Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Discussing writing

Electronic data

View graph of relations

Discussing writing: peer feedback on writing essays in an online forum for learners of English

Research output: ThesisDoctoral Thesis

Published

Standard

Discussing writing : peer feedback on writing essays in an online forum for learners of English. / Tuomey, Enda.

Lancaster : Lancaster University, 2014. 273 p.

Research output: ThesisDoctoral Thesis

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Tuomey, Enda. / Discussing writing : peer feedback on writing essays in an online forum for learners of English. Lancaster : Lancaster University, 2014. 273 p.

Bibtex

@phdthesis{d21ab6b5e2854ac2badee77c83aaadbb,
title = "Discussing writing: peer feedback on writing essays in an online forum for learners of English",
abstract = "This case study investigated feedback, interaction, and knowledge creation in an asynchronous discussion forum in which learners of English provided peer feedback on short argument essays for the IELTS test, a gatekeeper English exam used for immigration or university entrance. Over eleven months, a small but active group of intermediate and advanced learners from many countries changed participation from seeking feedback to giving complex macro-level feedback on each other{\textquoteright}s writing, changing their perceptions of peer editing and improving their own writing, while a much larger group engaged primarily in lurking.The research was exploratory at first, since it was not known whether learners would join or provide feedback, but as members joined, peer feedback loops and varying patterns of interaction emerged. To investigate these processes, both content and structure were examined, with forum posts examined using thematic units as the unit of analysis, and server logs providing structural data such as membership duration and posting patterns. Semi-structured interviews were carried out to gain further insight into member perceptions.Feedback was viewed as a process with benefits for both givers and receivers, rather than as a product given by an expert. Lurking was a key form of participation for both active and less-active members, while changes in roles and participation were mainly associated with longer membership and more feedback.Because of the informal learning setting and high turnover, models from outside educational settings were used as theoretical lenses: organizational citizenship (Bateman & Organ, 1983) and organizational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991), to investigate roles and behavior; and Nonaka{\textquoteright}s SECI framework (1994), to examine knowledge conversion and creation. Applying citizenship behavior to online settings posed problems due to the difficulty of distinguishing between discretionary or supra-role behavior and the core intent of a knowledge community. In contrast, a modified SECI framework appeared to be a useful metaphor, emphasizing peer feedback as socially-constructed knowledge.",
keywords = "Peer feedback, peer editing , online discussion , asynchronous discussion, learning English , IELTS , knowledge creation , organizational citizenship, roles and behaviors",
author = "Enda Tuomey",
year = "2014",
month = jun
language = "English",
publisher = "Lancaster University",
school = "Lancaster University",

}

RIS

TY - THES

T1 - Discussing writing

T2 - peer feedback on writing essays in an online forum for learners of English

AU - Tuomey, Enda

PY - 2014/6

Y1 - 2014/6

N2 - This case study investigated feedback, interaction, and knowledge creation in an asynchronous discussion forum in which learners of English provided peer feedback on short argument essays for the IELTS test, a gatekeeper English exam used for immigration or university entrance. Over eleven months, a small but active group of intermediate and advanced learners from many countries changed participation from seeking feedback to giving complex macro-level feedback on each other’s writing, changing their perceptions of peer editing and improving their own writing, while a much larger group engaged primarily in lurking.The research was exploratory at first, since it was not known whether learners would join or provide feedback, but as members joined, peer feedback loops and varying patterns of interaction emerged. To investigate these processes, both content and structure were examined, with forum posts examined using thematic units as the unit of analysis, and server logs providing structural data such as membership duration and posting patterns. Semi-structured interviews were carried out to gain further insight into member perceptions.Feedback was viewed as a process with benefits for both givers and receivers, rather than as a product given by an expert. Lurking was a key form of participation for both active and less-active members, while changes in roles and participation were mainly associated with longer membership and more feedback.Because of the informal learning setting and high turnover, models from outside educational settings were used as theoretical lenses: organizational citizenship (Bateman & Organ, 1983) and organizational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991), to investigate roles and behavior; and Nonaka’s SECI framework (1994), to examine knowledge conversion and creation. Applying citizenship behavior to online settings posed problems due to the difficulty of distinguishing between discretionary or supra-role behavior and the core intent of a knowledge community. In contrast, a modified SECI framework appeared to be a useful metaphor, emphasizing peer feedback as socially-constructed knowledge.

AB - This case study investigated feedback, interaction, and knowledge creation in an asynchronous discussion forum in which learners of English provided peer feedback on short argument essays for the IELTS test, a gatekeeper English exam used for immigration or university entrance. Over eleven months, a small but active group of intermediate and advanced learners from many countries changed participation from seeking feedback to giving complex macro-level feedback on each other’s writing, changing their perceptions of peer editing and improving their own writing, while a much larger group engaged primarily in lurking.The research was exploratory at first, since it was not known whether learners would join or provide feedback, but as members joined, peer feedback loops and varying patterns of interaction emerged. To investigate these processes, both content and structure were examined, with forum posts examined using thematic units as the unit of analysis, and server logs providing structural data such as membership duration and posting patterns. Semi-structured interviews were carried out to gain further insight into member perceptions.Feedback was viewed as a process with benefits for both givers and receivers, rather than as a product given by an expert. Lurking was a key form of participation for both active and less-active members, while changes in roles and participation were mainly associated with longer membership and more feedback.Because of the informal learning setting and high turnover, models from outside educational settings were used as theoretical lenses: organizational citizenship (Bateman & Organ, 1983) and organizational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991), to investigate roles and behavior; and Nonaka’s SECI framework (1994), to examine knowledge conversion and creation. Applying citizenship behavior to online settings posed problems due to the difficulty of distinguishing between discretionary or supra-role behavior and the core intent of a knowledge community. In contrast, a modified SECI framework appeared to be a useful metaphor, emphasizing peer feedback as socially-constructed knowledge.

KW - Peer feedback

KW - peer editing

KW - online discussion

KW - asynchronous discussion

KW - learning English

KW - IELTS

KW - knowledge creation

KW - organizational citizenship

KW - roles and behaviors

M3 - Doctoral Thesis

PB - Lancaster University

CY - Lancaster

ER -