The affordances of language choice in negotiation of oral peer feedback on L2 writing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.21859Keywords:
peer feedback, oral feedback, language choice, EFL writing, feedback incorporationAbstract
Peer feedback has long been an essential part of a process approach to writing in university EFL classrooms. This study examines how the affordances of peer feedback are shaped by students’ language choice. We interviewed 27 Chinese university students in an English writing course about their experiences giving and receiving oral peer feedback on an initial and revised draft of an essay. Semi-structured interviews were analyzed thematically and triangulated with stimulated recall, transcripts of peer review discussions, and content analyses of learners’ incorporation of feedback across essay drafts to better understand perceptions and actions following from language choice during oral peer review of their L2 writing. Findings show that students incorporated 56 percent of oral peer feedback instances when revising, and almost all of these occurred in students’ first language, Chinese. Participants described the L1 affordances of clarity, efficiency, and pragmatics as important considerations when giving oral feedback on peer writing. Through triangulation of oral peer feedback discussions, change across essay drafts, and student interviews, language choice is shown to be a supportive practice for L2 writers in oral peer feedback. In contrast to previous research that suggests that the L1 is used primarily for solving problems and less frequently for discussion of content, our findings show that students chose to use their L1 for peer review because of the perceived support offered for improving their writing – namely, clarity, efficiency, and pragmatics.
References
Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. The Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465–483. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02064.x
Allen, D., & Katayama, A. (2016). Relative second language proficiency and the giving and receiving of written peer feedback. System, 56, 96–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.12.002
Berggren, J. (2015). Learning from giving feedback: A study of secondary-level students. ELT Journal, 69(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu036
Brooks, F. B., & Donato, R. (1994). Vygotskyan approaches to understanding foreign language learner discourse during communicative tasks. Hispania, 77, 262–274. https://doi.org/10.2307/344508
Carhill-Poza, A. (2018). Silenced partners: The role of bilingual peers in secondary school contexts. Teachers College Record, 120(11), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812001105
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2021). Pedagogical translanguaging. Cambridge University Press.
Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing 3, 257–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90019-1
de Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (1994). Social cognitive dimensions of interaction in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 484–496. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02065.x
DiCamilla, F. J., & Antón, M. (2012). Functions of L1 in the collaborative interaction of beginning and advanced second language learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 166–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2011.00302.x
Emig, J. (1971). The composing processes of twelfth graders (NCTE Research Report 13). National Council of Teachers of English.
Gao, X., & Ren, W. (2019). Controversies of bilingual education in China. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(3), 267–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1550049
Garcia, O., & Kleifgen, J. A. (2018). Educating emergent bilinguals: Policies, programs and practices for English learners. Teachers College Press.
Hu, G., & Lam, S. T. E. (2010). Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy: Exploring peer review in a second language writing class. Instructional Science, 38, 371–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9086-1
Kibler, A. (2010). Writing through two languages: First language expertise in a language minority classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(3), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.04.001
Lantolf, J. P. (2011). The sociocultural approach to second language acquisition: Sociocultural theory, second language acquisition and L2 development. In D. Atkinson (Ed.). Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 24–47). Routledge.
Lantolf, J. P., & A. Pavlenko (1995). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002646
Lantolf, J. P., & S. L. Thorne. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.
LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed.). Academic Press.
Leung, C. (2016). English as an additional language – a genealogy of language-in-education policies and reflections on research trajectories. Language and Education, 30(2), 158–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2015.1103260
Li, S., & Vuono, A. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 84, 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006
Macaro, E. (2005). Codeswitching in the L2 classroom: A communication and learning strategy. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession (pp. 63–84). Springer.
McDonough, K., Crawford, W. J., & De Vleeschauwer, J. (2016). Thai EFL learners’ interaction during collaborative writing tasks and its relationship to text quality. In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (vol. 45, pp. 185–208). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage.
Selvi, A. F. (2019). Qualitative content analysis. In The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 440–452). Routledge.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880000400304
Tian, L. & Carhill-Poza, A. (under review). The role of second language proficiency in triadic oral peer feedback.
Tian, L. & Li, L. (2019). Chinese EFL learners’ perception of peer oral and written feedback as providers, receivers and observers. Language Awareness, 27(4), 312–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2018.1535602
Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00022-9
U.S. News and World Report. (n.d.). Best global universities in China. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/china
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: Issues of caring in education of US-Mexican youth. State University of New York Press.
van Lier, L. (2008). Ecological-semiotic perspectives on educational linguistics. The handbook of educational linguistics (pp. 596–605). Blackwell.
Villamil, O. S., & de Guerrero, M. C. M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 51–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90015-6
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Walqui, A., & Schmida, M. (2022). Reconceptualizing scaffolding for English learners. In Scaffolding for multilingual learners in elementary and secondary schools. Routledge.
Walqui, A., & van Lier, L. (2010). Scaffolding the academic success of adolescent English language learners: A pedagogy of promise. WestEd.
Wang, W. (2014). Students’ perceptions of rubric-referenced peer feedback on EFL writing: A longitudinal inquiry. Assessing Writing, 19(Jan), 80–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.008
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004
Yu, S. (2015). What factors shape the collaborative pattern of group interaction during peer feedback in the L2 writing classroom? Revista Española De Lingüística Aplicada, 28(2), 618–640. https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.28.2.10yu
Yu, S., & Hu, G. (2017). Can higher-proficiency L2 learners benefit from working with lower-proficiency partners in peer feedback? Teaching in Higher Education, 22(2), 178–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1221806
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2016a). Exploring Chinese students’ strategy use in a cooperative peer feedback writing group. System, 58, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.02.005
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2016b). Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014). Language Teaching, 49(4), 461–493. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000161
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2016c). Understanding the role of learners with low English language proficiency in peer feedback of second language writing. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 483–494. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.301
Zhang, M. (2018). Collaborative writing in the EFL classroom: The effects of L1 and L2 use. System, 76, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.04.009
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002
