Rationale of the study
English is a vital international language essential for the development of any country Graduates represent the workforce of their nations, making proficiency in English crucial for students, especially those at Hanam College of Education (HCE) Consequently, the need for frequent use of English among these students is increasingly important.
Writing is often perceived as the most challenging skill among the four language competencies As an English teacher, I recognize my responsibility to enhance my students' writing abilities There are various strategies to support this improvement, with peer feedback being a particularly effective method.
Effective written feedback is crucial for English writing teachers, as highlighted by Hyland (1990) and supported by Ferris (1995), who emphasize its importance in developing student writing Bitchener, Young, and Cameron (2005) argue that written feedback is often overlooked and misunderstood by students, making it essential for educators to provide it Furthermore, Dochy, Segers, and Sluijsmans (1999) advocate for peer feedback, noting its numerous advantages, including the enhancement of communication skills, collaboration, critical thinking, and fostering habits of lifelong learning.
The peer feedback method involves students drafting their papers and exchanging them with classmates for review They provide feedback based on a teacher-provided checklist that highlights key writing aspects, including organization, grammar, and vocabulary The specific focus areas for feedback are tailored to the unique characteristics of the students involved.
Peer written feedback in writing classrooms is widely recognized by researchers as a valuable tool for enhancing teaching and learning This approach allows students to exchange their papers, fostering collaboration and reflection, which are crucial for improving English language skills Additionally, peer feedback enables students to receive constructive critiques that aid in effective revisions As students engage in critical reading of their peers' work, they also become more discerning in their own writing However, the implementation of peer feedback can be challenging due to varying levels of English proficiency among students and the time commitment required from both teachers and learners.
In Vietnam, schools and universities are increasingly adopting modern methodologies to enhance language teaching, particularly in writing skills HCE, established 50 years ago, has faced unique challenges since its foreign languages faculty was only founded seven years ago English teachers at HCE are dedicated to overcoming these obstacles by implementing effective teaching methods, including peer written feedback, which has been utilized for third-year students over the past year This research aims to investigate how students provide feedback on paragraph writing, identify challenges they face in this process, and evaluate the effectiveness of the peer feedback method The findings will help determine the future application of this approach in teaching writing skills at HCE.
The textbook "Academic Writing" (by Liz and Roar, Third Edition) is utilized at HCE to teach paragraph writing, featuring 14 lessons focused on various paragraph forms At the conclusion of each lesson, students are tasked with writing paragraphs in specific formats, such as compare and contrast, cause and effect, and problem and solution, to reinforce their learning This process typically requires extensive feedback from teachers To alleviate the feedback burden on educators and enhance the learning experience for students, peer feedback has been introduced as a new method for providing constructive critiques on writing assignments.
Aims and objectives of the study
This research investigates the effectiveness of peer written feedback on paragraph writing skills among third-year students at HCE The study aims to assess students' current practices in providing feedback, identify challenges they face, and evaluate the overall effectiveness of this method Additionally, the research seeks to offer implications for teaching and learning through peer feedback and suggests areas for future study.
Scope of the study
This study examines peer written feedback as a specific technique for enhancing writing skills among third-year students at HCE, amidst various feedback methods such as teacher feedback, self-correction, and oral conferences.
Significance of the study
Writing is a crucial skill for language learners, serving as a key element in both academic and professional settings This significance has led to extensive research focused on diverse instructional approaches to teaching writing.
This study explores the significance of peer written feedback in the teaching and learning of writing It highlights how peer feedback fosters collaboration, encourages thoughtful consideration, and promotes reflection, offering more advantages than traditional oral negotiation and debate.
Utilizing peer-written feedback significantly reduces teachers' grading burdens while enhancing the learning experience for students This collaborative approach not only aids students in refining their writing skills but also fosters critical thinking as they engage with their peers' work, helping to identify and rectify mistakes.
Research methodology
With this aim in mind this study will be guided by the following research questions:
1 How do the third-year students of HCE give feedback to their peers’ written paragraphs?
2 What difficulties might the students encounter when giving feedback to their peers’ written paragraphs?
3 To what extent do the students improve their writings after receiving feedback from their peers?
To gather sufficient data for addressing the research questions, this study employed two methods: document analysis and questionnaires Document analysis was utilized to obtain insights for research questions one and three, while the questionnaire provided essential information to address research question two.
In this study, 20 students' initial drafts, accompanied by peer feedback, were collected and analyzed to understand how students provided feedback on each other's writing The research then compared the first drafts with the subsequent second drafts to evaluate the impact of peer feedback on students' writing improvement.
The questionnaire was done on 20 students who had given feedback to find out the difficulties students might cope with when giving feedback to their peers‟ writing.
Organization of the thesis
The paper consists of 3 main parts:
Part A: Introduction- briefly states the rationale of the study, the aims, research questions, scope as well as the significance and organization of the study
Part B of the article focuses on development and is divided into four chapters Chapter 1 provides a theoretical background and literature review, examining existing research on feedback in student writing, exploring various perspectives on peer feedback methods, and outlining guiding principles for delivering effective peer-written feedback.
Chapter 2: Research methodology- describes the methodology which deals with the participants, instrumentation, data collection procedure and data analysis procedure Chapter 3: Data analysis - analyses the collected data
Chapter 4 presents the findings and discussions, highlighting the key outcomes and implications for enhancing writing instruction through peer feedback Part C concludes by summarizing the study's significant findings, recognizing its limitations, and offering recommendations for future research in the field.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND
Theoretical background
Feedback is defined in various ways by researchers, with Hyland & Hyland (2006) providing one of the most comprehensive definitions They emphasize that feedback is essential for promoting and reinforcing learning, particularly in second language writing According to their findings, feedback plays a pivotal role in second language writing programs globally, being integral to product, process, and genre approaches within instructional practices.
Feedback is an essential element of classroom interaction, as highlighted by Chaudron (1988), who emphasizes its role in informing learners about the accuracy of their language use and classroom behavior Both students and teachers recognize feedback as a crucial aspect of the writing process, as noted by Cohen & Cavalcanti (1990) and Ferris (2002) Consequently, this topic has garnered significant attention in both teacher education and second language research literature.
Feedback on writing is most beneficial for students' development when given during the early and middle stages of the writing process At this point, students can effectively utilize the feedback to revise and edit their work Therefore, feedback should be an integral part of the writing process, rather than a one-time event, as highlighted by Raimes (1983).
“Responding to students‟ writing is very much a part of the process of teaching writing” That means feedback is very necessary for the success of the writing tasks
1.1.2 Types of feedback to students’ writing
There are three major types of feedback in the literature on writing They are teacher‟s feedback, self-editing and peer feedback
Teachers view responding to students' written work as a vital aspect of their role, as it fosters writing development and boosts students' confidence However, feedback is often delivered through written comments on final graded compositions, which, according to Peterson (2010), tend to have limited impact on students' writing growth since they are received only at the end of the writing process.
Research indicates that published findings often do not reach teachers, leaving them to rely on their own experiences and student input for written feedback (Hyland & Hyland, 2006) This reliance can lead to a disconnect between the feedback teachers provide and what students actually desire (Cohen & Cavalcanti, 1990; Hyland, 1998) Even when there is alignment between teacher and student perspectives, the potential for miscommunication remains significant (Hyland, 1998) Thus, delivering effective feedback is a crucial responsibility for teachers, demanding their ongoing commitment, diligence, and enthusiasm.
Self-editing is a crucial aspect of the writing process, as emphasized by Raimes (1992), who states that students must learn to critically assess their writing to express their ideas fluently and accurately This involves identifying and correcting various errors, such as grammar mistakes, spelling errors, and issues with clarity While students who engage in self-editing are more likely to overcome learning challenges, many struggle to recognize mistakes in their own work To aid in effective revision, teachers should equip students with correction codes, enabling them to better analyze and improve their writing.
Peer feedback involves students acting as sources of information, taking on roles typically held by trained educators to critique each other's drafts in both written and oral forms (Liu & Hansen, 2002) This practice is known by various terms such as peer response, peer editing, peer critiquing, and peer evaluation, each highlighting different aspects of the feedback process Regardless of the terminology, peer feedback allows students to review their classmates' work and offer constructive comments, often guided by specific questions from the teacher These interactions can occur in both oral and written formats, enriching the writing process and enhancing learning outcomes.
Peer feedback is recognized for its significant social, cognitive, affective, and methodological benefits, empowering students to take an active role in their learning process By engaging with peers' comments, students shift from passive reliance on teacher feedback to making informed decisions about their writing During peer feedback sessions, students not only create their own texts but also read and critique their classmates' work, fostering collaboration and enhancing their social and communication skills This process cultivates essential abilities such as negotiation, verbal communication, and the capacity to give and receive constructive criticism, ultimately leading to improved writing outcomes.
Literature review
Despite the significant impact of peer written feedback on students' writing revision, research in this area remains limited compared to the abundance of studies on teacher feedback Notable investigations in Vietnam, such as those by Trần Văn Phong (2007), Phan Thị Hảo (2008), and Nguyễn Thị Lãi (2008), primarily focus on the current use and students' perceptions of peer feedback, without exploring its effects on writing improvement or the challenges students face in providing feedback This gap in research motivates the author to conduct a study aimed at understanding the effectiveness of peer written feedback and the difficulties encountered by students in the feedback process.
Different views of peer written feedback in the teaching and learning of writing
The literature on peer feedback highlights both its benefits and challenges While several studies demonstrate the positive impacts of peer review, others address its potential issues This section will explore these significant concerns surrounding peer feedback.
1.3.1 Arguments in favor of students’ peer written feedback in the teaching and learning of writing
Peer feedback offers significant advantages for enhancing the teaching and learning of writing, as highlighted by numerous researchers One primary benefit is the improvement of writing skills and critical thinking for both feedback givers and receivers Peer reviewers provide valuable insights that enable writers to revise their work effectively As students engage in critically assessing others' writing, they also become more discerning readers and revisers of their own work A study by Lundstrom and Baker (2009) revealed that both givers and receivers of feedback experienced equal benefits, but those who provided feedback demonstrated greater advancements in their writing abilities This suggests that the act of giving feedback fosters a more critical perspective on one’s own writing.
Peer feedback enhances students' confidence and diminishes anxiety by highlighting their peers' writing strengths and weaknesses, leading to more positive attitudes towards writing (Seow, 2002) Additionally, Liu and Hansen (2002) emphasize that peer feedback fosters audience awareness through collaborative drafting, while also offering students valuable opportunities to practice English in a meaningful context.
Peer written feedback enhances teachers' ability to monitor individual and group progress effectively (Rollinson, 2005) It allows educators to evaluate the quality of feedback students provide, offering concrete examples of both positive and negative responses, which is often challenging to achieve through oral feedback Additionally, when students submit assignments alongside previous drafts and peer comments, it becomes easier for teachers to identify the original ideas of the student author and assess how well they integrated peer suggestions, a process that oral feedback cannot facilitate.
Peer written feedback significantly alters students' roles in the classroom Research by Yang et al (2006) investigated the impact of peer response in an EFL setting, focusing on its integration alongside traditional teacher feedback Their findings indicate that peer feedback can be effectively implemented in EFL environments, suggesting its potential applicability in ESL contexts as well, unaffected by dominant cultural influences Additionally, the study revealed that while peer feedback may not always be incorporated into subsequent drafts, it enhances self-editing abilities, fostering greater autonomy in writing skills.
Eliminating specific editing tasks can save teachers valuable time, particularly in large classes, allowing them to focus on providing more effective instruction and guidance (Rollinson, 2005) Additionally, the limited time available for thorough feedback in large classes means that peer reviewers can offer diverse perspectives on various aspects of students' work.
1.3.2 Argument against peer written feedback in teaching and learning of writing
While certain studies highlight the benefits of peer feedback, other researchers emphasize the challenges associated with peer review, attributing these difficulties to a variety of factors.
A major problem with peer response is that students find it hard to identify problem areas and may even offer inaccurate or misleading advice (Horowitz,
1986) Students also find it difficult to judge the validity of their peers‟ comments
Cultural and educational backgrounds, along with insufficient training, are crucial factors influencing the effectiveness of peer feedback (Leki, 1990; Leki, 1992; Nelson & Carson, 2006).
Student characteristics play a crucial role in the acceptance of peer feedback According to Rollinson (2005), many students may struggle to accept that their peers are qualified to evaluate their writing, necessitating considerable persuasion regarding the benefits of peer feedback Additionally, some students may hesitate to provide critical comments due to a desire to maintain group harmony or a reluctance to assert authority.
1.4 Different types of peer feedback in writing
Responding to student writing traditionally involves correcting errors in grammar and vocabulary, as noted by Shrum & Glisan (2002) However, this perspective has evolved, recognizing that different types of feedback can significantly enhance the quality of students' writing Peer feedback, in particular, is highlighted as an effective method, supported by the arguments of Keh (1990) and Mangeldorf (1992).
There are three primary types of peer feedback: oral comments, checklists, and written comments Understanding these distinct methods enables educators to choose the most effective form of peer feedback for specific teaching scenarios.
Oral peer response, as outlined by Mittan (1989), involves students collaborating in groups of four or five, where each member shares their paper with the others For homework, students read their peers' papers and prepare responses based on teacher-provided focus questions In the subsequent class, they offer oral feedback on each paper and engage in clarifying discussions This process allows each student to incorporate the feedback received from their group members into a revised version of their paper.
While oral discussions may seem time-consuming, even a brief conversation can yield valuable insights Students can take notes during these exchanges, capturing ideas from their peers (Raimes, 1983) This often leads to surprising revelations, as students discover the wealth of ideas generated in just a few minutes The notes collected can then serve as a foundation for subsequent rewriting exercises.
Oral comments allow students to collaboratively decide on feedback and how to articulate it, leading to more precise and constructive critiques through discussion This collaborative approach enhances students' confidence in the feedback they provide to peers (Mangelsdorf, 1992) However, a potential drawback is that students may not capture all the details while listening, leading to misunderstandings that can hinder their ability to revise their writing effectively.
To enhance student engagement in the feedback process, educators can provide a series of yes/no questions for peer review Education specialist Dr Kathleen Dudden Rowlands emphasizes that checklists serve a purpose beyond organization; they empower students by fostering a sense of control and accountability By utilizing checklists, students can eliminate common barriers to success, such as uncertainty about requirements or forgetting crucial components of their work.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research questions
This study examines how third-year students at HCE provide feedback on their peers' written paragraphs, explores the challenges they face during this process, and evaluates the effectiveness of the feedback method The investigation is guided by specific research questions aimed at understanding these dynamics.
1 How do the third-year students of HCE give feedback to their peers’ written paragraphs?
2 What difficulties might the students encounter when giving feedback to their peers ’written paragraph?
3 To what extent do the students improve their writings after receiving feedback from their peers?
Research methods
This section presents the participants, instrumentation, data collection procedure, and data analysis procedure
Twenty third-year students from the Foreign Language Faculty of HCE participated in a study, showcasing a mix of English proficiency levels Throughout the academic year, these students engaged in two terms of writing, each consisting of 30 periods focused on three types of paragraph writing: narrative, process, and descriptive After completing their study on each paragraph type, students were tasked with writing a paragraph on a given topic, resulting in a total of six writing assignments for each student during their third year.
This study utilized two methods to gather comprehensive information: document analysis of students' peer feedback and a survey questionnaire Document analysis was instrumental in addressing research questions regarding how third-year HCE students provide feedback on their peers' written paragraphs and the extent of improvement in their writing after receiving such feedback Meanwhile, the questionnaire aimed to identify the challenges students face when offering feedback on their peers' work.
Interview and observation could have been used to answer question 3 However, due to the limitation of time and ability, these instruments were decided not to be utilized
Documents analysis of students’ peer written feedback
Data analysis involves the systematic application of statistical and logical techniques to effectively describe, condense, and evaluate data As noted by Shamoo and Resnik (2003), various analytical methods enable researchers to draw inductive inferences and differentiate the signal (the phenomenon of interest) from the noise (statistical fluctuations) within the data.
Data analysis in qualitative research often involves an iterative process where data collection and analysis occur simultaneously Researchers actively seek patterns in observations throughout the data collection phase, as highlighted by Robinson (2004) The specific qualitative approach employed—such as field study, ethnography, content analysis, oral history, biography, or unobtrusive research—determines the nature of the analysis, which is further influenced by the type of data being used, including field notes and documents.
There are three primary types of documents:
• Public Records: The official, ongoing records of an organization‟s activities
Examples include student transcripts, mission statements, annual reports, policy manuals, student handbooks, strategic plans, and syllabi
• Personal Documents: First-person accounts of an individual‟s actions, experiences, and beliefs Examples include calendars, e-mails, scrapbooks, blogs, Facebook posts, duty logs, incident reports, reflections/journals, and newspapers
• Physical Evidence: Physical objects found within the study setting (often called artifacts) Examples include flyers, posters, agendas, handbooks, and training materials
In the light of these discussions, the data of this study is personal documents because it is the students‟ personal writing
This study involved a data analysis of 40 writing sheets featuring peer feedback from students across two writing tasks, with 20 sheets per task The author meticulously presented and analyzed the students' written feedback to gather accurate insights, aiming to evaluate the effectiveness of peer feedback practices among students at HCE.
The following features concerning students‟ practice of giving peer written feedback are analysed:
- The areas they gave feedback to (paragraph organization, grammar, or vocabulary)
- Their tendency to provide suggestions and general comments
According to McDonough (1997), questionnaires are a favored tool among educational researchers due to several key advantages They offer enhanced reliability through anonymity, promote greater honesty from respondents, and are more economical, saving both researchers and participants time and effort Additionally, questionnaires are versatile, suitable for both small-scale and large-scale research projects.
In the questionnaire, there are two parts Part 1 includes questions concerning difficulties the students encountered when giving their peers written feedback Part
The article explores the challenges students faced while offering suggestions to enhance their peers' writing skills Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with various issues by selecting from five options: Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Neutral (N), Disagree (D), and Strongly Disagree (SD).
The author aims to identify the challenges students face when providing feedback, noting that questionnaires only reveal the level of agreement on issues rather than the actual difficulties encountered To effectively gather data for the second research question regarding these challenges, interviews and observations are suggested as more insightful methods However, due to limitations in ability and knowledge, only certain aspects can be explored Consequently, the questionnaire is designed to collect information specifically addressing the difficulties students may experience when giving feedback on their peers' written paragraphs.
The data collection process was divided into two stages In the first stage, students wrote a paragraph on a specific topic as homework after completing a lesson During the next class, they provided feedback on their peers' writings, guided by a checklist that the teacher introduced, which focused on paragraph organization, grammar, and vocabulary The teacher first explained the checklist to ensure students understood each question and then instructed them on how to give constructive comments and suggestions for improvement Additionally, a list of commonly used symbols for identifying mistakes was provided Students used these symbols to annotate errors in their peers' work and were encouraged to offer corrective suggestions Finally, students took notes and shared their feedback on each other's writing.
After students received peer feedback on their writing, they revised their texts before submitting them to the teacher The teacher then collected the first and second drafts from 20 students, ensuring confidentiality regarding their identities during data discussion Both the initial drafts with peer comments and the revised drafts were thoroughly examined, analyzed, and compared for insights.
In the second stage, a questionnaire was distributed to 20 third-year students The researcher had to give explanations to make sure that all students understood the questions clearly
2.2.4 Data analysis method 2.2.4.1 Data analysis procedure
An analysis of peer written feedback on 20 writing papers was conducted to evaluate the current practices among third-year students at HCE This study primarily examined the specific areas of feedback, including paragraph structure, organization, grammar, and vocabulary The goal was to identify which aspects students commonly address in their feedback, as well as their inclination to offer suggestions and general comments.
The study analyzed the first and second drafts of student writings, focusing on peer feedback's impact on improvement It examined the revisions made in areas such as paragraph structure, organization, grammar, and vocabulary after students received feedback from their peers.
The survey analysis aimed to identify the challenges students face when providing written feedback on their peers' writing By examining the levels of agreement indicated by students, the study determined which difficulties were perceived as the most and least challenging.
There are 3 research questions in this thesis The data analysis is to answer these 3 questions
The analysis of feedback provided by third-year students of HCE on their peers' written paragraphs highlights three key areas: organization, grammar, and vocabulary This structured approach to peer review emphasizes the importance of clear organization in writing, adherence to grammatical rules, and the effective use of vocabulary The collected data reveals how students engage in constructive criticism, fostering a collaborative learning environment that enhances their writing skills.
- The percentage of students who gave feedback on paragraph organization
- The percentage of students who gave feedback on grammar
- The percentage of students who gave feedback on vocabulary
- The percentage of students who gave general comments
The researcher aimed to investigate how students utilized a feedback checklist when reviewing their peers' first draft writings The analysis focuses on the students' feedback, with names used in the study being pseudonyms to maintain ethical standards.
DATA ANALYSIS
Student‟s practice of giving peer written feedback
Analysis of this section is to answer question 1 and is based on the students‟ giving feedback to their peers‟ first drafts
In the previous chapter, students were tasked with providing feedback on their peers' writing, focusing on three key areas: paragraph organization, grammar, and vocabulary Additionally, they were encouraged to offer general written comments to enhance the overall quality of the work.
To help them with their giving feedback, a checklist (appendix 2, p III) was given to them prior to their task assignment
Students were instructed to provide feedback on four key aspects of paragraph organization: the topic sentence, supporting ideas, conclusion, and overall coherence Despite this guidance, data analysis indicates that few students addressed issues related to paragraph organization, as illustrated in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: The percentage of students who gave feedback on paragraph organization
The chart illustrates that only 20% of students provided feedback on coherence, making it the least commented area Following this, 30% of students offered feedback on conclusions Feedback on supporting ideas was slightly higher at 35% The topic sentence received the most attention, with 45% of students commenting on it.
And among 9 students gave feedback on paragraph organization, there is 3 students (30%) providing suggestions for their peers to correct the mistakes while the rest did not
Students focused on grammar when providing feedback to their peers, highlighting errors by underlining them and using symbols to identify specific types of mistakes.
Students provided the suggestions Students did not provide the suggestions
Figure 2: The percentage of students who provided suggestions for the grammatical mistakes
While all students identified grammatical errors, only 55% offered suggestions for corrections, as illustrated in Chart 2 In contrast, 45% of the students did not provide any recommendations for addressing these mistakes.
The most common mistakes related to grammar that students made were use
45% 55% of verbs, articles, preposition and punctuation Therefore, only these kinds of mistakes were examined more closely to see how students gave feedback on grammar
The number of mistakes indicated
The number of correct suggestions
The number of incorrect suggestions
Table 1: Students’ giving feedback on grammar
Table 1 reveals a total of 138 identified mistakes across four categories, with varying percentages for each type The most prevalent errors are related to verb usage, accounting for 72% of the total mistakes In contrast, mistakes involving articles and prepositions are nearly equal, comprising 8% and 7%, respectively Punctuation errors represent the smallest portion, at only 5%.
In a study analyzing 138 identified mistakes, students offered only 61 suggestions, resulting in a mere 44% response rate Out of these, only 53 suggestions were correct, while the remainder were incorrect Notably, punctuation errors, despite being the least frequent, had the highest correction success rate at 50%, matching that of article errors Conversely, verb errors had the lowest correction rate at just 11%, while preposition errors saw a correction success rate of 40%.
Here are some examples showing the way students gave feedback to their peers‟ writing in terms of grammar
After I sit down next to a girl After I sat down next to a girl
After I prepared the meal for my family
After I had prepared the meal for my family
It is too late to come back home
It was too late to come back home
I visited HCM mausoleum by my parents
Prep I visited HCM mausoleum with my parents
Fortunately, my teacher came, and asked me what happened
P Fortunately, my teacher came and asked me what happened
Table 2: Examples of students’ giving feedback on grammar
In addition to grammar, vocabulary plays a crucial role in enhancing students' writing skills, leading them to focus on vocabulary when providing written feedback to their peers Consequently, all students identified mistakes and utilized symbols to highlight these errors However, despite pointing out the mistakes, only 38% of students offered suggestions for correction, while a significant 62% did not provide any recommendations, as illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3: The percentage of students who provided suggestions for the vocabulary mistakes
Students frequently make vocabulary mistakes in writing, particularly concerning word form, word order, and word choice This article focuses on examining these specific types of errors to determine if feedback effectively enhances students' vocabulary usage in their writing.
The total number of the mistakes indicated
The number of the correct suggestions
The number of incorrect suggestions
Table 3: Students’ giving feedback on vocabulary
Table 3 reveals a total of 73 identified mistakes across four categories, with varying percentages for each type The most prevalent errors are related to word choice, accounting for 57% of the total mistakes Mistakes concerning word form make up 24%, while errors associated with word order comprise the remaining percentage.
Among 73 mistakes indicated, students only provided 20 suggestions And there are only 14 correct suggestions and the rest are incorrect The percentage of the word choice it is the highest (85 %) The percentage of correct suggestions for word order mistakes is lowest (10%) The percentage of correct suggestion for mistakes related to the word form is 20 %
Here are some examples showing the way students gave feedback to their peers‟ writing in terms of vocabulary
That was the rest time on Saturday
That was the break time on Saturday
It is hold a way perfect
It was hold a perfect way
Maybe the teacher in my kinder garden
Maybe in my kinder garden the teacher
Although she advised me not pluck
Although she advised me not to pluck
Table 4: Examples of students’ giving feedback on vocabulary
Data indicates that only 65% of students provided comments on their peers' writing sheets, while 35% did not participate Furthermore, the feedback offered was often brief and lacked specificity, consisting mainly of general statements.
“Good”, “good content”, “good idea” “very good”, “Not bad”, “Need improved”,
Many students struggle with vague feedback like "too many mistakes" or "bad writing," which fails to provide clear guidance for improvement Such comments leave peers uncertain about what specific aspects of their writing need enhancement This highlights a broader issue: students often lack the skills to offer constructive criticism that could genuinely assist their classmates in refining their writing abilities.
Figure 4: The percentage of students who gave general written comments
3.1.5 Students’ using the checklist when giving feedback
An analysis of student feedback revealed that all participants utilized the checklist when assessing their peers However, only 15% provided specific comments with clear suggestions for improvement, addressing both organizational structure and lexico-grammatical errors For instance, one student noted, “This topic sentence is very good That’s an interesting memory Your writing has many mistakes regarding tense You should use the past simple tense The reader can understand the relationship between the ideas in the paragraph It’s a paragraph, so you shouldn’t write in essay form” (feedback on Phung Thi Hoa’s writing, appendix 4, p V).
A significant majority of students (85%) receive feedback that lacks specificity and actionable insights While they identify mistakes, many do not provide concrete suggestions for their peers to improve their writing For instance, general comments like "the content is very simple and unclear" fail to explain the reasons behind these assessments or offer guidance on how to enhance clarity and sophistication in the content.
Following are some examples of the feedbacks the students giving to their peers‟ writings:
- Have many mistakes word choice
- The topic sentence are not clear
- Content of paragraph aren‟t clear and interested
- Many mistake about tense and order
- Supporting ideas: generally it‟s good, should give more details
- Conclusion: should restate the topic sentence
- Use wrong tense, wrong words
- Good idea but supporting idea not clearly
- You don‟t use linking words
- When I read it, I don‟t know you have many maim ideas
- The conclusion not relevant to the topic of the paragraph
- The idea not logic, when I read it, I felt a paragraph not clearly
- Paragraph have many wrong form and mistakes about grammar
Students‟ difficulties when giving written feedback to their peers‟ writings 28 1 Students‟ difficulties in indicating the mistakes in their peers‟ writings 28 3.3 Improvement of students‟ writing after receiving peer written feedback
This analysis addresses question 2, focusing on students' responses to a questionnaire regarding peer feedback on writing Students were encouraged to identify mistakes and offer corrections in their peers' work The survey aimed to explore the challenges students faced in this process, specifically concentrating on difficulties related to paragraph writing.
3.2.1 Students’ difficulties in indicating the mistakes in their peers’ writings
As shown in the table 8 below, with different aspect students have levels of agreement not the same
Students’ difficulties in indicating the mistakes related to or commenting on:
Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree a The grammatical 10 4 2 0 4 structure of the topic sentence b The controlling idea conveyed in the topic sentence
6 359 4 1 0 c Whether the topic sentence is too general or too specific
7 6 2 2 3 d The relevance of the supporting ideas
4 6 5 2 3 e The use of transitional devices
3 7 3 3 4 f The use of verbs 0 3 2 5 10 g The use of articles 2 3 1 6 8 h Punctuations 1 2 2 7 8 i Prepositions 4 5 2 5 4 j Word order 5 6 4 2 3 k Word choice 6 7 2 3 2 l Word form 5 4 3 4 4
Table 5: Students’ difficulties in indicating the mistakes in their peers’ writings
* Grammatical structure of the topic sentence
The topic sentence plays a crucial role in a paragraph, yet many students struggle to identify its grammatical correctness As illustrated in Table 8, 70% of students faced challenges in recognizing errors related to topic sentences, while 10% remained neutral on the issue Only 20% disagreed, suggesting that a significant number of students find it difficult to pinpoint mistakes in this essential component of writing.
A significant 75% of students reported challenges in identifying whether the topic sentence conveys the controlling idea, with 30% strongly agreeing and 45% agreeing In contrast, only 5% disagreed, while 10% remained neutral on the issue.
*Whether the topic sentence is too general or too specific
According to Table 8, 65% of students struggled to identify whether the topic sentence was too general or too specific, while 25% did not face this difficulty, and 10% selected a neutral response.
*The relevance of the supporting ideas
One crucial aspect of student feedback involves assessing whether the supporting ideas align with the paragraph's main topic A paragraph achieves unity only when its supporting ideas are relevant, yet many students struggle with this evaluation Research indicates that twice as many students face challenges in determining the relevance of supporting ideas compared to those who do not, with 50% reporting difficulties and only 25% feeling confident Additionally, a significant 25% of students provided neutral responses, highlighting the complexity of this task.
*The use of transitional devices
The use of transitional devices is crucial for paragraph coherence, aiding readers in understanding the text more easily However, many students struggle with this aspect, as evidenced by a survey where 15% strongly agreed and another 15% agreed that they found it challenging to identify mistakes related to transitional devices Additionally, 35% of students (15% disagreeing and 20% strongly disagreeing) reported no difficulties in commenting on these devices, while 15% remained neutral The significant number of students expressing difficulties, along with those who were neutral, highlights a general lack of knowledge regarding transitional devices Consequently, when providing feedback on their peers' writing, students often feel uncertain about the correctness of transitional device usage.
Students often focus on verb usage errors when reviewing their peers' writing Research shows that only 15% of students struggle to identify these mistakes, while 75% find it easy, and 10% remain neutral This indicates that recognizing verb-related errors is generally not a challenging task for most students.
Recent statistics reveal that 70% of students struggle with identifying mistakes in article usage, while 25% do not face such difficulties, leaving 5% neutral This indicates that while most students are familiar with articles, many still experience confusion regarding their correct application.
According to the data presented, a significant majority of students, approximately 75%, reported no difficulties in identifying punctuation mistakes, with 35% disagreeing and 40% strongly disagreeing with the notion that they faced challenges In contrast, only 15% of students indicated they had trouble recognizing punctuation errors, while 10% selected a neutral response.
The data reveals that approximately 45% of students struggle with identifying preposition errors, indicating that prepositions pose a significant challenge for some learners Conversely, an equal percentage of students (45%) either disagreed or strongly disagreed with experiencing such difficulties, while 10% remained neutral on the issue This highlights the varying levels of proficiency in handling prepositions among students.
According to the data, 55% of respondents reported difficulties with word order, while 25% did not, and 20% remained neutral This indicates that students often struggle with word order, primarily due to their tendency to translate directly from their native language to English, highlighting a lack of awareness in this area.
A significant 65% of students reported difficulties in identifying mistakes related to word choice, while only 25% felt confident in this area The remaining 10% provided neutral responses, suggesting that many students struggle to determine the correctness of word usage.
Table 8 reveals that 45% of students experienced challenges in identifying errors related to word form, with 25% strongly agreeing and 20% agreeing, while 40% reported no difficulties Additionally, 15% of students selected a neutral response.
3.2.2 Students’ difficulties in providing suggestion the mistakes in the peers’
When providing feedback on their peers' writing, students are not only expected to identify mistakes but also to offer constructive suggestions for improvement This article will explore the challenges students face when attempting to provide effective recommendations to enhance their peers' writing.
Students’ difficulties in providing suggestion the mistakes related to
Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree a The grammatical structure of the topic sentence
7 8 1 2 2 b The controlling idea conveyed in the topic sentence
9 7 1 1 2 c Whether the topic sentence is too general or too specific
6 9 3 1 1 d The relevance of the supporting ideas
5 6 5 3 1 e The use of transitional devices
3 8 4 3 2 f The use of verbs 1 3 1 5 10 g The use of articles 4 6 2 5 3 h Punctuations 5 4 3 6 2 i Prepositions 5 4 6 3 2 j Word order 4 4 7 4 1 k Word choice 6 8 5 1 0 l Word form 6 5 4 4 1
Table 6: Students’ difficulties in providing suggestion the mistakes in the peers’ writings
*Grammatical structure of the topic sentence
Students faced significant challenges in identifying grammatical errors in their topic sentences, which made it difficult for them to suggest corrections According to Table 9, 75% of students reported struggles with providing suggestions for these mistakes, with 35% strongly agreeing and 40% agreeing Conversely, about 20% of students did not experience such difficulties, while 5% remained neutral.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Findings
This study, outlined in Chapter 2 "Research Methodology," investigates third-year students at HCE and their feedback processes in paragraph writing skills It aims to identify the challenges students face while providing feedback and assess the effectiveness of the feedback method The research will be guided by specific research questions to achieve these objectives.
1 How do the third-year students of HCE give feedback to their peers’ written paragraphs?
2 What difficulties might students encounter when giving feedback to their peers
3 To what extent do student improve their writings after receiving feedback from their peers?
And after collecting and analyzing the data, the result helps answer all three questions
The data indicates that when providing feedback on their peers' writing, students primarily focus on grammar and vocabulary, often identifying and suggesting corrections for these errors However, they show less concern for paragraph organization and struggle to offer constructive general comments that could aid in improving their peers' writing.
Research indicates that a significant number of students struggle with providing feedback on their peers' writing, with a higher percentage reporting difficulties in identifying mistakes and suggesting improvements Additionally, many students remained neutral on their ability to give constructive feedback.
Following peer feedback, the results indicate minimal improvement in paragraph organization in the second draft However, students demonstrated significant enhancements in grammar and vocabulary, with a notable increase in grammatical accuracy Overall, the feedback was instrumental in elevating the quality of their writing.
In conclusion, the study‟s findings prove that the peer written feedback can help students improve their writing skills in some extent
The author discusses the impact of peer feedback on students' writing practices, highlighting significant improvements in their writing skills following peer reviews Additionally, the article addresses the challenges students face when providing constructive feedback to their peers.
The data indicates that a small percentage of students pay attention to paragraph organization and face challenges when providing feedback on this aspect To address this, teachers should offer detailed instruction on paragraph structure, enabling students to write well-organized paragraphs and facilitate easier commentary Furthermore, to enhance the effectiveness of written feedback, teachers should provide sample comments for students to review By examining these examples, students will learn how to deliver constructive feedback, which will assist their peers in making necessary revisions to their writing.
Students often face challenges when providing feedback on their peers' writing To address these difficulties, it's essential for teachers to train students beforehand This training should include clear explanations of the feedback process and the specific steps to follow Additionally, creating a detailed checklist can guide students on key areas to focus on while giving feedback, ultimately enhancing their ability to provide constructive criticism.
Many students prioritize identifying and suggesting corrections for grammar and vocabulary errors, leading to improved accuracy after peer feedback To enhance the effectiveness of this feedback, teachers should guide students in revising grammar and vocabulary thoroughly and provide clear instructions on paragraph organization This approach enables students to write well-structured paragraphs and facilitates easier commentary on organization Additionally, teachers should highlight common mistakes with examples, helping students avoid these errors in their writing and recognize them more readily.
Implications for teaching and learning of writing using peer written feedback 41 1 Implications for teaching of writing using peer written feedback
Effective peer feedback requires pre-training students on how to evaluate their writing and provide constructive feedback This training should occur at the beginning of the semester and continue throughout the peer feedback process, ensuring students develop the necessary skills for meaningful critique.
Teachers should train students to evaluate their writing by introducing a clear checklist of basic criteria This checklist enables students to assess the quality of their work effectively It is essential for teachers to explain each criterion thoroughly to prevent misunderstandings Providing examples or small tasks allows students to practice individually, in pairs, or in groups, helping them determine the quality of paragraphs This approach not only guides students in giving constructive feedback on their peers' writing but also highlights key aspects to focus on when crafting their own paragraphs.
Teachers should emphasize the significance of peer feedback in writing, encouraging students to not only revise their own work but also to provide thoughtful comments to their peers By demonstrating their own appreciation for peer feedback and offering bonus remarks for critical responses, teachers can foster a culture of responsibility and collaboration among students.
The ongoing intervention activity highlights the teacher's crucial role in maintaining close contact with students during peer feedback sessions While students can offer valuable insights to their peers, they often face challenges that require the teacher's assistance By moving around the classroom or sitting alongside students, the teacher can provide necessary support and share their perspectives on the students' work and feedback methods This collaborative approach benefits both students and the teacher, as students gain clarity on misunderstandings, and the teacher gains a comprehensive understanding of the peer feedback process.
4.3.1.3 Communicative discussion after peer written feedback activity
Teachers can identify common writing mistakes and encourage students to provide feedback and suggestions on these issues Allowing writers to ask questions about peer feedback fosters clarity, while reviewers can offer detailed explanations for their comments This collaborative activity enhances students' understanding of each other's writing processes.
4.3.2 Implication for learning of writing using peer written feedback
After students are trained how to give feedback, they should follow these steps to give feedback
Students must thoroughly review and memorize the checklist criteria provided by their teacher If they face any challenges while giving feedback, they should seek assistance from their teacher.
Students must take responsibility when providing feedback on their peers' writing, as constructive comments can significantly enhance their friends' writing skills Additionally, offering thoughtful feedback encourages students to adopt a more critical perspective, ultimately contributing to their development as proficient writers.
When providing feedback, students should aim to address all criteria in the checklist, ensuring a balanced evaluation rather than focusing excessively on one aspect while neglecting others.
This part includes the summary, the limitations of the study and suggestions for further studies.
Concluding remarks
Supported by the collected data, the author has covered the research objectives set forth
1.1 Student’s practice of giving peer written feedback
The primary research objective is to analyze students' practices in providing peer written feedback While students are expected to focus on key elements of paragraph organization—such as the topic sentence, supporting ideas, conclusion, and overall coherence—they tend to prioritize grammar and vocabulary over structural organization Additionally, many students struggle to offer general written comments Notably, a higher percentage of students identify mistakes and suggest improvements related to grammar and vocabulary compared to other aspects of writing.
1.2 Students’ difficulties when giving written feedback to their peers’ writings
The research aims to explore the challenges students face when providing feedback Data reveals that a significant number of students struggle with identifying mistakes and offering constructive suggestions for improvement, with a higher percentage reporting difficulties compared to those who do not Notably, the most challenging aspect for students is organizing their feedback within paragraphs.
1.3 Improvement of students’ writing after receiving peer written feedback
Many students prioritize identifying and suggesting corrections for grammar and vocabulary errors; however, a greater number are able to address these mistakes after receiving peer feedback compared to those who improve their paragraph organization.
1.4 Implications for teaching and learning of writing using peer written feedback
The last research objective is to propose some implication for teaching and learning using peer written feedback
1.4.1 Implications for teaching of writing using peer written feedback
To enhance the effectiveness of peer written feedback among students, teachers should implement structured activities such as pre-training, intervention, and post-feedback discussions Pre-training involves educating students on how to evaluate and provide constructive feedback on writings, while also increasing their awareness of the importance of this practice During the intervention phase, teachers can assist students in overcoming challenges they encounter when giving feedback Finally, organizing communicative discussions after the feedback process allows students to share their experiences and foster mutual understanding.
1.4.2 Implications for learning of writing using peer written feedback
Students must thoroughly review the checklist provided by their teacher and seek assistance if they face any challenges during the feedback process It is essential for students to be accountable when offering feedback on their peers' writing, as their comments can significantly influence their friends' improvement Additionally, students should strive to address all criteria in the checklist, ensuring a balanced approach rather than focusing excessively on one aspect while neglecting others.
Although great effort has been made by the researcher while carrying out the study, there have been still limitations as follows:
Due to time constraints, the research author focused solely on the most common writing mistakes, potentially limiting the comprehensiveness of the findings and leaving some results unsatisfactory.
Secondly, the study only researches one type of peer feedback so it can not indicate all the advantages of the peer feedback
The questionnaire was designed with a limited scope, focusing solely on the difficulties students faced in providing feedback As students could only indicate their agreement or disagreement with the statements, this approach hindered the author's ability to fully understand the actual challenges encountered by students during the feedback process.
Teachers often overlook reviewing mistakes before allowing students to revise their paragraphs, focusing solely on comparing the first and second drafts This approach can lead to confusion, as the errors identified by students may not align with the checklist criteria, resulting in misunderstandings during the correction and improvement process.
In spite of the limitation above, the author hopes that the study will make a contribution to the better situation of the teaching and learning skill at HCE
3 Suggestions for the further studies
Further studies could examine the other types of the peer feedback- oral peer feedback may be an example
The study focuses exclusively on the role of peer written feedback in enhancing writing skills Future research could explore the application of peer feedback in teaching and learning additional skills.
1 Bartels, N (2004) Written peer response in L2 writing, Retrieved on April 26,
2008, from http://exchange.stage.gov/forum/vols/vol141/no1/p.34.htm
2 Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D (2005) “The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing” Journal of Second Language
3 Black et al ( 2004) Assessment for Learning: putting it into practice
4 Brown, H.D (1994) Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy, Englewood, New Jersey Prentice Hall Regents
5 Byrne, D (1991) Teaching writing skills- Longman handbooks for language teacher Longman
6 Casanave, C (2004) “Controversies in Second Language Writing: Dilemmas and Decisions in Research and Instruction” ELT Journal, 58, p.29-39
7 Charles, M (1990) “Responding to problems in written English using a student self-monitoring technique”, ELT Journal, 44, p 286-293
8 Chaudron, C (1988) “The effects of feedback on students‟ composition revisions”, RELC Journal, 15, p.1-14
9 Cohen, A.D (1998) Strategies in learning and using a second language
10 Cohen, A.D and Cavalacanti, M.C (1990) "Feedback on Compositions: Teacher and Student Verbal Reports", in B Kroll (ed.), Second Language Writing, Research Insights for the Classroom, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 155–
11 Devenny, R (1989) “How ESL Teachers and Peers Evaluate and Respond to Students Writing”, RELC Journal, 20, p.77-88
12 Dheram, P.K (1995) “Feedback as a two-bulllock cart: a case study of teaching writing”, ELT Journal, 49
13 Dochy, Segers, & Sluijsmans, (1999) Studies in Higher Education,Routledge
14 Ferris, D (1995) “Can advanced ESL students become effective self-editors?”
15 Ferris, D.R (1997) "The Influence of Teacher Commentary on Student Revision", TESOL Quarterly, p 315–339
16 Ferris, D (2002) Treatment of error in second language student writing Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press
17 Griffin, C.W (1982) “Theory of responding to students writing: The state of the art” College Composition and Communication, 33, 296-310
18 Harding, K & Taylor, L (2005) International Express- Intermediate Oxford University Press
19 Hansen, J.G & Liu, J (2005), “Guiding principles for effective peer response”, ELT Journal, 59, p 31-38
20 Harmer, J (1991) The practice of English Language Teaching Oxford: Oxford University Press
21 Hyland, K (1990) “Providing productive feedback”, ELT Journal, 44, p.279-
22 Hyland, K (1998) “Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge”, ELT Journal, p 349- 382
23 Hyland, K; & Hyland, F., (2006) “Feedback on second language students' writing.” Language Teaching, 39, 2, p 83-101
24 Horowitz (1986) Feedback in seconsd language writing: Teacher and student attitudes and preferences Cambridge University Press
25 Keh, C.L (1990) “Feedback in the writing process: a model and methods for implementation”, ELT Journal, 44, p.294-303
26 Krashen, S.D (1984) Writing, Research, theory, and application Oxford University Press
27 Leki, L (1990) Coaching from the margins: Issues in oral and written responses Cambridge University press
28 Leki, I (1992) Understanding ESL Writers: A Guide for Teachers Heinemann
29 Liu & Hansen (2002) Peer Response in Second Language Writing
Classrooms University of Michigan Press
30 Lundstrom, K & Baker, W (2009) “To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing” Journal of Second Language
31 Mangeldorf (1992) “Peer reviews in ESL composition classroom” ELT
32 McDonough (1997) “Learner-learner interaction during pair and small group activities in a Thai EFL context” System, p 207–224
33 Mendonỗa and Johnson (1994) Peer Review Negotiations: Revision Activities in ESL Writing Instruction TESOL Quarterly, p 745–769
34 Mittan, R (1989) The peer response process: Harnessing students’ communicative power Longman
35 Murphy, B (1994) “Correcting students’ writing”, Retrieved from the World Wide Web English Language Center, Assumption University, Bangkok, Thailand
36 Murray, D (1978) A writer teaches writing: A practical method of teaching compositions Houghton Mifflin
37 Nelson, G & J Carson (2006) Cultural issues in peer response: Revisiting culture In K Hyland & F Hyland (eds.), 42-59 Cambridge University Press
38 Nunan, D (1989) Dressing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom
39 Nunan, D (1992) Research Methods in Language Learning Cambridge University Press
40 Nguyễn Thị Lãi (2008) “Students‟ peer written feedback in writing skills among Intermediate students at Hanoi University of Industry”
Paragraphs: A Guide to Effective Writing St Martin‟s Press
42 Peterson, S.S (2010) “Improving Student Writing Using Feedback as a Teaching Tool”, What works? Research into Practice www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/whatWorks.html
42 Phan Thị Hảo (2008) “Peer written feedback in writing portfolios by third year students in the English Department in College of Foreign Language, Vietnam
43 Raimes, A (1983) Techniques in teaching writing Oxford: Oxford University Press
44 Raimes, A (1992) Techniques in teaching writing Oxford University Press
45 Reid, J.M (1993) Teaching ESL writing Prentice Hall Regents
46 Robinson (2004) “Technology and New Directions in Professional Development: Applications of Digital Video, Peer Review, and Self-Reflection”
Journal of Edication Technology system, p 55-66
47 Rollinson, P (2005) “Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class”, ELT
48 Seow, A (2002) The writing process and process writing In J.C Richard, &
W.A Renandya (Eds), Methodology in Language Teaching – An Anthology of
Current Practice Cambridge University Press
49 Shamoo and Resnik (2003) Responsible conduct of research Oxford University Press
50 Shepherd (2005) “Teachers‟ and students‟ belief about responding to ESL writing: A case study” TESL Canada Journal, p 83- 95
51 Shrum, J and Glisan, E W (2002) Teacher’s Handbook: contextualized language instruction Heinle and Heinle college foreign language publishing term
52 Taylor, B (1981) “Content and written form: A two-way street”, TESOL
53 Trần Văn Phong ( 2007), “An investigation into the use of peer written feedback in the first year writing classes at the English Department in College of Foreign Language, Vietnam University, Hanoi
54 Truscott, J (1996) "The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes", Language Learning, p327–369
55 Villamil, O S., & Guerrero (1996) “Peer revision in the L2 classroom: socialcognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behaviour”
56 Yang et al (2006) A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a
Chinese EFL class Journal of second language writing
57 Zamel, V (1995) “Responding to students writing”, TESOL Quarterly, 19, p.79-202
This survey aims to gather information for my research on the practice of peer-written feedback in paragraph writing skills among third-year students at Hanam College of Education (HCE) Your participation in this survey is greatly valued, and all responses will be kept confidential for research purposes, ensuring that your identity remains anonymous in any analysis of the data.
Class:……… Time of learning English:………
When providing feedback on peers' written paragraphs, I encountered several challenges These included difficulties in articulating constructive criticism, balancing honesty with sensitivity, and ensuring clarity in my suggestions Additionally, I faced the challenge of maintaining an objective perspective while being mindful of my peers' feelings Overall, the process required careful consideration to effectively communicate my thoughts and support their improvement.
(SA= strongly agree, A=Agree, N = Neutral, D=disagree, SD= Strongly disagree)
1 You have difficulties in indicating the mistakes related to:
Aspects Level of your agreement
The analysis of the topic sentence involves examining its grammatical structure and the controlling idea it conveys It is essential to determine if the topic sentence is overly general or too specific, as this affects clarity Additionally, the relevance of supporting ideas must be assessed to ensure they enhance the main argument Effective use of transitional devices is crucial for smooth flow, while appropriate verbs, articles, punctuation, and prepositions contribute to grammatical accuracy Attention to word order and choice is vital for precise communication, alongside consideration of word form to maintain consistency throughout the text.
2 You have difficulties in providing suggestions to improve:
Aspects Level of your agreement
The analysis of the topic sentence involves examining its grammatical structure and the controlling idea it conveys It is essential to determine if the topic sentence is overly general or too specific, as this affects clarity Additionally, the relevance of supporting ideas must be assessed to ensure they align with the main argument Effective use of transitional devices enhances the flow of the content, while careful selection of verbs, articles, and punctuation contributes to grammatical accuracy Attention to prepositions, word order, and word choice further refines the writing, ensuring it is coherent and engaging Lastly, the appropriate use of word forms is crucial for maintaining a professional tone throughout the article.
- Is the topic sentence grammatically correct?
- Does it announce the topic and convey the controlling idea?
- Is it too general or too specific?
- Does every sentence in the paragraph support the controlling idea expressed in the topic sentence?
- Is there enough support to develop and support the controlling idea effectively?
- Is the conclusion relevant to the topic of the paragraph?
- Are the ideas in a logical order?
- Are there signals that helps the readers understand the relationship between the ideas in the paragraph?
-Are all the verbs used correctly?
- Are there any mistakes related to the use of the articles in the writing?
- Is there anything wrong with the use of the preposition in the writing?
- Are there any punctuation mistakes?
-Are all the words are in the correct order?
- Are the right words used?
- Is the right formed of the word used?
-What is strength of the writing?
- What is weakness of you‟re the writing?