：del.icio.usgoogle书签雅虎搜藏百度搜藏
关键词：英语写作互评教育新课标教师评价合作学习理论最近发展区理论建构主义理论English writingpeer feedbacknew course standardteacher evaluationcooperative learning theorythe Zone of Proximal Developmentconstructivism theory

-
摘要：本文以学生互评的实际调查情况为出发点，对学生互评进行理论和实际分析，探讨影响学生互评的因素及如何更好地利用学生互评的有效途径。本文采取问卷调查和访谈的方法来搜集资料和数据。采用问卷调查调查学生对于老师评价的态度，学生对于互评的评价，学生对于老师评价和互评的总体评价三个方面进行调查互评的运用情况，通过对学生和老师的访谈确定互评对老师和学生的学习和工作的影响，互评的效果如何，然后总结出为什么在互评教学中会遇到这些问题以及会产生这些效果。本文的研究结果是：1）关于互评的作用，老师和学生都同意互评给学生的写作水平带来了积极的影响，都认为首先互评能够让学生的态度更加积极，能够主动的参与到学习过程中来；2）关于教师评价的作用，老师和学生都肯定了在目前的情况下，老师批改仍然是具有重要作用的评价方法；3）关于互评中的问题从调查结本文出自www.51lunwen.org，在代写英语毕业论文与留学生论文方面具有丰富的经验！如果需要原创英语论文，英文论文请联系 QQ：949925041
果来看，老师和学生都认为在互评过程中学生水平的不足是导致互评教学过程中的一大障碍，而且评价方法不够科学也是一个重要原因。此外，学生认为老师在互评教育过程中的指导不够，而老师认为学生的自我约束能力不足，这些也都成为互评教过实施过程中的问题。本文得出两个结论：1）互评对于中国的英语教育来说具有重要的作用，应该努力推进互评教育在中国英语教育中的运用，但鉴于中国教育的历史和现状，目前还不能完全将互评教育作为主要的教育模式，应该注重将互评教育与教师评价相结合；2）互评教育在中国的推广存在着许多问题和障碍，学生的互评水平，教师的指导水平和学生的参与程度是影响中国互评教育的最主要的因素。本文认为应该从加强互评培训，确立多重的评价模式，正确的进行互评分组，以及加强团队学习的意识的培养等4个方面予以解决。并指出互评教育的成功需要一个长期的过程和多方面共同努力才能实现。
Abstracts:This paper was based on an actual condition survey of students’ peer feedback to conduct a theoretical and practical analysis. It explored the factors that affected students in implementing peer feedback and concluded the effective ways of how to make a better use of peer feedback. This study made use of a questionnaire and interviews to gather information and data. The questionnaire was used for understanding the status of using peer feedback through understanding students’ attitudes towards teacher evaluation, students’ evaluation for peer feedback, students’ evaluation for teacher feed back and peer feedback. Through interviews with teachers and students to determine the impact of peer feedback on students’ learning and teacher’s work, then summing up why these problems or effects emerge in the process of conducting peer feedback. The research results of this study were: 1)with regard to the role of peer feedback, both teachers and students agreed that peer feedback had a positive impact on improving students’ writing skills; 2) with respect to the role of teacher evaluation, teachers and students affirmed that under present circumstances, teacher evaluation still played an important role in correcting writing; 3) in terms of the problems existing in peer feedback, both teachers and students thought that students’ inadequate levels of knowledge was a major obstacle which was existing in the process of implementing peer feedback, less scientific methods for peer feedback was also another important factor. In addition, students pointed out that teachers’ guidance for peer feedback in the training process was not enough, while teachers thought that students lacked enough self-restraint, these were also the problems existing in the process of implementation of peer feedback. This study drew second conclusions: 1)peer feedback had played an important role in China's English education, it should strive to promote the use of peer feedback in English education in China, taking the history and current status of China's education into consideration, peer feedback could not be completely used as a major mode of education, it should focus on a combination of peer feedback and teacher evaluation; 2) students’ level of peer feedback, teachers’ guidance and students’ participation in peer feedback were the most important factor which affected the implementation of peer feedback in China. This paper suggested that it should strengthen
the training for peer feedback, establish multiple evaluation mode, conduct correct grouping for peer feedback and strengthen the cultivation of awareness of team studying to address the problems of four aspects. It further pointed out that the successful peer feedback needed a long term process and the efforts of all aspects.

Table of Content
Abstracts (Chinese)………………………………………………………………….4
Abstracts (English)…………………………………………………………………..5
Chapter I Introduction………………………………………………………………7
1.1 Background of the study…………………………………………………………..7
1.2 Purposes of the study………………………………………………………………9
1.3 Significance of the study…………………………………………………………10
1.4 Layout of the paper……………………………………………………………….10
Chapter II Literature Review………………………………………………………12
2.1 Feedback……………………………………………………………………….....12
2.2 Researches on peer feedback……………………………………………………..14
2.3 Summary………………………………………………………………………....24
Chapter III Methodology…………………………………………………………..25
3.1 Contents …………………………………………………………………………25
3.2 Aims……………………………………………………………………………...25
3.3 Methods and Instruments………………………………………………………25
Chapter Ⅳ Results………………………………………………………………...31
4.1 Analysis on the results of the questionnaire……………………………………...31
4.2 Results of interviews towards teacher…………………………………………...37
4.3 Results of interviews towards students…………………………………………..40
4.4 Summary…………………………………………………………………………41
Chapter V Discussion………………………………………………………………42
5.1 The positive role of peer feedback……………………………………………….43
5.2 Combination of peer feedback and teacher evaluation…………………………..45
5.3 Difficulties in implementing peer feedback……………………………………...46
Chapter VI Conclusion……………………………………………………………..48
6.1 Major findings……………………………………………………………………48
6.2 The limitations of this study……………………………………………………...50
6.3 Implication……………………………………………………………………….51
References…………………………………………………………………………..55
Appendix I: Questionnaire…………………………………………………………59
Appendix II Interview (Questions)………………………………………………...61

References
1. Amores, M. J. (1997), A New Perspective on Peer editing [ J ].Foreign Language Annuals Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 513.
2. Artemeva, N., & Logie, S.( 2002), Introducing engineering students to intellectual teamwork: The teaching and practice of peer feedback in the professional communication classroom [J]. Language and Learning across the Disciplines, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 62-85.
3. Bishop, W. (2003), The subject is writing: essays by teachers and students [M]. Portsmouth: Boyton /Cook Publishers Inc..
4. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D. & Charney, D. (2006), Commenting on Writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice www.51lunwen.org peer reviews and subject matter experts [J]. Written Communication, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 260-294.
5. Cooper, D. R. & Schindler P. S. (2006), Business research methods [M]. Boston : McGraw Hill. 6. Creswell, J. (2003), Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches [M]. London: International Educational and Professional Publisher.
7. DiCamilla, F. J. & Anton, M. (1997), Repetition in the collaborative discourse lf L2 learners: a Vygotskian perspective [J]. Canadian Modern Language Review, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 609-633.
8. Donato, R. (1994), Collective scaffolding in second language learning [J]. In: J. P. Lantolf & G. Appe
l (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, Vol. 12, No. 8, pp. 33-56.
9. Flower, L. (1994), The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing [M]. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, pp. 16.
10. Grabe William & Robert B. Kaplan. (1996), Theory & practice of writing[M]. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, pp. 264-266.
11. Jonannessen, L. R. & McCam, T. (2002), It can’t be this difficult: peer revision activities. In Case You Teach English: An interactive casebook for prospective and practicing teachers [M]. New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall.
12. Kamimura, T. (2006), Effects of peer feedback on EFL students writers at different levels of English proficiency: a Japanese context [J]. TESL Canada Journal, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 12-36. 13. Lawson, B., S. Ryan & R. Winterwood. (1989), Encountering student texts[M]. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English, pp. 56-70.
14. Mendonca, C. O. & Johnson, K. E. (1994), Peer Review Negotiations: Revision Activities in ESL Writing Instruction [J]. TESOL Quarterly., Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 745-769.
15. Min H. T. (2006), The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 118-141.
16. Nelson, G. L. & Garson, J. G. (1998), ESL students’ perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 113-131.
17. Nunnally, J. C.(1978) , Psychometric theory [M]. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York.
18. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994), Psychometric theory [M]. New York: McGraw Hill,.
19. Pallant, J. (2005), SPSS Survival Manual [M]. USA: Open University Press.
20. Palmeri, J. & Daum, S. (2001), Fending for themselves [C]. In Issac, Emily J. & Jackson, Phoebe (Ed). Public works: Student writing as public text. Portsmouth: Boyton/Cook Publishers, Inc..
21. Parsons, L. (2001), Revising & editing: using models and checklists to promote successful writing experiences [M].Ontario: Pembroke Publishers Ltd.
22. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2007), Research methods for business students [M]. Essex, Pearson Education Limited.
23. Swain, M. (1985), Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition, New York: Newbury House, pp. 235-256.
24. Tribble Christopher. (1996), Language teaching: A scheme for teacher education[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 130.
25. Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000), Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments [J]? Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 147–170.
26. Villamil, O. S. &M. C. M. De Guerrero. (1998), Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2 writing [J]. Applied Linguistics, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 491 - 514.
27. Vygotsky, L. (1978), Interaction between Learning and Development [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 79-91.
28. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Rose, G. (1976), The role of tutoring in problem solving [J]. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 8, No. 17, pp. 89-100.
29. Wortzel, R. (1979), essay定制 life style determinants of women’s food and shopping behavior [J]. Journal of >30. 贝晓越, 李东海. 国外英语二语写作中“同伴互评”教学法的新近研究综述. 牡丹江大学学报, 2008, 17 (12): 143-146.
31. 高莉莉.专业英语写作教学中同级讨论的有效性研究.太原师范学院院报,2004,3(3):9-12.
32. 黄爱莲.以学生为中心的大学英语写作教学. 株洲工学学报, 2003, 12(7): 121-122.
33. 周雪.中学英语写作教学探索. 外语教学研究,2003,11(2):26-28.
34. 李瑞云. 作文批改五步法——英语专业学生作文批改的实证研究. 北京广播电视大学院报, 2001,5(2): 30-33
35. 童长涛.过程教学法与英语写作能力——一项写作教学实践研究[J].赣南师范学院学报, 2003,12(7):27-40.
36. 杨苗. 中国英语写作课教师反馈和同侪反馈对比研究.现代外语,2006, 12(8):66.
37.余美根. 怎样在外语教学中利用同伴互评[J].涪陵师专学报,2005, 8(4): 56.
38. 王初明. 以写促学—— 一项英语写作教学改革的实验.外语教学与研究, 2000, 3(12):211-230
39. 王泳利，王欣春.以小组讨论促进英文写作. 株洲工学院学报, 2003，10(2):157-159.
40. 韦丽秋. 一种有效的作文批改法. 河池师专学报,2002,3(1): 34-37.
41. 张立. 在EFL写作教学中中国大学生对同伴互评的认知.四川外语学院学报, 2008, 24(4): 141-144.
42. 邹宇.Peer Feedback in College English Writing Course.安徽工业大学学报, 2006, 10 (4):10-16.

代写需求
论文题目：新课标下学生互评在高中英语写作教学中的应用情况——个案研究The Application of Peer Feedback in EFL Writing Teaching in senior secondary schools---A Case Study
论文语种：英文
您的研究方向：外国语言学及应用语言学
是否有数据处理要求：否
您的国家：中国
您的学校背景：国内一流重点大学
要求字数：20000
论文用途：硕士毕业论文 Master Degree
是否需要盲审（博士或硕士生有这个需要）：是
补充要求和说明：开题报告已有（见附件），论文以英文写作，参考文献50个以上，外文文献不少于20个。格式不做要求。