探讨同伴反馈在英语写作中的作用
探讨同伴反馈在英语写作中的作用作者：王松来源：《校园英语·中旬》2014年第08期【摘要】本研究旨在探讨同伴反馈在大学生英语写作中的作用及学生对同伴反馈的看法。
该研究对象为16名贵州大学英语专业的二年级学生。
受试对象分为四组，每组成员阅读了同伴的写作后给予反馈修改建议。
结果发现，同伴反馈能激发学习者的内在兴趣和学习动力，加强自主学习能力，提高他们的写作质量。
但是，学习者的传统文化和社会文化因素也会对同伴反馈造成负面影响，降低其在写作中的作用。
【关键词】过程写作法同伴反馈教师反馈一、引言近20年来，写作过程法是英语学习者在英语写作教学中采用的主要方式之一。
此方法把英语写作分为构思、初稿、反馈、修改和定稿五个阶段，重视英语学习者的整个写作过程，避免大多数学习者‘一稿’的不良写作习惯现象。
而反馈正是这种教学法中的主要步骤。
教师反馈和同伴反馈是反馈活动中的两种主要模式。
而近年来，在全球发展与国际合作的社会环境影响下，社会对英语学习者的实际运用能力要求正在不断提高，中国的教育体制正在从应试教育向素质教育转变，高等教育中的英语教学目标也已从传统的知识教授转变为培养应用型英语人才。
英语课堂教学不应仅仅教授语言知识，而应该更加关注学生的语言应用能力和情感目标，强调给学生提供充分的自主探索与合作交流的机会，让他们在探索与实践的教学环境中激发他们的内在兴趣和学习动力。
因此，强调学习者的自主学习及合作学习已经成为英语写作教学中的主导思想。
在这种新型教学理念的指引下，写作课堂也发生了较大的改革与创新。
以往的以教师为中心，师生互动的传统教学模式已逐渐转变为以学生为中心，生生互动的创新教学模式。
从而，同伴反馈在如今的英语写作教学中越来越受到教师的重视。
同伴反馈是一种学生相互交换阅读对方作文并根据自己对其的理解提出建议的写作活动，是自主学习和合作学习在英语写作教学中的体现。
这种方式有助于为英语学习者建立一种交互式的写作环境，加强他们写作上的交流与互动。
根据国内外已有的研究结果，同伴反馈可以有效的帮助英语学习者提高写作水平，加强读者意识，从而强化其写作的实际运用能力。
它正在逐渐取代传统的教师反馈，成为目前写作教学中的主要反馈方式。
因此，此次研究旨在探索同伴反馈在英语写作中的具体作用以及英语学习者对它的看法。
二、理论依据·合作学习理论（Cooperative learning）合作学习是指学习者为了完成共同的学习任务进行明确的小组责任分工的一种互助性学习。
它从教学过程的集体性出发，针对传统教学忽视同伴相互作用的弊端，着眼于同伴之间互动的变革，将合作性的团体结构纳入到了课堂教学之中，构建了以同伴互动为基本特征的课堂教学结构，通过组织开展学生小组合作性活动来达成课堂教学的目标，并促进学生的个性与群性的协同发展（王坦，2007）。
由于它在改善课堂内的社会心理气氛，培养学习者的合作意识、竞争意识、创新意识和平等意识，提高他们的交际能力和自主学习能力等方面实效显著，很快引起了世界各国的关注，并逐渐成为当代主流教学理论与策略之一，被人们誉为近十几年来最重要和最成功的教学改革。
虽然合作学习在国外已有着几十年的发展与研究，但我国自20世纪90年代才开始出现对合作学习的研究与实验，并取得了较好的效果。
因此，该研究领域在我国仍属新生事物，有待于更广泛深入的研究。
·反馈理论（Peer response）过程写作教学法最早是由Wallace Douglas 在20世纪70年代末，针对传统的成果写作教学法的弊端所提出来的（邓郦鸣，2003）。
该理论以建构主义和认知心理学为基础，把写作过程分为构思、起草、反馈和修改四个阶段，强调学习者在该过程中的自主性，鼓励师生之间和生生之间的交流与互动，以及学习者的自我反省和自主监控。
写作过程的实质是一种群体间的交际活动，而不是作者的个人表现（韩金龙，2001）。
过程写作教学法把反馈引入了写作教学并把它作为该过程的重要环节。
在写作教学中，反馈是指读者在阅读了作者的文章后，根据自己的理解和感受向作者提出关于文章语言、内容、思维、篇章和结构各个层面的修改建议，帮助作者认识到自己在写作上的不足并加以改善，从而提高作者的写作质量和写作能力。
因此，反馈能增强学习者的自我监控意识和认知意识，促进学习者的写作水平。
三、实验设计本次研究选择了16个就读于贵州大学英语专业的二年级学生，教学环境为英语专业基础写作课程。
所选受试对象分为4个写作小组，每组4人。
所有学生都具备一定的英语写作能力并了解基本的写作技巧。
在分组前研究者对所有学生进行了一次前测并根据他们的前测成绩进行分组，以保证每个小组之间不存在显著性差异。
试验期间研究者给每个小组布置了两次写作任务。
每个小组成员根据写作要求完成各自的作文后，将其交给其它小组成员评阅并获取同伴的反馈意见，然后对自己的文章进行修改。
实验结束后，研究者分别访谈了各个学生并记录了他们在实验中各自的写作表现和写作成果，旨在分析同伴反馈在英语写作中的作用和学生对其的看法。
四、数据收集与分析研究者根据所有受试学生在试验期间完成的两次写作任务和访谈，收集了他们的初稿、同伴反馈意见、修改稿和态度反馈。
通过以上方式所得的数据在进行定性与定量数据分析后，得出结果。
五、结果与讨论数据分析显示，受试学生在开展了同伴反馈小组合作后，其英语写作输出取得了更大的进步，写作能力得到了更大的提高。
这也进一步证明了同伴反馈对英语学习者在写作方面的重要性，原因分析如下：1.同伴反馈可以培养学习者的情感目标，激发他们的内在兴趣和学习动机，发挥了学习者的主观能动性，加强了他们的自主学习能力。
Skehan （1998）认为，在二语学习的诸多因素中，学习动力的重要性仅次于语言学能。
学习动力越高，语言习得越好，语言应用能力越强。
在本次研究中研究者发现小组成员之间的同伴反馈实现了信息交互的多样性，这正是传统教师反馈所缺少的。
在同伴反馈中，学生是活动的主导者，而不是以往的被动接受者。
同伴之间地位平等，互动自然，不受社会因素和年龄阶段的限制，建立了平等、融洽的学习氛围，真正做到了畅所欲言，能够针对同伴写作的不足之处提出帮助性建议，这大大激发了学习者学习英语写作的成效性动力和内在性动力，增加了学生的写作意识。
另一方面，由于反馈是一个复杂的认知过程，反馈主体的能动性在这一活动过程中将会起到十分重要的作用，能动性的差异，如反馈动机、反馈目标、反馈需求和焦虑程度等因素会导致反馈效果截然不同。
通常情况下，教师和学生在语言能力、写作动机和写作思路之间的巨大差异导致学生在教师反馈中经常是被动的接受者。
他们往往无法，也不敢与教师进行沟通和协商，其主体能动性受到压抑。
与教师反馈相比，同伴反馈减轻了学生的压力，降低焦虑程度，学生具备共同语言，并且不断的角色转换和换位思考帮助他们轻松、自由的进行意义协商，激发他们对问题和建议的深入思考，加强了他们的自主学习能力。
2.同伴反馈对学习者的写作内容有显著性的提高。
研究发现，与传统的教师反馈相比，学生更倾向于接受同伴在小组反馈中所提出的建议。
蔡基刚（2011）在教师反馈和同伴反馈的对比研究中就发现，学生在得到了两种方式的反馈意见后，在其随后的作文修改稿中所采用的教师反馈建议仅仅占据了提供总量的53%，而同伴反馈建议则占据了84%。
这是因为，教师反馈语言往往过于严肃、正式，而点评内容也主要针对于学生的语言应用和篇章结构，很少关注于写作内容的提升。
而同伴之间由于平等的社会地位、共同的思维方式相近的语言能力，他们的建议则更多体现在写作内容的改变与发展，而较少关注写作理论知识等概念。
因此，鉴于语言能力和写作理解等因素，学生在作文修改时会更多考虑同伴所给的建议，这也使得他们的写作内容与初稿相比有了显著性的提高。
3.传统的社会文化因素对同伴反馈有直接的负面影响。
不可忽视的是，由于受到中国传统文化中集体主义观念和社会因素的负面影响，同伴反馈有时在学生的写作过程中并没有发挥其应有的效果。
Carson （1998）提到中国学生为了维持小组氛围而经常不愿对小组同伴的写作提出正常的批评意见。
Nelson （1998）也提到中国大学生受面子观念的影响在小组讨论中经常保持沉默。
这些行为都极大地影响到同伴反馈的质量以及该活动在写作过程中应有的作用。
从受试学生实验后的访谈发现，虽然当前的教育文化强调以学生为中心的课堂教学，但传统的以教师为中心的教学方式对许多学生影响颇深。
他们已经形成了教师课堂权威性和主导性的学习习惯。
在学生为主体的同伴反馈活动中，这部分学生显得茫然、不知所措，不清楚自己的角色和作用。
此外，由于学生在知识量和语言认知及应用方面与教师相比有较大差距，有些学生对自己的同伴，尤其是能力比自己差的同伴缺乏信任，认为他们的反馈建议对自己帮助不大，不予采用。
最后，中国的传统文化强调团结与和谐。
一些学生为了维护小组的友好气氛和组员的面子，并不愿对同伴作出负面评价，指出他们写作上的不足。
这些因素都较大的影响了同伴反馈在写作中的实际作用。
六、结论本文从过程写作教学法出发，以反馈阶段中的同伴反馈为视角，分析了其在大学生英语写作中的作用以及学生对其的看法。
与传统的教师反馈相比，同伴反馈符合当前教育制度中以学生为中心的课堂教学的方针，让学生积极参与到教学活动中，激发了他们的内在兴趣和学习动力，发挥了他们的主观能动性，增强了他们的自主学习能力，提高了他们的英语写作能力，在英语学习者的写作过程中具有十分重要的作用。
在实际教学中，教师应该恰当的结合教师反馈和同伴反馈两种反馈模式，取长补短，充分发挥两者在写作过程中的作用，提高英语学习者的写作能力。
参考文献：[1]Carson，J.G. and Nelson，G. L.1996. Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction， Journal of Second Language Writing 5（1）.[2]Nelson， G. L.and Carson，J.G.1998. ESL students’ perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing 7（2）.[3]Skehan， P. 1998. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University Press.[4]蔡基刚.中国大学生英语写作在线同伴反馈和教师反馈对比研究[J].外语界.2011（2）.[5]邓郦鸣等.写作过程法的系统研究及其对大学英语写作教学改革的启示[J].外语教学.2003（6）.[6]韩金龙.英语写作教学：过程体裁教学法[J].外语界.2001（4）.[7]王坦.合作教学导论[M].山东教育出版社.2007.*基金项目：贵州大学引进人才科研项目，编号：贵大人基合字（2011）08号。
英语写作教学中的同伴反馈
零零地从事学习 ，只有将 自身置于社会团体 ，与人 交 互协 商 ，其知识 才 得 以构 建 ，内化 。他 的 “ 近 邻
发展 区 Ｚ ｎ ｆ ｒｘ ｌ ｅｅｏｍｅ ｔ ｏ ｅｏ ｏｉ ｖｌｐ ｎ）” 就是 指 人 ｐ ｍａ ｄ
合作学习的理论认为 ，合作学习就是 “ 在教学 中运 用 学 习 小 组 的方 式 ，使 学 生之 间能 协 同努 力 ， 充分地发挥个体及其 同伴 的学习优势” 。㈣同伴反 馈 写作 正 是通 过 小组 活 动 ，充分 地发 挥 了个 体及 其
同伴 的学 习优 势 ， 既 提 高 了学 生 的写 作 兴 趣 ，增 加 了学 生 相 互 交 流 的机 会 ，还减 轻 了教 师 的 负 担 ， 提 高 了写 作 反 馈 的 效 果 。 以前 苏 联 著 名 心 理 学 家 Ｖ ｇｔ ｙ 为代 表 的社 会 建构 学 派 认 为 ，语 言 知 识 ｙｏｓ ” ｋ 的 习得 必 须在 社会 交 互情 景 中实 现 ，学 习者 不能 孤
读作 文并提 出修改意见 的写作活动。 近年来 ，国 内此类研究逐步增多 ，但研究 中对其提法不一 ，又 称为同级反馈或 同辈反馈 ，［１ ７同侪反馈 ， 同伴评 － ８ 价 ，［０ ３１ 评估 ，［这 给文 献检 索 或查 阅带来 了诸 ，同学 １ １ １ １ 多不便 ，作为一项有一定研究价值 的写作活动 ， 其 称谓 有必要统一 。其实 ， “ 同级 ”意味着 这一反 馈 只能 在 同一级 别 的学 生 之 间展开 ，而 同一 级 别很 难把握 ，为何不能是 “ 高一级别” 向 “ 低一级别” 的反馈 呢？“ 评价 ”和 “ 评估 ”更侧重于对学生的 作文给予等级评分 ，而不包含通常所谓 的修改和改 错 。如 果 使 用 “ 反馈 ” ，则 既包 含 同伴 对 作 文 的正
写作反馈对比分析：教师反馈和同伴反馈
Literature Review on Feedback in EFL Writing: Teacher Feedback and Peer Feedback摘要：写作是一种重要的语言技巧，相比较听力、口语和阅读，写作更能全面的展现学习者的语言精准水平。
所以我们需要对英语写作的教与学投入更多的精力。
然而我们当前的大学英语写作教学收效并非显著。
一方面，老师花费大量的精力和时间去阅读和修改学生的英语写作，但成效颇低；另一方面，学生只是表面肤浅的理解老师的建议及评语或者甚至直接忽视老师给予的纠错反馈。
在一定程度上来看，造成这种现象的原因可以追溯到结果教学法在英语写作教学中的广泛应用而带来的影响。
结果教学法把英语写作过程看成是一个线性的活动，在这一过程中没有课堂活动部分，没有互动。
而与之相对应的过程教学法把写作看成是一个复杂的、相互重叠的认知过程，在这个过程中有学生的积极参与。
反馈作为过程教学法的重要组成部分而引起广泛的关注，它包括：教师反馈、同伴反馈、自我反馈和计算机辅助反馈。
其中，教师反馈和同伴反馈是其主要的两大部分。
在二语学习环境下关于这两种反馈效果的研究很多，但研究结果有所不同，有的研究者认为教师反馈的效果更佳而有的研究更倾向于在写作中使用同伴反馈。
在以往的研究中，研究者们大多只侧重于其中一种反馈方式在大学英语写作教学中的应用，而将两者教学方法结合起来应用的研究不是很多。
因此，本研究尝试将两种反馈应用到大学英语写作教学中并期待通过实证研究能够在不久将来证实其可行性和效度。
关键字：反馈；教师反馈；同伴反馈；外语写作Abstract: As an important language skill, writing can comprehensively present the learners’language proficiency compared with other basic skills such as listening, speaking and reading. Therefore, much attention should be paid to the teaching and learning of English writing. However, at present time, our college English writing instruction seems unsatisfactory. On the one hand, teachers contribute a great deal of time and energy to reading and correcting student’s composition but with low efficiency; on the other hand, students spend less time superficially understanding teacher’s suggestions and comments or even directly neglect teacher’s error correction.To a certain extent, this current situation can be traced back to the prevailing traditional product-oriented approach which assumes writing as a liner process, in which there is no students’ interaction within writing activities. On the contrary, the process-oriented approach assumes writing as a cognitive process, with which students can actively participant in writing activities. Feedback, an indispensable part of process-oriented approach of writing, has attracted great attention, which mainly encompasses teacher feedback and peer feedback. In ESL context, many studies on the effects of two types of feedback has been done. Nevertheless, the results of them varied greatly in these studies. Some scholars reviewed that teacher feedback is more favorable in writing class while others prefer to use peer feedback. Up to now, most of the researchers just focus on either peer feedback or teacher feedback, and few researchers have combined the two kinds of feedback in the context of the EFL writing. Hence, the study attempts to apply peer feedback and teacher feedback into EFL writing through an empirical study and look forward to its feasibility and effectiveness will be approved in the near further study in writing pedagogy. Keywords: feedback; teacher feedback; peer feedback; EFL writing1.IntroductionFeedback plays a prominent role in improving student’s learning ability and strengthening his or her learning achievement in language pedagogy. In writing, feedback refers to “reader’s comprehensible input from author whose function is offering information to reader to modify composition” (Zhu, 2010). The efficiency of writing feedback will directly affect students’ writing level as well as reflecting the effectiveness of teacher’s writing strategies. Feedback in EFL writing mainly focus on: teacher feedback; peer feedback; self-feedback and computer-generated feedback. From which teacher feedback refers to the input provided by the teacher for the revision of students’ writings or assessment of learning performance (Keh, 1990) and peer feedback is defined as a system in which individuals evaluate counterparts’or peers’achievements of language learning including writing and reading (Topping, 1998). Teacher feedback plays a dominant role in L2 writing, while in recent yearsteacher feedback was given great attention through the popularity of process writing approach. Domestic and foreign scholars have already conducted a great deal of empirical research on teacher and peer feedback, but have not reached a consensus on the effectiveness and the ranges, methods and strategies of application. And many researches paid attention to the single study on different modes of feedback as well as focusing less on the comparative study of the efficiency, merits and demerits of integrating teacher feedback and peer feedback. Based on which this study will explore the effectiveness of combining teacher feedback and peer feedback and look forward to providing practically and significantly instructional feedback in EFL writing.2.Related Studies of Teacher Feedback and Peer Feedback at Home and AbroadThe study of writing feedback began in the 1950s. The scholars made a comparison between teacher’s error correction and peer’s error correction with the guidance of teachers, the results of which examined that the efficiency of the latter is better than the former one. In the following 60 years, domestic and international scholars made a detail study on the practical effectiveness of peer feedback (Keh, 1990; Ferris, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2006; Paulus, 1999; Tsui & Ng, 2000; Ming, 2005; Liu, 2002; Gong, 2007; Meng, 2009; Wang, 2010; Xu, 2010; Guo, 2011; Hu & Zhang, 2011). These researchers stated that singly using teacher feedback will not truly and efficiently improve students’writing ability. “Teachers often spend a great deal of time and energy in modifying composition and putting forward many comments and suggestions on writing, however, students always neglect teachers’correction comments as well as superficially understand the correction suggestions. This kind of single and passive feedback have no effect on stimulating student’s learning interests and enthusiasm”(Zhou, 2013: 121). On the contrary, peer feedback attracted more attention to scholars and teachers. They found that in the process of face-to-face communication, negotiation and discussion, peer feedback can mutually, actively and accurately state what students want to express. Meanwhile, student’s self-learningability and collaborative spirit could be exerted to the utmost as well as writing and thought ability being exerted to a higher extent.Some other studies investigated the essence of teachers’feedback behaviors (Connors & Lunsford 1993: 200-223; Ferris, 1997: 315-339; ); the effectiveness of feedback types (Ferris & Roberts, 2001: 161-184; Kepner, 1991: 305-313); students’perceptions of feedback (Cohen & Cavalcanti, 1990: 155-177; Hedgocock & Left-kowtz, 1994: 141-165). Totally, students generally considered that peer feedback is much more effective than teacher feedback. In terms of teacher feedback, domestic researches focused more on the importance and values of student’s recognition process and its development (Zhang et al., 2000: 24-28; Xie, 2011: 50-51); and its efficiency in improving student’s attention and their ability (Li & Wu, 2005; Bei, 2009); and its influences on the accuracy, fluency and complexity of student’s writing (Wang & Liu, 2012: 49-53); or even the effectiveness of different types of teacher feedback and correction and teachers’and students’attitudes towards teacher feedback (Wang, 2006: 24-30; Zhang & Liu, 2010: 115-118). These studies just singly focused on different aspects of teacher feedback, there are less studies on the combination of peer feedback and teacher feedback and explanation of theirs reliability and efficiency in EFL writing.In recent writing instruction, peer feedback (Richards et al., 2005: 128) refers to “the activity in the process of composition modifying and in this activity where students read peers’ composition in groups and then make comments and suggestions on them”. International writing researches firmed the application of peer feedback in ESL writing (Hansen & Liu, 2005: 31-38; Jacobs et al., 1998: 301-317 ). Also many scholars conducted researches from the perspective of cognition, who put forward that peer feedback could cultivate student’s analytic ability and expand their thinking space (Paulus, 1999: 265-289). In addition, students could also communicate with peers and improve the ability of using target language in specific communicative contexts (Hansen, 2005: 31-38). However, the researchers pointed out that although peer feedback could make up drawbacks for teacher feedback, its accuracy, reliability and efficiency are being questioned and the practical operation is needed to beexplored further.From the above review, we can conclude that domestic and international scholars just singly conducted researches on either teacher feedback or peer feedback or made studies on the types, characteristics or strategies of feedback as well as a comparative study on peer feedback and teacher feedback. However, there are less researches on combing this two kinds of feedback from now on. Based on which, this study looks forward to making contribution to feedback in EFL writing by integrating peer feedback and teacher feedback.3. Definition of Terms3.1 Feedback TheoryFeedback is wisely seen in education as crucial for both encouraging and consolidating learning (Anderson, 1982; Vygotsky, 1978), and the importance has also been acknowledged in the field of English writing. In the traditional American dictionary (2006), feedback is defined as “transferring process and system input into a part of output”. In the process of writing, the effects of writing cannot be neglected. Keh (1990: 302) referred to feedback as an indispensable part in the process writing pedagogy.In language learning, feedback means evaluative remarks which are available to language learners concerning their language proficiency or linguistic performance (Larsen-Freeman, 2005). In the field of teaching and learning, feedback is defined as many terms, such as response, review, correction, evaluation or comment. No matter what the term is, it can be defined as “comments or information learners receive on the success of a learning task, either from the teacher or from other learners (Richards et al., 1998)”.A more detail description of feedback in terms of writing is that the feedback is “input from the reader to a writer with the effect of providing information to the writer for revision”(Keh, 1990). From the presentation of general grammatical explanation to the specific error correction is all the range of feedback. The purpose is to improve the writing ability of students by the description and correction of theerrors.The role of feedback is to make writers learn where he or she has misled or confused the reader by supplying insufficient information, illogical organization, lack of development of ideas, or something like inappropriate word-choice or tense (Keh, 1999).From the perspective of teachers, feedback can be seen as a form of evaluation, aiming at producing a supportive teaching environment and helping students finish assignments better with the aid of feedback from the previous ones. From the perspective of learners, feedback can be considered as a self-assessment, which enables learners to see in what area they need to improve and understand. And feedback can be classified as teacher feedback and peer feedback in terms of the source of feedback which writers receive.3.1.1Teacher FeedbackTeacher feedback refers to the input provided by the teacher for the revision of students’writings or assessment of learning performance (Keh, 1990). Students usually hole the view that teacher feedback is more believable for the reason that it is originated from the influence of the traditional product-oriented approach in writing. And many teachers feel that they have the duty to make substantial comments on students’compositions for the purpose of giving a response to students’efforts, offering assistance for the improvement of students’ writing performance and justify the grades they acquired (K, Hyland, 2003).Researchers considered teacher feedback from various aspects—examining the nature of teacher’s responding behaviors in order to find out the effectiveness of teacher feedback (Connors & Lunsford, 1993; Ferris, 1997; Sommers, 1982; Zamel, 1985); comparing students’ perceptions of teacher feedback with those peer feedback (Chaudron, 1984); and analyzing students’views on teacher’s feedback (Cohen & Cavalcanti, 1990; Hedgcock & Leftkowtz, 1992). The main method of response to the writing is the handwritten commentary on students drafts and teacher feedback is most emphasized in students’expectation for revision. One of the major issues thathave been addressed is whether teachers’ written comments can help students enhance their writing ability without checking the texts appropriately (Brannon & Knoblauch, 1982; Straub, 1996, 1997).In fact, several early L1 studies that teacher feedback does not serve serve as a mean of effective communication between teacher and student (Brannon & Knoblauch, 1982; Faigley & Witte, 1981). However, the role of teacher feedback on students’ writing has transferred when it refers to second language learning. Although this mode may cause some wrong communication and misunderstanding between teacher and student, teacher feedback has the potential value for stimulating students to revise their drafts (Saito, 1994; Zhang, 1995) and to improve their writing (Fathman & Whalley, 1990; Ferris, 1995, 1997, 2006; Goldstein & Conrad, 1990). 3.1.2 Peer FeedbackDifferent from teacher feedback, peer feedback is defined as the use of learners as sources of information and interaction for each other in such a way that learners assume roles and responsibilities normally taken on by formally trained teacher, tutor or editor in commenting on and critiquing each others drafts in both written and spoken formats in the process of writing (Liu & Hansen, 2002). For many years, the unique benefits of language learners can offer to each other were ignored in writing classrooms, especially in ESL and EFL classrooms. The Process Writing Theory and The Collaborative Learning Theory have justified the use of peer feedback activities in the writing process. These theories have provided the evidence that peer feedback activities not only help L2 learners improve their writing ability but also their overall language abilities through the negotiation of meaning which typically take place during these activities.There are various forms in peer feedback, such as offering spoken suggestions and correcting errors in written form. The well-known mode of peer feedback of SL writing class is that students who work in pairs in small groups read peer’s compositions carefully, pointing out problems and doubts, and offer suggestions and comments (Richards et al., 2005). The essence of feedback is to hear multipleperspectives from a wide audience (Shepherd, 1992; Cho, Schunn, & Charney, 2006). This method, which is supported by the writing workshop pedagogy, and is widespread in the first language teaching.4. Theoretical Foundations of Feedback4.1 Collaborative LearningCollaborative learning, also called cooperative learning, is the second theoretical basis that back for the application of feedback in writing class (Hiltz, 1997). It is feasible that students communicate actively with each other in the classroom.Collaborative learning emphasizes that both students and instructors participate and communicate actively (Hiltz, 1997). Collaborative learning is viewed from both behavioral and humanistic perspectives (Slavin, 1987). The behavioral perspective stresses that students are encouraged to study under a cooperative situation and rewarded in the form of group rather than individual ones. From the humanistic perspective, more understanding and better performance are gained from the interaction among peers. Hence, it is obvious that collaborative learning puts more attention to the influence of peers, which is different from the previous EFL writing theories (Johnson and Johnson, 1986).Collaborative learning makes it possible that students discuss and accomplish tasks that they can not do finish by themselves without higher motivation. Students acquire certain kinds of knowledge and benefit from each other in the way of spoken and written communication, which occurs in the atmosphere of collaborative learning.Researches in L1 writing has found that the writing is strengthened with the help of collaborative learning strategies (Bruffee, 1984). For example, students in writing groups negotiate meaning as they revise the peers’writings; learning in writing teams is conducive to improving the students’writing proficiency (Gere, 1987).As to the impact of collaborative learning on L2 writing instruction, many benefits of applying collaborative learning strategies in the classroom has also beenstated in the study. In some researches it is mentioned that students can make decisions reasonably and effectively compare notes from the content and application through the group work. Collaborative learning also offers students raise opportunities review and use their growing knowledge of L2 writing through interaction with peers in writing groups (Hivela, 1999: 8). There are many opportunities for students to share and communicate ideas with each other.4.2 Process-Oriented ApproachCompared with the product-oriented approach, the process approach is an essential component of composition instruction and research. It is obvious that product-oriented approach attaches great importance to grammar, spelling, punctuation and vocabulary and so on. The process-oriented approach in EFL writing began to appear in the late of 1960s and early 1970s in L1 writing (Elbow, 1973; Emig, 1971). The process-oriented approach was introduced to L2 studies by Vivan Zamel (1976). She argues that advanced L2 writers who are similar to L1 writers would benefit from this approach (Matsuda, 2003). Although there are various process approaches in writing instruction, some noticeable features can be concluded. The features of process-oriented approach are as followed:1)Putting attention to the process of writing rather than the final product;2)Offering suggestions and help to compose student’s writing;3)Putting forward strategies of pre-writing, drafting and rewriting;4)Attaching great importance to the stage of revising;5)Assisting students find the correct content when they write the compositions;6)Emphasizing feedback no matter from teachers or peers;7)Encouraging to hold individual feedback meetings in the groups throughout theprocess of writing.A process-oriented approach, which lays the first theoretical foundation for feedback that attaches great importance to the cyclical phases of writing, for example, pre-write, draft, revision, and edit and final draft. At the beginning, many tasks including producing a topic through reading or listening or analyzing the structure thathas been carried out to the writing. Next, students from create the first drafts for further reading and revising by forming their ideas into a liner structure. Then, the second draft appears and the interactive activity among peers can be repeated after the second on the condition that there is enough for students to discuss their compositions. Finally, students accomplish the final draft based on the feedback from both peers and the teachers. Therefore, it is clear that process of writing is the center of process-oriented approach (Keh, 1990: 294). And the reader’s feedback exerted great influence on the multiple-draft process because it is the motivation for the writer get the final draft through the writing process.The importance of the revision process of writing has been strengthened (Leki, 1990) and how to revise the writing from the reader’s feedback has also become the focus of the process of writing (Zhang, 1995). Researches on the importance of revision are also emphasized that revision could help writer become mature and enrich their writing experience. Revision is seen as an essential procedure and a useful way of enhancing the quality of writing from the perspective of cognitive psychology (Fitzgerald, 1987). The strategies for planning and revising can be applied in classroom for students and multiple-drafts can offer more chances for students assess their writing critically (Becker, 2006).Reference:[1] Chaudron, C. The effects of feedback on students revisions [J]. RELC Journal, 1984, 15(2): 1-14.[2] Chaudron, C. Evaluating Writing: Effects of Feedback on Revision [J]. RELC Journal, 1984, 15(4): 1-14.[3] Cohen, A. and M. Cavalcanti. Feedback on Composition: Teacher and Student Verbal Reports[A]. B. Kroll. Learner Strategies in language Learning[C]. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1987, 57-69.[4] Connors, R., & Lunsford, A. (1993). Teachers’rhetorical comments on student papers. College Composition and Communication, 44, 515-524.[5] Faigley L & Witte, S. Analyzing revision [J]. College Composition and Communication, 1981, 32(4): 400-414.[6] Fathman K & Whalley E. Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content [A]. In Kroll B (ed.). Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, 178-190.[7] Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33-53.[8] Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 315-339.[9] Ferris, D. R. (1999). The Case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1-10.[10] Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does Error Feedback Help Student Writers? New Evidence on the Short-and Long-term Effects of Written Error Correction.In Hyland, K, & Hyland, F. (Eds.), 81-104.[11] Ferris, D. R. and Roberts, B. (2001) Error Feedback in L2 Writing Classes: How explicit does it need to be ? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10: 161-184. [12] Goldstein, L,. & Conrad, S. (1990). Student input and negotiation of meaning in ESL writing conferences. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 443-460.[13] Hedgcock, J. & N, Lefkowitz. Some Input: Two Analysis of Student Response to Expert Feedback in L2 Writing [J]. Modern Language Journal, 1996, (80): 287-308.[14] Hyland, F. 1998. “The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers”. Journal of Second Language Writing 7: 255-286.[15] Jacobs, G. M., A. Gurtis, G. Braine & S. Huang. Feedback on Student writing: Taking the middle path [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1998, 7(3): 307-317.[16] Keh, C. L. (1990). Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation. EFL Journal, 44(4), 294-304.[17] Liu, J. & J. G., Hansen. Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classroom [M]. The University of Michigan Press, 2002.[18] Lin, N. F. & Careless, D. Peer Feedback: The learning element of peer assessment [J]. CATESOL Journal, 2001, (3): 5-17.[19] Min, H. T. 2005. “Training students to become successful peer reviewers”. System 33/2.[20] Paulus, T. The effect of peer and teacher feedback on students’writing [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1999, 8(3): 265-289.[21] Richards, C. J. and R. Schmidt. (eds.). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics[J]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research press, 2005.[22] Saito, H. 1994. “Teachers ‘practices and students’preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners ”. TESL Canada Journal 11.[23] Sommers, N. Responding to Student Writing [J]. College Composition and Communication, 1982, (33): 148-156.[24] Topping, K. Peer feedback between students in colleges and universities [J]. Review of Educational Research, 1998, 68(3): 249-276.[25] Tsui, A. B. & Ng, M. Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? [J]. Journal of Second Language writing, 2000, 9(2): 147-170.[26] Vygotsky, L. S.Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological process [M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978.[27] Zamel, V. Writing: The process of discovering meaning [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1982, 16: 195-209.[28] Zamel, V. Responding to student writing [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1985 (1): 79-101.[29] Zhang, S. Q. Examining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1995, 4(3): 209-222.[30] Zhu, W. Effects of teaching for peer feedback on students’comments and interaction [J]. Written Communication, 1995, 12(4): 492-528.[31] 贝晓武. 写作任务的练习效应和教师反馈对不同外语水平学生写作质量和流利度的影响[J]. 现代外语, 2009(4): 389-398+437.[32] 郭晓英. 英语写作评价模式的多元化设计[J]. 北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版), 2011, (4): 105-113.[33] 龚晓斌. 英语写作教学: 优化的同伴反馈[J]. 国外外语教学, 2007, (3): 49-53.[34] 韩冰. 同伴互评在大学英语写作教学中的功效—基于写作流利性, 复杂性及准确性的实证研究[J]. 教育理论与实践, 2009(21): 40-42.[35] 胡茶娟, 张迎春. 大学英语写作教学中的同伴互评效果的比较研究—基于135名学生的分组对照试验[J]. 湖南农业大学学报, 2011, (3): 68-72.[36] 李红, 吴胜梅. 英语写作中教师反馈对学生注意影响的研究概况[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2005(2): 88-91.[37] 孟晓. 同伴反馈在英语写作教学中的应用研究[J]. 山东外语教学, 2009, (4): 61-64.[38] 王俊菊. 总体态度, 反馈类型和纠错种类—对大学英语教师书面反馈的探究[J]. 国外外语教学, 2006(3): 24-30.[39] 王颖, 刘振前. 教师反馈对英语写作准确性, 流利性, 复杂性和总体质量作用的研究[J]. 外语教学, 2012(6): 49-53.[40] 徐颖. 英语写作教学中的同伴反馈[J]. 四川教育学院学报, 2010, (10): 76-79.[41] 谢晓燕. 大学英语专业课堂教师反馈研究[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报, 2011(2): 50-55.[42] 杨苗. 中国英语写作课教师反馈和同伴反馈对比研究[J]. 现代外语, 2006, (3): 293-301.[43] 朱秋娟. 反馈机制与写作教学—国内外研究及对大学英语写作教学的启示[J]. 长春理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, (3): 160-162.[44] 张义君, 刘燕梅. 教师反馈类型对大学生英语写作的影响[J]. 首都经贸大学学报, 2010(1): 115-118.[45] 周一书. 论同伴反馈在大学英语写作课堂中的有效性[J]. 江苏教育学院学报, 2013, (2): 121-124.。
英语作文反馈意见
英语作文反馈的重要性及其策略In the realm of English language learning, essaywriting is a crucial skill that requires constant practice and refinement. However, practice alone is not sufficient; feedback is essential for effective improvement. English essay feedback not only helps students identify their mistakes but also provides them with insights into how to enhance their writing abilities. This article explores the importance of essay feedback and offers strategies for effective feedback delivery.**The Importance of English Essay Feedback**1. **Identification of Errors**: Feedback allows teachers to identify grammatical, syntactical, and vocabulary errors in students' essays. By pointing out these errors, teachers help students correct them and avoid repeating them in future writings.2. **Enhancement of Writing Skills**: Feedback can help students improve their writing skills by guiding them on how to structure their essays, use appropriate language, and express their ideas clearly.3. **Encouragement of Critical Thinking**: By providing feedback on the content and argumentation ofessays, teachers encourage students to think critically about their topics and develop more nuanced and persuasive arguments. 4. **Boosting Student Motivation**: Positive feedback can motivate students to continue writing and improve, while constructive criticism can help themidentify areas where they need to focus their efforts.**Strategies for Effective English Essay Feedback**1. **Provide Specific and Detailed Feedback**: Teachers should provide specific and detailed feedback on students' essays, focusing on both the content and the language used. This helps students understand exactly what they need to improve and how to do so.2. **Encourage Student Involvement**: Teachers can encourage students to participate actively in the feedback process by asking them to reflect on their own writing and identify areas where they think they could improve. This promotes a sense of ownership over their learning and helps students take responsibility for their own progress.3. **Use a Balanced Approach**: Teachers should strive to maintain a balance between positive and constructive feedback. Positive feedback can boost students' confidence, while constructivecriticism can help them identify areas where they need to improve. 4. **Encourage Revision and Resubmission**: Teachers should encourage students to revise their essays based on the feedback they receive and resubmit them for further evaluation. This helps students see the impact of their efforts and continue to improve their writing skills over time.In conclusion, English essay feedback is crucial for effective writing improvement. By providing specific and detailed feedback, encouraging student involvement, using a balanced approach, and encouraging revision and resubmission, teachers can help students develop their writing skills and achieve their full potential as writers. **英语作文反馈意见的重要性及其策略**在英语学习的领域中，作文写作是一项至关重要的技能，需要不断的练习和完善。
英语写作中同伴反馈对学生注意的影响
英语 写作 中同伴 反馈对学 生注意 的影响
张 玲
宿迁 ２ ３０ ） ２８０
（ 迁 高等师 范 学校 ， 苏 宿 江
【 摘
要】 统计结果表明 ， 英语写作 中同伴反馈 对 高、 低水 平组学习者的注意都 有显著性 的促进作用 ， 同伴反馈对 于 中、 且
高 、 、 水 平 组 学 习 者 注 意 的促 进 作 用 可 以 和 教 师 反馈 相 媲 美 。 本 文 以 中 国 大 学 生 为调 查 对 象 ， 查 在 中 国语 境 下英 语 写 作 中 低 调
Ｓ ａｎ和 Ｌ ｐ ｉ １ ９ ， ｔ ｗ ｉ，９ ５ 认 ｗｉ ａ ｋｎ（ ９ ４ ｑｄｉ Ｓ ａｎ １ ９ ） ｎ
学生 的写作 能力 。 现在 大学 英语 教师 不但要 负担 繁 重 的教学 任务 ，而且 还必 须 承担一定 的研究 工作 。
这些 使 得 老 师没 有 时 间 给学 生 的写 作 提供 及 时 和
足够的反馈 ， 这就使得学生在写作的时候感到茫然 无 措 ， 而 影响他 们 写作能 力 的提高 。因而 国 内外 进
有 很 多 研究 者 就 同伴 反 馈 对 学生 写 作 熟练 程 度 的
影响进行了研究 ， 但很多研究却得出了相互矛盾的
结 果 。本 研究 从 同伴 反 馈 对 Ｅ Ｌ写 作 中学 习 者 注 Ｓ
ｆ ｅ ｂ ｃ ｒ ｕ ｔｔ ｅ ｔ ｒ ｅ ｐ ｏ ｃ ｅ ｃ ｅ ｅ ｓ ｅ ｒｆ ｅ ｂ ｃ ｎ ｅ ｃ ｅ ｅ ｄ ａ ｋ ｇ ｏ ｐ ａ ｈ ｅ ｒｆ ｉ ｎ ｙ ｌｖ ｌ．Ｐ ｅ ｅ ｄ ａ ｋ ａ ｄ ｔａ ｈ ｒ￣ｅ ｂ ｃ ａ ｅ ｓｍｉ ｒ ｅ ｅ ｔｏ ｅ ａｔ ｎ ｉｎ ｏ ｅ ＥＦ ｈ ｉ ｄ ａ ｋ ｈ ｖ ｉ ｌ ｆ ｃ ｎ ｔ ｔ ｔ ｆｔ Ｌ ａ ｈ ｅ ｏ ｈ Ｃｈ ｎ ｓ ｅ ｒ ｅ ｓ ａ ｉ ｅ ｅ ｔｐ ｏ ｃ ｅ ｃ ｅ ｅ ｓ ｉ ｒｔ ｇ ｈ ｔ ｄ ｓ ｃ ｎ ｕ ｔ ｄ ｏ ｅ ｒ￣ｅ ｂ ｅ ｎ ｗ ｉ ｎ ａ ｉ ｇ ａ ｆ ｃ ｎ ｉ ｅ ｅ ｌ ａｎ ｒ ｔ ｄ ｆｒ ｎ ｒｆ ｉ ｎ ｙ ｌｖ ｌ ｎ ｗ ｉ ｎ ．Ｔ ｅ ｓｕ ｙ ｉ ｏ ｄ ｃ ｅ ｎ ｐ ｅ ｆ ｉ ｉ ｄ ａ ｋ ｉ ｒｔ ｇ ｈ ｖｎ ｅ ｅ ｔ ｏ ｉ ｎ Ｃｈｎ ｓ ｏ ｅ ｅ ＥＦ ａ ｎ ｒ ’ａｔｎ ｏ ｔ ｉ ｅ ｅ ｔｐ ｏ ｃｅ ｃ ｖ ｌ ． ｅ ａ ｅ ａａ ａｅ ｄ ｓ ｕ ｓ ｄ ｉ ａ ｅ ． ｉ ｅ ｅ ｅ Ｈ ｇ Ｌ ｌ ｒ ｅ ｓ ｔ ｔ ｎ ａ ｆ ｒ ｎ ｒ ｆ ｉ ｎ ｙ ｌ ｅ ｓ Ｄ ｔ ｉ ｄ ｄ ｔ ｒ ｉｃ ｓ ｅ ｎ ｐ ｐ ｒ ｅ ｅｉ ｄ ｉ ｅ ｌ
同伴互评在大学英语写作教学中的应用研究
第 ５期
朱艳华： 同伴 互 评 在 大 学 英 语 写 作 教 学 中的应 用研 究
１３ １
在此 期 间 ， 教师 主要扮 演课 堂管 理 者 的角色 ， 保学 但两 者之 间却仍 然 没 有 显 著差 异 ， 明他 们 各 自的 确 说
生认 真地 开展 该 活 动 。在 控 制 班 中 ， 师 利用 这 部 教
同伴互 评也 称作 同伴 反馈 、 同伴评 估 ， 学生 们 是 相互 交换 阅读 作 文 并 提 出修 改建 议 的 写 作 教 学 活
一
、
研 究设 计 与过 程
本 实验 的受 试 是 本 院 ２ ０ ０ ６级 药 学 专 业 １ ６名 ６
动。同伴互评 的理论依据来 源于 Ｚ ｍ ｌ 以写作过 学 生 ， ａ ｅ“ 均来 自两个 自然 教 学 班 。试 验 组 和 控 制组 分 程为 中心 ” 的写 作 方 法 ， 他认 为 ， 馈 在整 个 写 作 过 别 为 ８ 、２人 。实验 一共 持续 了 １ 反 ４８ ０周 ， 每周 两 节 写
同辈 反馈 。
教 师评 阅 ， 程序 是 学 生 初稿 一 同伴 互 评 一 第 二稿 一 写作任 务 是 由教 师命 题 的应 用 文 或 者议 论 文 ，
第一 稿和第 二 稿均 由学 生在课 外 完 成 。教 师评 阅 由
研究 表 明 ， 同伴 互评 能 够促 使 学 生 在 写 作 中扮 教 师评 阅一 学 生定 稿 。 演更 加积 极 的角 色 ， 够 给学 生 创 造 很 多 交 互 、 能 协 商 、 作等 机会 ， 合 而这 些是 提高 学 生 自主性 的重要 因
活动 是花 架子 ， 甚 实 效 。 学 生们 也 习惯 了 老师 在 伴互 评是 学生 完成 第一 稿后 在课 内进行 的 。笔者 对 无
写作反馈对比分析：教师反馈和同伴反馈
写作反馈对比分析：教师反馈和同伴反馈Literature Review on Feedback in EFL Writing: Teacher Feedback and Peer Feedback摘要：写作是一种重要的语言技巧，相比较听力、口语和阅读，写作更能全面的展现学习者的语言精准水平。
所以我们需要对英语写作的教与学投入更多的精力。
然而我们当前的大学英语写作教学收效并非显著。
一方面，老师花费大量的精力和时间去阅读和修改学生的英语写作，但成效颇低；另一方面，学生只是表面肤浅的理解老师的建议及评语或者甚至直接忽视老师给予的纠错反馈。
在一定程度上来看，造成这种现象的原因可以追溯到结果教学法在英语写作教学中的广泛应用而带来的影响。
结果教学法把英语写作过程看成是一个线性的活动，在这一过程中没有课堂活动部分，没有互动。
而与之相对应的过程教学法把写作看成是一个复杂的、相互重叠的认知过程，在这个过程中有学生的积极参与。
反馈作为过程教学法的重要组成部分而引起广泛的关注，它包括：教师反馈、同伴反馈、自我反馈和计算机辅助反馈。
其中，教师反馈和同伴反馈是其主要的两大部分。
在二语学习环境下关于这两种反馈效果的研究很多，但研究结果有所不同，有的研究者认为教师反馈的效果更佳而有的研究更倾向于在写作中使用同伴反馈。
在以往的研究中，研究者们大多只侧重于其中一种反馈方式在大学英语写作教学中的应用，而将两者教学方法结合起来应用的研究不是很多。
因此，本研究尝试将两种反馈应用到大学英语写作教学中并期待通过实证研究能够在不久将来证实其可行性和效度。
关键字：反馈；教师反馈；同伴反馈；外语写作Abstract: As an important language skill, writing can comprehensively present the learners?language proficiency compared with other basic skills such as listening, speaking and reading. Therefore, much attention should be paid to the teaching andlearning of English writing. However, at present time, ourcollege English writing instruction seems unsatisfactory. On the one hand, teachers contribute a great deal of time and energy to reading and correcting student?s composition but with low efficiency; on the other hand, students spend less time superficially understanding teacher?s suggestions and comments or even directly neglect teacher?s error correction. To a certain extent, this current situation can be traced back to the prevailing traditional product-oriented approach which assumes writing as a liner process, in which there is no students? interaction within writing activities. On the contrary, the process-oriented approach assumes writing as a cognitive process, with which students can actively participant in writing activities. Feedback, an indispensable part of process-oriented approach of writing, has attracted great attention, which mainly encompasses teacher feedback and peer feedback. In ESL context, many studies on the effects of two types of feedback has been done. Nevertheless, the results of them varied greatly in these studies. Some scholars reviewed that teacher feedback is more favorable in writing class while others prefer to use peer feedback. Up to now, most of the researchers just focus on either peer feedback or teacher feedback, and few researchers have combined the two kinds of feedback in the context of the EFL writing. Hence, the study attempts to apply peer feedback and teacher feedback into EFL writing through an empirical study and look forward to its feasibility and effectiveness will be approved in the near further study in writing pedagogy. Keywords: feedback; teacher feedback; peer feedback; EFL writing1.IntroductionFeedback plays a prominent role in improving student?s learning ability and strengthening his or her learningachievement in language pedagogy. In writing, feedback refers to “reader?s comprehensible input from author whose function is of fering information to reader to modify composition” (Zhu, 2010). The efficiency of writing feedback will directly affect students? writing level as well as reflecting the effectiveness of teacher?s writing strategies. Feedback in EFL writing mainly focus on: teacher feedback; peer feedback; self-feedback and computer-generated feedback.From which teacher feedback refers to the input provided by the teacher for the revision of students? writings or assessment of learning performance (Keh, 1990) and peer feedback is defined as a system in which individuals evaluate counterparts?or peers?achievements of language learning including writing and reading (Topping, 1998). Teacher feedback plays a dominant role in L2 writing, while in recent years teacher feedback was given great attention through the popularity of process writing approach. Domestic and foreign scholars have already conducted a great deal of empirical research on teacher and peer feedback, but have not reached a consensus on the effectiveness and the ranges, methods and strategies of application. And many researches paid attention to the single study on different modes of feedback as well as focusing less on the comparative study of the efficiency, merits and demerits of integrating teacher feedback and peer feedback. Based on which this study will explore the effectiveness of combining teacher feedback and peer feedback and look forward to providing practically and significantly instructional feedback in EFL writing.2.Related Studies of Teacher Feedback and Peer Feedback at Home and AbroadThe study of writing feedback began in the 1950s. Thescholars made a comparison between teacher?s error correction and peer?s error correction with the guidance of teachers, the results of which examined that the efficiency of the latter is better than the former one. In the following 60 years, domestic and international scholars made a detail study on the practical effectiveness of peer feedback (Keh, 1990; Ferris, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2006; Paulus, 1999; Tsui & Ng, 2000; Ming, 2005; Liu, 2002; Gong, 2007; Meng, 2009; Wang, 2010; Xu, 2010; Guo, 2011; Hu & Zhang, 2011). These researchers stated that singly using teacher feedback will not truly and efficiently improve students?writing ability. “Teachers often spend a gre at deal of time and energy in modifying composition and putting forward many comments and suggestions on writing, however, students always neglect teachers?correction comments as well as superficially understand the correction suggestions. This kind ofsingle and passive feedback have no effect on stimulating student?s learning interests and enthusiasm”(Zhou, 2013: 121). On the contrary, peer feedback attracted more attention to scholars and teachers. They found that in the process of face-to-face communication, negotiation and discussion, peer feedback can mutually, actively and accurately state what students want to express. Meanwhile, student?s self-learning ability and collaborative spirit could be exerted to the utmost as well as writing and thought ability being exerted to a higher extent.Some other studies investigated the essence of teachers?feedback behaviors (Connors & Lunsford 1993: 200-223; Ferris, 1997: 315-339; ); the effectiveness of feedback types (Ferris & Roberts, 2001: 161-184; Kepner, 1991: 305-313); students?perceptions of feedback (Cohen & Cavalcanti, 1990: 155-177; Hedgocock & Left-kowtz, 1994: 141-165). Totally,students generally considered that peer feedback is much more effective than teacher feedback. In terms of teacher feedback, domestic researches focused more on the importance and values of student?s recognition process and its development (Zhang et al., 2000: 24-28; Xie, 2011: 50-51); and its efficiency in improving student?s attention and their ability (Li & Wu, 2005; Bei, 2009); and its influences on the accuracy, fluency and complexity of student?s writing (Wang & Liu, 2012: 49-53); or even the effectiveness of different types of teacher feedback and correction and teachers?and students?attitudes towards teacher feedback (Wang, 2006: 24-30; Zhang & Liu, 2010: 115-118). These studies just singly focused on different aspects of teacher feedback, there are less studies on the combination of peer feedback and teacher feedback and explanation of theirs reliability and efficiency in EFL writing.In recent writing instruction, peer feedback (Richards et al., 2005: 128) refers to “the activity in the process of composition modifying and in this activity where students read peers? composition in groups and then make comments and suggest ions on them”. International writing researches firmed the application of peer feedback in ESL writing (Hansen & Liu, 2005: 31-38; Jacobs et al., 1998: 301-317 ). Also many scholars conducted researches from the perspective of cognition, who put forward that peer feedback could cultivate student?s analytic ability and expand their thinkingspace (Paulus, 1999: 265-289). In addition, students could also communicate with peers and improve the ability of using target language in specific communicative contexts (Hansen, 2005: 31-38). However, the researchers pointed out that although peer feedback could make up drawbacks for teacher feedback,its accuracy, reliability and efficiency are being questioned and the practical operation is needed to be explored further.From the above review, we can conclude that domestic and international scholars just singly conducted researches on either teacher feedback or peer feedback or made studies on the types, characteristics or strategies of feedback as well as a comparative study on peer feedback and teacher feedback. However, there are less researches on combing this two kinds of feedback from now on. Based on which, this study looks forward to making contribution to feedback in EFL writing by integrating peer feedback and teacher feedback.3. Definition of Terms3.1 Feedback TheoryFeedback is wisely seen in education as crucial for both encouraging and consolidating learning (Anderson, 1982; Vygotsky, 1978), and the importance has also been acknowledged in the field of English writing. In the traditional American dictionary (2006), feedback is defined as “transferring process and system input into a part of output”. In the process of writing, the effects of writing cannot be neglected. Keh (1990: 302) referred to feedback as an indispensable part in the process writing pedagogy.In language learning, feedback means evaluative remarks which are available to language learners concerning their language proficiency or linguistic performance (Larsen-Freeman, 2005). In the field of teaching and learning, feedback is defined as many terms, such as response, review, correction, evaluation or comment. No matter what the term is, it can be defined as “comments or information learners receive on the success of a learning task, either from the teacher or from other learners(Richards et al., 1998)”.A more detail description of feedback in terms of writing is that the feedback is “input from the reader to a writer with the effect of providing information to the writer for revision”(Keh, 1990). From the presentation of general grammatical explanation to the specific error correction is all the range of feedback. The purpose is to improve the writing ability of students by the description and correction of the errors.The role of feedback is to make writers learn where he or she has misled or confused the reader by supplying insufficient information, illogical organization, lack of development of ideas, or something like inappropriate word-choice or tense (Keh, 1999).From the perspective of teachers, feedback can be seen as a form of evaluation, aiming at producing a supportive teaching environment and helping students finish assignments better with the aid of feedback from the previous ones. From the perspective of learners, feedback can be considered as a self-assessment, which enables learners to see in what area they need to improve and understand. And feedback can be classified as teacher feedback and peer feedback in terms of the source of feedback which writers receive.3.1.1Teacher FeedbackTeacher feedback refers to the input provided by the teacher for the revision of students?writings or assessment of learning performance (Keh, 1990). Students usually hole the view that teacher feedback is more believable for the reason that it is originated from the influence of the traditional product-oriented approach in writing. And many teachers feel that they have the duty to make substantial comments on students?compositions for the purpose of giving a response to students?efforts, offeringassistance for the improvement of students? writing performance and justify the grades they acquired (K, Hyland, 2003).Researchers considered teacher feedback from various aspects—examining the nature of teacher?s responding behaviors in order to find out the effectiveness of teacher feedback (Connors & Lunsford, 1993; Ferris, 1997; Sommers, 1982; Zamel,1985); comparing students? perceptions of teacher feedback with those peer feedback (Chaudron, 1984); and analyzing students?views on teacher?s feedback (Cohen & Cavalcanti, 1990; Hedgcock & Leftkowtz, 1992). The main method of response to the writing is the handwritten commentary on students drafts and teacher feedback is most emphasized in students?expectation for revision. One of the major issues that have been addressed is whether teachers? written comments can help students enhance their writing ability without checking the texts appropriately (Brannon & Knoblauch, 1982; Straub, 1996, 1997).In fact, several early L1 studies that teacher feedback does not serve serve as a mean of effective communication between teacher and student (Brannon & Knoblauch, 1982; Faigley & Witte, 1981). However, the role of teacher feedback on students? writing has transferred when it refers to second language learning. Although this mode may cause some wrong communication and misunderstanding between teacher and student, teacher feedback has the potential value for stimulating students to revise their drafts (Saito, 1994; Zhang, 1995) and to improve their writing (Fathman & Whalley, 1990; Ferris, 1995, 1997, 2006; Goldstein & Conrad, 1990). 3.1.2 Peer Feedback Different from teacher feedback, peer feedback is defined asthe use of learners as sources of information and interaction for each other in such a way that learners assume roles and responsibilities normally taken on by formally trained teacher, tutor or editor in commenting on and critiquing each others drafts in both written and spoken formats in the process of writing (Liu & Hansen, 2002). For many years, the unique benefits of language learners can offer to each other were ignored in writing classrooms, especially in ESL and EFL classrooms. The Process Writing Theory and The Collaborative Learning Theory have justified the use of peer feedback activities in the writing process. These theories have provided the evidence that peer feedback activities not only help L2 learners improve their writing ability but also their overall language abilities through the negotiation of meaning which typically take place during these activities.There are various forms in peer feedback, such as offering spoken suggestions and correcting errors in written form. The well-known mode of peer feedback of SL writing class is that students who work in pairs in small groups read peer?s compositions carefully, pointing out problems and doubts, and offer suggestions and comments (Richards et al., 2005). The essence of feedback is to hear multiple perspectives from a wide audience (Shepherd, 1992; Cho, Schunn, & Charney, 2006). This method, which is supported by the writing workshop pedagogy, and is widespread in the first language teaching.4. Theoretical Foundations of Feedback4.1 Collaborative LearningCollaborative learning, also called cooperative learning, is the second theoretical basis that back for the application of feedback in writing class (Hiltz, 1997). It is feasible that studentscommunicate actively with each other in the classroom.Collaborative learning emphasizes that both students and instructors participate and communicate actively (Hiltz, 1997). Collaborative learning is viewed from both behavioral and humanistic perspectives (Slavin, 1987). The behavioral perspective stresses that students are encouraged to study under a cooperative situation and rewarded in the form of group rather than individual ones. From the humanistic perspective, more understanding and better performance are gained from the interaction among peers. Hence, it is obvious that collaborative learning puts more attention to the influence of peers, which is different from the previous EFL writing theories (Johnson and Johnson, 1986).Collaborative learning makes it possible that students discuss and accomplish tasks that they can not do finish by themselves without higher motivation. Students acquire certain kinds of knowledge and benefit from each other in the way of spoken and written communication, which occurs in the atmosphere of collaborative learning.Researches in L1 writing has found that the writing is strengthened with the help of collaborative learning strategies (Bruffee, 1984). For example, students inwriting groups negotiate meaning as they revise the peers?writings; learning in writing teams is conducive to improving the students?writing proficiency (Gere, 1987).As to the impact of collaborative learning on L2 writing instruction, many benefits of applying collaborative learning strategies in the classroom has also been stated in the study. In some researches it is mentioned that students can make decisions reasonably and effectively compare notes from thecontent and application through the group work. Collaborative learning also offers students raise opportunities review and use their growing knowledge of L2 writing through interaction with peers in writing groups (Hivela, 1999: 8). There are many opportunities for students to share and communicate ideas with each other.4.2 Process-Oriented ApproachCompared with the product-oriented approach, the process approach is an essential component of composition instruction and research. It is obvious that product-oriented approach attaches great importance to grammar, spelling, punctuation and vocabulary and so on. The process-oriented approach in EFL writing began to appear in the late of 1960s and early 1970s in L1 writing (Elbow, 1973; Emig, 1971). The process-oriented approach was introduced to L2 studies by Vivan Zamel (1976). She argues that advanced L2 writers who are similar to L1 writers would benefit from this approach (Matsuda, 2003). Although there are various process approaches in writing instruction, some noticeable features can be concluded. The features of process-oriented approach are as followed:1)Putting attention to the process of writing rather than the final product;2)Offering suggestions and help to compose student?s writing;3)Putting forward strategies of pre-writing, drafting and rewriting;4)Attaching great importance to the stage of revising;5)Assisting students find the correct content when they write the compositions;6)Emphasizing feedback no matter from teachers or peers;7)Encouraging to hold individual feedback meetings in the groups throughout theprocess of writing.A process-oriented approach, which lays the first theoretical foundation for feedback that attaches great importance to the cyclical phases of writing, for example, pre-write, draft, revision, and edit and final draft. At the beginning, many tasks including producing a topic through reading or listening or analyzing the structure that has been carried out to the writing. Next, students from create the first drafts for further reading and revising by forming their ideas into a liner structure. Then, the second draft appears and the interactive activity among peers can be repeated after the second on the condition that there is enough for students to discuss their compositions. Finally, students accomplish the final draft based on the feedback from both peers and the teachers. Therefore, it is clear that process of writing is the center of process-oriented approach (Keh, 1990: 294). And the reader?s feedback exerted great influence on the multiple-draft process because it is the motivation for the writer get the final draft through the writing process.The importance of the revision process of writing has been strengthened (Leki, 1990) and how to revise the writing from the reader?s feedback has also become the focus of the process of writing (Zhang, 1995). Researches on the importance of revision are also emphasized that revision could help writer become mature and enrich their writing experience. Revision is seen as an essential procedure and a useful way of enhancing the quality of writing from the perspective of cognitive psychology (Fitzgerald, 1987). The strategies for planning and revising can be applied in classroom for students and multiple-drafts can offer morechances for students assess their writing critically (Becker, 2006).Reference:[1] Chaudron, C. The effects of feedback on students revisions [J]. RELC Journal, 1984, 15(2): 1-14.[2] Chaudron, C. Evaluating Writing: Effects of Feedback on Revision [J]. RELC Journal, 1984, 15(4): 1-14.[3] Cohen, A. and M. Cavalcanti. Feedback on Composition: Teacher and Student Verbal Reports[A]. B. Kroll. Learner Strategies in language Learning[C]. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1987, 57-69.[4] Connors, R., & Lunsford, A. (1993). Teachers?rhetorical comments on student papers. College Composition and Communication, 44, 515-524.[5] Faigley L & Witte, S. Analyzing revision [J]. College Composition and Communication, 1981, 32(4): 400-414.[6] Fathman K & Whalley E. Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content [A]. In Kroll B (ed.). Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, 178-190.[7] Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33-53.[8] Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 315-339.[9] Ferris, D. R. (1999). The Case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1-10.[10] Ferris, D. R. (2006). Does Error Feedback Help Student Writers? New Evidence on the Short-and Long-term Effects of Written Error Correction.In Hyland, K, & Hyland, F. (Eds.), 81-104.[11] Ferris, D. R. and Roberts, B. (2001) Error Feedback in L2 Writing Classes: How explicit does it need to be ? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10: 161-184. [12] Goldstein, L,. & Conrad, S. (1990). Student input and negotiation of meaning in ESL writing conferences. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 443-460.[13] Hedgcock, J. & N, Lefkowitz. Some Input: Two Analysis of Student Response to Expert Feedback in L2 Writing [J]. Modern Language Journal, 1996, (80): 287-308.[14] H yland, F. 1998. “The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers”. Journal of Second Language Writing 7: 255-286.[15] Jacobs, G. M., A. Gurtis, G. Braine & S. Huang. Feedback on Student writing: Taking the middle path [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1998, 7(3): 307-317.[16] Keh, C. L. (1990). Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods forimplementation. EFL Journal, 44(4), 294-304.[17] Liu, J. & J. G., Hansen. Peer Response in Second Language Writing Classroom [M]. The University of Michigan Press, 2002.[18] Lin, N. F. & Careless, D. Peer Feedback: The learning element of peer assessment [J]. CATESOL Journal, 2001, (3): 5-17.[19] Min, H. T. 2005. “Training students to become successful peer reviewers”. System 33/2.[20] Paulus, T. The effect of peer and teacher feedback on students?writing [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1999, 8(3): 265-289.[21] Richards, C. J. and R. Schmidt. (eds.). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics[J]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research press, 2005.[22] Saito, H. 1994. “Teachers …practices and students?preferences for feedback on second language writing:A case study of adult ESL learners ”. TESL Canada Journal 11.[23] Sommers, N. Responding to Student Writing [J]. College Composition and Communication, 1982, (33): 148-156.[24] Topping, K. Peer feedback between students in colleges and universities [J]. Review of Educational Research, 1998, 68(3): 249-276.[25] Tsui, A. B. & Ng, M. Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? [J]. Journal of Second Language writing, 2000, 9(2): 147-170.[26] Vygotsky, L. S.Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological process [M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978.[27] Zamel, V. Writing: The process of discovering meaning [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1982, 16: 195-209.[28] Zamel, V. Responding to student writing [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1985 (1): 79-101.[29] Zhang, S. Q. Examining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1995, 4(3): 209-222.[30] Zhu, W. Effects of teaching for peer feedback on students?comments and interaction [J]. Written Communication, 1995, 12(4): 492-528.[31] 贝晓武. 写作任务的练习效应和教师反馈对不同外语水平学生写作质量和流利度的影响[J]. 现代外语, 2009(4): 389-398+437.[32] 郭晓英. 英语写作评价模式的多元化设计[J]. 北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版), 2011, (4): 105-113.[33] 龚晓斌. 英语写作教学: 优化的同伴反馈[J]. 国外外语教学, 2007, (3): 49-53.[34] 韩冰. 同伴互评在大学英语写作教学中的功效—基于写作流利性, 复杂性及准确性的实证研究[J]. 教育理论与实践, 2009(21): 40-42.[35] 胡茶娟, 张迎春. 大学英语写作教学中的同伴互评效果的比较研究—基于135名学生的分组对照试验[J]. 湖南农业大学学报, 2011, (3): 68-72.[36] 李红, 吴胜梅. 英语写作中教师反馈对学生注意影响的研究概况[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2005(2): 88-91.[37] 孟晓. 同伴反馈在英语写作教学中的应用研究[J]. 山东外语教学, 2009, (4): 61-64.[38] 王俊菊. 总体态度, 反馈类型和纠错种类—对大学英语教师书面反馈的探究[J]. 国外外语教学, 2006(3): 24-30.[39] 王颖, 刘振前. 教师反馈对英语写作准确性, 流利性, 复杂性和总体质量作用的研究[J]. 外语教学, 2012(6): 49-53.[40] 徐颖. 英语写作教学中的同伴反馈[J]. 四川教育学院学报, 2010, (10): 76-79.[41] 谢晓燕. 大学英语专业课堂教师反馈研究[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报, 2011(2): 50-55.[42] 杨苗. 中国英语写作课教师反馈和同伴反馈对比研究[J]. 现代外语, 2006, (3): 293-301.[43] 朱秋娟. 反馈机制与写作教学—国内外研究及对大学英语写作教学的启示[J]. 长春理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, (3): 160-162.[44] 张义君, 刘燕梅. 教师反馈类型对大学生英语写作的影响[J]. 首都经贸大学学报, 2010(1): 115-118.[45] 周一书. 论同伴反馈在大学英语写作课堂中的有效性[J]. 江苏教育学院学报, 2013, (2): 121-124.。
英语写作中对同伴反馈的研究
ｅａｕ ｔ ｎ 和 同佯编辑 （ ｅｒ ｄｔ ｇ 等 。这 个概念是 Ｇｒｖ ｓ ｖｌ ｉ ） ａｏ ｐ ｅ ｉｎ ） ｅ ｉ ａ ｅ
（９ ８ 提 出 的过 程 写 作模 式 （ｒｃｓ． ｉｎ ｍｏ ｅ） 的环 节 １７ ） Ｐｏ ｅｓ ｔ ｇ ｄ １中 ｗｒｉ
之 一。 ａｅ 的“ Ｇｒｖ ｓ 过程 写作模式” 主要是针对成 果写作教学法
学者用 了文本分析 、 访谈 、 录音等 。其 中还有一 部分是 以个人
看法和经验 总结的非 实证ห้องสมุดไป่ตู้研究 。
也可 以是 口头反馈或 小组 讨论 ， 还可 以是 同伴之 间相互 反馈 。
任 当 今 科 技 迅 速 发 展 的 时 代 ，更 可 以通 过 网络 反 馈 的 形 式 指 导英语写作教学 。 同 伴 反 馈 是 学 生 们 相 互 交 换 阅 读 作 文 并 提 卅 修 改 建 议 的 写 作 教 学 活 动 也 被 称 作 同 伴 互 评 （ｅ ｒ ｅ ｉｗ） 、同伴 反 应 ｐ ｅ ｖｅ ｒ （ｅｒｒｓｏ ｓ） ｐｅ ｅｐ ｎｅ 、同伴 评 论 （ｅｒｃｉｑ ｉｇ 同伴 评 估 （ｅ ｒ ｐ ｅ ｒｉｕｎ ） ｔ ｐｅ
多， 究 方法也越来越 科学化 。 研 三、 内研究现状 国
、
概 念
存 语言教学环境中 ， 反馈 通 常 是 指 为 了 改进 、 高学 习 者 提 的 学 爿成 绩 丽对 其 某 一学 刊任 务 完 成 情 况 发 刚 的 信 息 。就 英
语写作教学 而言，反馈则主要 指学习者接收 到的关于其写作
来 ， 来 越 多 的 中 国 教 师 对 过 程 教 学 法 产 生 了 兴 趣 ， 尝 试 把 越 并 它运用 到教学中去 。
一
英语作文同学互评的优点
英语作文同学互评的优点英文回答：Peer review among classmates offers numerous benefits that contribute to both the written and oral communication skills of students. It provides a platform for students to:Enhance Critical Thinking Skills: By analyzing and providing feedback on their peers' work, students develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter and improvetheir ability to critically evaluate written and spoken language.Develop Communication Skills: Peer review fosters active listening, clear and concise communication, and persuasive argumentation. Students learn to articulatetheir thoughts and ideas effectively in both writing and speaking.Identify Strengths and Areas for Improvement: Throughpeer review, students can identify areas where they excelas well as aspects that need improvement. This self-reflective process allows them to target specific areas for further development.Learn from Diverse Perspectives: By sharing their work with classmates from different backgrounds, students gain exposure to various writing styles, perspectives, and ideas, which broadens their own writing and communicationabilities.Build Confidence and Self-Esteem: Receiving feedback from peers can help students build confidence in their writing and speaking skills as they realize their strengths and see areas for improvement.Foster Collaboration and Teamwork: Peer review encourages students to collaborate and work together, fostering a sense of community and shared learning.Provide Specific and Constructive Feedback: Classmates often provide specific and constructive feedback that istailored to the individual student, which can be more effective than instructor feedback that may be more general.Cultivate a Growth Mindset: Peer review emphasizes the iterative nature of writing and speaking and encourages students to embrace a growth mindset, continuously seeking opportunities to improve their communication skills.Enhance Presentation Skills: In addition to written reviews, peer review can also involve oral presentations, allowing students to develop their confidence in public speaking and refine their presentation techniques.Prepare Students for Real-World Scenarios: Peer review simulates real-world scenarios where individualscollaborate on writing and communication projects,preparing students for professional settings where theywill encounter feedback from colleagues.中文回答：同学互评具有以下优点：增强批判性思维能力，通过分析和提供对同学作品的反馈，学生对学习主题有了更深入的理解，并且提高了批判性评估书面和口语语言的能力。
外语写作中同伴反馈的原则与方法
外语写作中同伴反馈的原则与方法作者：才亚楠来源：《教书育人·高教论坛》2010年第11期20世纪70年代以来，随着心理语言学的产生和发展，二语(外语)写作教学中传统的结果教学法(product approach)逐渐被过程写作法(process writing)所取代，二语写作研究的重点已从评估学生成稿(the written product)转向探索学生写作过程(thewritingprocess)。
写前准备、写作和评改(反馈)三个环节并非是一次性完成的线性过程，而是相互交织、循环往复的过程。
评改已不再是写作教学中的最后步骤，作为提高作文质量和写作能力的一个有效环节，其作用得到了外语研究者的广泛认可。
外语写作研究领域中，反馈作为主要的研究课题之一。
近30年来备受关注。
其研究焦点主要集中在反馈的形式和种类，各种反馈的作用、学生对反馈的评判等方面。
本文着重探讨了同伴反馈在大学外语写作当中一些基本原则和操作方法。
对于同伴反馈的评价对于同伴反馈的作用，写作教学界至今仍存在较大的争论。
一些研究者在理论探索的基础上通过实证发现，同伴反馈有多方面的作用。
例如，它给学生提供了真实的读者，鼓励学生有目的地写作并增强他们对自己写作能力的信心；学生通过交流、沟通、协商逐步完成并优化了写作任务，充分发挥了学生在学习中的主体作用，真正实现了以学生为中心的自主和自助的交际法写作模式(Keh，1990：294-296；Ferris．1995：33；Tsui&Ng，2000：168；Mangelsdorf，1992：274；戚焱，2004：47；张英等，2000：24；蔡兰珍，2001：41；杨文滢、胡桂莲，2003：59)。
一些过程写作教学法的倡导者也认为同伴反馈既是教师反馈的有益补充，又能通过互动促进二语发展(Long&Porter，1985)。
但也有不少研究对同伴反馈中出现的问题表示担忧，这些问题包括学生在大多数情况下，只注意文章的形式，而不太关注内容和意义层面(教师反馈也存在这种倾向)；学生对同伴的反馈能力比较怀疑、缺乏信任等(cressweli，2000：236-237；Dheram，1995：161；Muncie，2000：50；Yagelski，1995：216；Stod-dard&Macarthur，1993：76)。
最新 二语写作中的同伴反馈研究综述-精品
二语写作中的同伴反馈研究综述一、引言同伴反馈，也被称为同伴互评、同伴校正等，指的是学生相互阅读对方作文，并对作文进行提问、评论或提出建议的写作修改活动。
同伴反馈作为形式性评估，与教师反馈相互补充，同时是合作学习的形式之一。
受合作学习理论、过程教学法及理论的影响，自20世纪80年代末以来，二语写作中的同伴反馈受到了广泛关注。
本文拟从同伴反馈的有效性、学生对同伴反馈的接受程度、同伴反馈在二语课堂的具体实施等方面进行评述，以期对二语写作教学和反馈研究有所启示。
本文中的“二语写作”指作为非母语的写作，包括英语作为第二语言和外语的写作情况。
二、同伴反馈有效性的研究大量研究已经证实了同伴反馈的有效性，它在提高学生二语写作水平方面的作用不可忽视。
Nelson和Murphy（1993）研究了中等水平二语学习者能否有效地参与到同伴反馈活动中，能否从中受益。
受试是4名来自不同国家的ESL 大学生。
经过连续6周的观察，发现虽然受试人数较少，但是这些学生的确能够成功参与同伴反馈，而且这类同伴反馈活动有助于改进他们的修改策略。
Mendonca和Johnson（1994）研究了二语写作课上学生使用同伴反馈的情况，结果发现同伴互评为学生提供了充分表达自己想法，以及和同伴协商彼此观点的机会，能够增强学生的读者意识，促使学生在写作中扮演更积极的角色。
为了探究同伴反馈对二语写作的影响，Villamil和De Guerrero（1998）对14名ESL大学生进行了实证性研究，发现同伴反馈能够帮助中等水平的二语学习者认识到自己有能力修改同伴的作文，能够提高学生的学习自主性，对写作质量的提高有积极作用。
De Guerrero和Villamil（2000）研究了双人反馈小组中同伴反馈的作用，结果发现学生之间互相阅读和评阅对方的作文，通过对作文的反馈，同伴可以看到自己作文中语言及篇章中出现的问题，通过对比和学习别人的写作，个人可以看到自己对同伴作文修改中的参与及贡献，激发写作兴趣和信心，从而逐渐提高写作能力。