Leveraging the potential of peer feedback in an academic writing activity through sense-making support

• Published in: European journal of psychology of education Vol. 33; no. 1; pp. 165 - 184
• Main Authors: Wichmann, Astrid, Funk, Alexandra, Rummel, Nikol
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer 01.01.2018; Springer Netherlands; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Academic Discourse; Academic Language; College Students; Comprehension; Education; Educational Psychology; Error Correction; Feedback; Feedback (Response); Learning; Novices; Pedagogic Psychology; Peer Evaluation; Revision (Written Composition); Skills; Students; Teachers; Teaching Methods; Writers; Writing; Writing (Composition); Writing Instruction; Writing Skills; Feedback uptake; Peer assessment; Academic writing
• ISSN: 0256-2928; 1878-5174
• DOI: 10.1007/s10212-017-0348-7

The act of revising is an important aspect of academic writing. Although revision is crucial for eliminating writing errors and producing high-quality texts, research on writing expertise shows that novices rarely engage in revision activities. Providing information on writing errors by means of peer feedback has become a popular method in writing instruction. However, despite its popularity, students have difficulties in leveraging the potential of peer feedback: feedback uptake is low and students engage in little revision. Instructional support might help learners to make sense of peer feedback and to reflect on the provided information more deeply. The present study investigated the effect of sense-making support on feedback uptake as well as on revision skills, in particular problem detection and problem correction. In an experimental study, 73 university students were randomly assigned to conditions with or without sense-making support. The results indicate that feedback uptake improved concerning two out of three variables: students in the condition with sense-making support made fewer new errors and rejected more incorrect feedback comments. Students' revision skills only improved with regard to problem detection. Overall, we were able to show that peer feedback alone might not be sufficient to make successful changes in the text and improve revision skills. Sense-making support proved to be effective to some extent and partially helped to maximize the benefits of peer feedback.