Application of peer editing method in English composition

class: A positive outcome

MST. FARHANA FERDOUSE

Introduction:

In the field of English language teaching, there exist four basic skill areas namely
reading, writing, listening and speaking. Each area plays a significant role in the
development of the learners. Writing is a major skill area and is considered a
productive skill. Writing increases the student's personal knowledge and self-
esteem and encourages learning in all subject areas, by employing auditory, visual
and kinesthetic systems all at once. Most importantly, writing contributes
significantly to improve reading skills, vocabulary application, and therefore
speaking ability. Peer editing is a step in the writing process that helps students
evaluate and improve the quality of their written work in many ways. It is a major
process in academic writing. It involves students to take part in editing each other’s
writing, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses in their writing. Peer editing
helps to build students’ sense of identity and provides them with chances to learn
from each other and enhance their awareness of their abilities and knowledge alike.
This paper discusses the advantages of peer editing, guidelines for in-class editing,
few drawbacks, and further suggestions on how to apply peer editing method
effectively in English composition class for a positive outcome.

Literature Review:

Second language writing instruction has gradually evolved from the traditional
product oriented approach to the process writing approach over the last three
decades. Instead of focusing solely on formal accuracy and the final product of
writing, process approach instills “greater respect for individual writers and for the
writing itself” (Hyland, 2003, p.17). It is a recursive procedure which advocates pre-
writing activities, encourages peer editing and requires multiple drafts. Peer editing
is a crucial component in multi drafted process-oriented writing instructions. The
use of peer editing process has been generally supported in the literature as a

114
“potentially valuable aid for its social, cognitive, affective, and methodological
benefits” (Rollinson, 2005, p.23). The beneficial impact and effectiveness of peer
editing have been substantiated by a number of empirical studies; for example, Min
(2006), Tsui & Maria (2000). It has been claimed that peer readers can provide
useful feedback, as they revise effectively on the basis of feedback they receive from
peer editors. Peer feedback can be seen as complementary to teacher feedback in
that it is more specific, and that by reading others writing as critical readers,
students could become more critical readers and editors of their own writing.

Advantages of applying peer editing method:

From a socio-cognitive perspective, peer response can be seen as a formative

developmental process that gives writers the opportunities to discuss their texts and
discover others' interpretations of them. Peer editing allows students to share ideas
regarding the topics of their writing, the different styles and structures and the editing
methods and techniques. It also creates an atmosphere of co-operation and enthusiasm
among students. They feel equal in one situation where they are helping each other to
produce better results. In this regard, peer editing plays an important role in developing
students' independence and raising their self esteem and confidence in their abilities. In
addition, peer editing enhances students' responsibility by allocating them a role similar
to the teacher's to spot mistakes and help to fix them. Students in this case benefit by
identifying strengths and weaknesses in their own writing as well as in their peers'. The
process of looking at each other’s piece of writing reinforces their editing skills and
makes them aware of such criteria the next time they write. They read with a critical eye
which helps them develop their critical thinking skills and improve their writing skills by
being exposed to different writing types.

As for the benefits of peer editing on teachers' part, it decreases the amount of their
paperwork. Instead of marking whole class papers of first drafts, teachers will look at the
papers after they have been reviewed by the students' peers. This would give the teacher
the chance to spot higher level mistakes that could also indicate the areas that need
working out with the whole class. The teacher could also be observant as to praise strong
editors who will eventually become highly appreciated by their peers. Their highlighted
thoroughness and attention to detail will become qualities of positive competition in the

115
classroom. The other students will seek the same as to become good writers and editors
and hence will have their works completed more often.

Peer editing method will also increase their overall fluency and similarly improve
their reading comprehension because students learn more when they personally apply
principles without being forced by higher authorities. At the end they will notice
that their writing skill is indeed improved than before.

Classroom Application:

Procedural Guidelines:

Before starting the process of peer editing, there are some steps a teacher should
follow and some issues to keep in mind. Peers should be divided into several
groups so that they can work together on their papers and, the teacher should
determine it considering the size of the class. Another point to be taken on account
of is whether the teachers choose the peers or they let students choose for
themselves. This should be decided upon earlier so that it does not waste the class
time nor cause any dissatisfaction among the students. After settling down the
specific peers there are two ways to distribute papers among students. One way is
to mix all the papers and then allocate them randomly so that students get a chance
to move around and meet their peers to discuss their feedback. The other way is to
let students exchange each other’s papers within their groups. This will depend on
the number of students in the class. Moreover, students should be provided with
specific guidelines for the editing process through which they can focus their
editing of each other’s papers. Editing symbols should also be well known to
students so that they apply them adequately. The feedback form should address the
content as well as the accuracy of the written work. It will also provide them with a
sense of appreciation and support their self esteem. It will enhance their confidence
and make them feel responsible for the task they are assigned. It will of course ease
the process of knowing who peered up with whom to be able to meet later and
discuss. Teacher should stress that students take it seriously and read through the
whole paragraph before spotting the mistakes to give them a better understanding
of what is written. The second round involves scanning the paragraph and finding

116
the mistakes. They should not fix any mistakes but only underline them and write
the editing symbols on top of the words.

Code for error correction:

Symbol Type of Error Symbol Type of error

/ Unnecessary word Pro Pronoun

? Meaning unclear Ps Parallel structure
^ Word missing Rc Relative clause
Art Article Cap Capital letter needed
Ro Run-on c/nc Countable/non-countable noun
Cs Comma splice Sv Subject-verb agreement
T Tense Frag Sentence fragment
Vf Verb form Ts Topic sentence
P Punctuation Wf Word form
Pre Preposition

This will give the writers a hint of the kind of errors and make it easy for them to
fix it later. After having papers along with feedback forms, the students should start
fixing their mistakes using the hints provided through the editing symbols and the
notes and comments in the feedback forms. In some cases, students might not be
clear about some comments or suggestions and in such a case they should consult
their editors. In so many cases it may happen that student writer is correct and the
student editor makes a mistake. So student writer should discuss their viewpoints
on the mistakes they are not convinced with. To assist students to fix their mistakes,
a dictionary and a grammar book plus the study notes are the best companions.
They can always go back to their editors and check the possible ways of editing or
even ask other students in their groups to give them a hand. Moreover the teacher
should relax the time limit so that the editors can work efficiently. Teacher should
carefully consider this period when the students will prepare the edit sheet. The
amount of time allotted for editing depends on the length and nature of the writing
assignment and the content of the edit sheet. For a 500 word composition, editors
117
can be given 20 minutes to edit the papers. Some students at first may not
complete all the questions but gradually they will become more proficient and will
work faster.

Areas of suggestions for the students:

Before practicing peer editing method, teacher should give his/her students a clear
conception about the necessary requirements of writing a good paragraph. In a
paragraph-
 Title should address the topic.
 Details or explanations should support the topic.
 Topic sentences should be focused and specific.
 Connectors have to be used thoroughly and correctly.
 Capitalization should be used where necessary.
 Spelling mistakes should be fixed and not repeated.
 Singular/plural nouns should be correctly used.
 Punctuation marks should be used properly.
 Prepositions should be used correctly.
Case Study:

Setting:

This study was conducted in a course titled ‘English Composition’ in Summer

2009 in Stamford University Bangladesh. The participants (18 in number) were the
students of BBA. The objectives of the course were to help students fully develop
their abilities in writing in English. The course began with sentence–level,
grammatical practices and then paragraph-level writing and it ended with the
production of different types of paragraphs including description, cause and effect
and compare & contrast. The classes were in the form of lectures, brainstorming,
group discussion, in class and out of class writing and peer review activities. This
was not the students' first experience with peer review. In the first 10-12 classes of
the course, the teacher had been encouraging them to do peer-editing for each
118
other. Those who did well in peer-editing were praised in class. The teacher
sometimes showed the whole class PowerPoint slides with examples demonstrating
how to edit a composition successfully and how to comment on the particular
errors. It was for the first time the teacher made peer preview performance part of
the final score. The final score of the course comprised of -

Mid-Term - 30%
Final Term - 30%
Class Test (2) - 20%
Assignment -10%
Attendance -10%
Total 100%
The teacher counted their editing proficiency as ‘Assignment’ to motivate the
students. The teacher rated the students on the basis of to the written feedback they
gave to their group members. These rules were made clear to the students at the
beginning of the trimester. The teacher adopted and modified the "writing cycle"
suggested by Tsui & Maria (2000) in designing his class. Tsui & Maria (2000)
described the writing cycle as follows: Topic selection, brainstorming, writing the
first draft, giving and receiving peer comments, revising writing the second draft,
second round of peer comments, further revision for writing a third draft, teacher
comments (as a normal activity of the writing process), then final revision to write
the fourth draft. However, in order to observe the effects of peer comments, only
the First drafts of the paragraphs were counted for data analysis.

119
The Writing Cycle

Topic Selection
(Teacher and students)
Brainstorming
Writing first draft
Peer comments
(Focus on content & organization+ peer editing sheet
Writing the second draft
Peer comments
(Focus on content & organization+ peer editing sheet
Third draft
Teacher’s comments
(Focus on content & organization and forms)

Participants:

Before starting the experimental classes, the teacher took a ‘Diagnostic Test’ for
assessing student’s English proficiency. The result of the test was used for grouping
the participants into three different groups of six in each. The students were
grouped by mixed ability and shared ability levels (Richards & Lockhart, 2000). In
order to mix the students' levels of proficiency, three students who obtained highest
scores were mixed with the three lowest proficiency students (group 1); three
second highest proficiency students were mixed with three second lowest
proficiency students (group 2), and finally, the six medium proficiency students
were put together (group 3). After the teacher determined the three groups, the
group members selected a monitor for each group.

120
Participant’s Information

Group Student’s Name Role Marks Obtained in

Diagnostic Test

Atikur Rahman G.M 4.5

Selima Hossain G.M 6.75

Rubina Islam Monitor 4.75

Mushfiqur Rahman G.M 4.25

1. Tamanna Sayed G.M 6.5

Gulshan Ara G.M 6.75

Amina Khatun G.M 5.25

Dilruba Jahan G.M 5

Selim Morshed G.M 6.25

2. Arif Islam Monitor 5

Kaium Hossain G.M 6

Habibur Rashid G.M 6.25

Shanaj Parveen G.M 5.75

Abdur Rahim G.M 5.5

Aminul Islam Monitor 6

3. Ziaur Rahman G.M 5.75

Mamunur Rashid G.M 5.25

121
 Zakir Hossain G.M 5.5

Procedure:

This study was conducted in the 2nd half of the trimester in the class. All the
writing assignments were conducted with a multi-draft process. After writing first
drafts, the students were required to read group members' paragraphs and to give
each other written feedback that could be used for revision.

Feedback form for the peer editors:

Name of the student writer : Name of the student editor:

ID: ID:

Instruction: Your comments will be used by the author to rewrite his or her paper. Be as
detailed and helpful as possible. Write all comments on this sheet (peer editors are
allowed to correct the errors).

1) Is there any specific topic sentence? Yes  No 

Specific comment:

2) Do all the details support the topic sentence? Yes  No 

Specific Comment:

3) Is the concluding sentence appropriate (Concluding Sentence should restate the

topic sentence)? Yes  No 

Specific Comment:

4) Is there any grammatical errors? Yes  No 

Specific comment:

122
 5) What sort of grammatical errors did you trace?

Types of error: Number of errors

6) Have you made any correction? Yes  No 

How many?

7) Have you taken any help from your teacher? Yes  No 

How many Times:

8) Do you have any further suggestions to improve this paragraph?

Yes  No 

If your answer is yes say why:

After having received the feedback from their classmates, the students revised
and wrote a second draft. The teacher then read the second draft and gave students
additional feedback. Finally, the students revised again and wrote their third draft.
To probe into the students' revision process, teacher chose Group 1 (totaling 6
students) from the three original groups as participants in this study.

Data collections:

Data Collection 1st Draft (1st paragraph): Table: 1

Total number of papers 6

Actual Peers The Correction Correction

Number of Feedback Number they made they made
Types of Mistake of themselves taking help
Mistake (Teacher correction from
Feedback) teacher

123
 Sp 33 24 14 5 9

Sv 17 13 8 3 5

Frag 14 9 4 1 3

Run-on 13 9 5 1 4

Cap 20 16 14 11 3

Pre 21 17 11 4 7

Tp 4 2 0 - -

Sp sent. 18 9 3 0 3

Concluding sent 5 3 2 0 2

Student – teacher conferences (One to One):

After the first round commenting on the descriptive paragraph, the teacher had a
close look at the comments of each student and arranged one-on-one student-
teacher conferences for 10 to 15 minutes for helping the students to write and
understand the commentaries properly and work accordingly. Some good
comments of other students were also shown as models. Furthermore, during the
student-teacher conferences, the teacher helped the students’ to solve problems
regarding unclear comments they received from their peers and also explained
some problems that the group members did not know. The teacher also helped the
students to clarify what kind of idea they really wanted to express and confirmed
this grammatical point.

Data Collection 1st Draft (2nd paragraph): Table: 2

Total number of papers 6

124
 Actual Peers The Correction Correction
Number of Feedback Number they made they made
Types of Mistake Mistake of themselves taking
(Teacher correction help from
Feedback) teacher

Sp 11 10 10 5 5

Sv 11 9 8 5 3

Frag 9 7 4 3 1

Run-on 10 6 4 3 1

Cap 12 12 11 9 2

Pre 13 11 9 6 3

Tp 3 3 1 - 1

Sp sent. 11 10 9 2 7

Concluding sent 3 3 2 2 -

Data Collection 1st Draft (3rd paragraph): Table: 3

Total number of papers 6

Actual Peers The Correction Correction

Number of Feedback Number they made they made
Types of Mistake Mistake of themselve taking
(Teacher correction s help from
Feedback) teacher

125
 Sp 5 5 5 4 1

Sv 3 3 3 3 -

Frag 4 3 3 2 1

Run-on 6 4 4 2 2

Cap 5 5 5 4 1

Pre 8 7 6 5 1

Tp 1 - - - -

Sp sent. 6 3 2 2 -

Concluding sent 2 1 1 - 1

Result analysis:

The data collected from the 1st drafts of 1st, 2nd & 3rd paragraphs prove that
students incorporated a great effort to edit their peer’s papers resulting tremendous
peer feedback into the revision which gradually helped them to become quality
writers. Their progress from 1st paragraph to 2nd paragraph and from 2nd paragraph
to 3rd paragraph is really remarkable (which is summarized in table 4). In the 1st
draft of the 1st paragraph, their total grammatical mistakes were 118; peer editors
found out 88 errors, they corrected 56 errors, 25 by themselves and 31 taking help
from the teacher. In the 1st draft of the 2nd paragraph, their total errors were 66,
peers’ feedbacks were 55, and they corrected 46 errors, whereas they corrected 31
errors by themselves and 15 by taking help from the teacher. In the 1st draft of the
3rd paragraph, the total numbers of errors were 31, student’s feedback were 27. Peer
editors corrected 26 errors, 20 by themselves and 6 taking help from the teacher.
The result of the data analysis clearly revealed the fact that as much as the students
were getting involved in peer editing process, their capability of writing and
editing were improving tremendously, whereas the number of errors were
126
decreasing rapidly. Though most of the revisions and corrections were of surface-
level, the effort students made in the revising process still represents “a cognitive
and linguistic effort that needs to be acknowledged” (Villamil & De Guerrero, 1998,
p.505). It should also be noted that though peer review activities cannot guarantee
the overall improvement in a piece of writing, students can become more critical
readers and revisers through reading others writings critically. Moreover, here the
teacher was no more a silent observer; rather his/her active participation in the
process brought a new dimension in teaching and learning process. Through
applying the process, the teacher made an opportunity for students to talk to her
openly which made the class more interactive and effective as well.

Overall Progress: Table: 4

Number of Error findings and Gramma Errors Overall progress

classes correction tical on (Positive/
(Group 1) errors conte Negative)
nt
1st draft of 1st Actual number of 118 27
paragraph errors
(Practiced in 1st
2/3 classes) Student’s Feedback 88 14
Positive
Number of 56 5
correction they
made

Correction they 25 0
made by themselves

Correction they 31 5
made taking help
from teacher

1st draft of 2nd Actual number of 66 17

127
paragraph errors
(practiced in
next 2/3 Student’s Feedback 55 16 Positive
classes)
Number of 46 12
correction they
made

Correction they 31 4
made by themselves

Correction they 15 8
made taking help
from teacher

1st draft of 3rd Actual number of 31 9

paragraph errors
(practiced in
last 2/3 classes) Student’s Feedback 27 4
Positive
Number of 26 3
correction they
made

Number of 20 2
correction they
made by themselves

Correction they 6 1
made taking help
from teacher

128
 Questionnaire for students:

Just before finishing the course, students were asked to attend a questionnaire
session. Their commentary revealed the fact that they enjoyed the whole process a
lot. It created a great opportunity for them to improve their writing skill along with
other three skills like reading, speaking and listening as well. Though few of the
students faced some problems, their overall impression about peer editing process
was positive:

Total number Question Yes No Overall

of Students Result
(Positive
or
Negative)

1. Do you like to edit your peer’s 16 02 Positive

paper?

2. Do you trust the editor? 13 05 Positive

3. Did you learn anything from peer 15 03 Positive

editing?

18
4. Did you face any problems when 7 11 Positive
you work as editor?

5. Do you feel that group member 13 5 -

should be changed for each pair editing
session?

6. Do you think the shortage of time 9 9 Positive

may hinder this process?

7. Do you like to work as peer editor in 16 2 -

regular basis?

129
Peer editing drawbacks and few suggestions:

Peer feedback is still hotly debated. Various conclusions have been drawn, that
is, peer feedback is advantageous in one side and disadvantageous in the other
side. The criticism toward peer feedback offered by Hong (2006), that the students
devalue peer feedback activity, even, they do not like peer feedback at all. The
students, according to Hong, commented that they felt being underestimated by
negative feedback given by their peers. But this research revealed that the students
have seen peer feedback as an interesting way of learning to write. They also said
that comment and negative feedback is the evidence that their writing is really read
by their peer. In fact, Peer feedback generates positive impact if the students are
ready and well-trained and prepared by the teacher. It can be assumed that peer
feedback failure is caused by ignoring this aspect. Generally, peer feedback might
be useful to enhance students' awareness on the grammatical mistakes and
mechanical mistakes. Students who are not aware of this aspect might use
inappropriate tenses in their narrative and peer feedback can stimulate their
awareness on this kind of mistake. According to Clark (2003) peer feedback in
process oriented narrative writing can be successfully done if the teacher provides
guidance. Most students, especially younger and less able writers, need direct
instruction in evaluating writing and guidance in responding to the writing of
peers. Therefore, the teacher needs to prepare feedback form or narrative rubric to
help students doing peer feedback.

Conclusion:

It appears from the findings that in peer editing process students get a very wide
opportunity to learn from editing others papers and from having their papers
edited, and therefore the student who becomes good editor generally becomes a
good writer. In peer editing process students begin to look at their own papers
differently and more critically. However, improving writing skill is a slow process,
the positive result of peer editing may not be observed in first few weeks rather
may be observed a few weeks later. Hence, if the students are guided properly
acquiring the strategy of the editing process surely they become independent
writers and editors within a very short period.

130
 Works Cited

Clark, Irene. L. (2003). Concepts in composition: theory and practice in the teaching of writing.

New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hyland, K. (2003). “Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process.” Journal of

Second Language Writing, 12 (1), 17-29.

Min, H-T. (2006). “The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and

writing quality.” Journal of Second Language Writing, 15 (2), 113-131.

Richards, C.J & Lockhart, C. (2000). Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classroom.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rollinson, P. (2005). “Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class.” ELT Journal, 59 (1),

23-30. doi:10.1093/elt/cci003

Tsui, A. B. M. & Maria, N.G. (2000). “Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer

comments?” Journal of Second Language Writing, 9 (2), 147-170.

Villamil, O. S. & De Guerrero, M. (1998). “Assessing the impact of peer revision on L2

writing.” Applied Linguistics, 19 (4), 491-514.

131
 Appendix

Student’s commentaries:

1. I specially found the improvement from draft 1 of 1st paragraph to1st draft of
third paragraph and now I am able to write faster than before. I know how to
organize the ideas and to write it using appropriate grammatical rules … …

2. The peers in my group commented carefully on my writing which helped me

revise my later draft much better than the previous one … … ….

3. I learned a lot due to the enthusiastic comments from my peers in my group. I

also learned new things from reading my peers’ essays … …

4. Peer editing helps me to recognize my mistakes …..

5. Peer editing helps us to correct our mistakes before the teacher sees them …

Teacher’s commentaries:

1. It gives students a chance to practice their skills, discuss problems in context

and check grammar….

2. Differences in student’s opinions may lead to better learning…..

3. It creates a relaxed learning environment…..

4. If student’s level is very low, they wouldn’t be able to do it….

5. Good for weak students if paired with strong ones….

132