Peer Assessment in EFL Writing Classes

Yıl 2019, , 101 - 111, 13.07.2019

Vedat Kızıl

https://doi.org/10.34137/jilses.560099

Öz

This article presents the findings of a
seven-week case study which set out to investigate the benefits of integrating
peer assessment into university level EFL writing classes and examine its
impact on students’ social skills. The study was carried out with 17 B1 English
proficiency level students studying at an English preparatory programme of a
foundation university. First, the students were introduced to using rubrics to
assess a written product. Then, each week after the students had composed a
writing, a paragraph for the first three weeks and an essay for the remaining
four weeks, they were asked to anonymously assess one of their friends’ writing
by using the relevant rubric and filling in the peer assessment form. In
addition, the students were interviewed in the 3^rd week of the study
in order to capture their early impressions regarding what they liked most and
least about peer assessment as well as what they learnt from being an assessor
and being assessed. The same interview was conducted again on the last day of
the study to find out whether the participants changed their opinions. The
results revealed that students benefited from peer assessment activities as
they improved their understanding of the rubrics over time, which lead to more
quality writings; they felt more accountable not only for their own learning
but also that of their friends’, which promoted a cooperative learning environment
in which students offered quality feedback to each other; and finally they
improved their collaboration and problem-solving skills, which contributed to
their social skills which are in parallel with the needs of modern society and can
be utilised outside the school environment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

peer assessment, assessment of writing, efl writing, cooperation with peers

İngilizce Yazı Yazma Derslerinde Akran Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Bu makale üniversite İngilizce
hazırlık seviyesinde yabancı dil olarak İngilizce yazı yazma derslerinde akran
değerlendirmesinin faydalarını bulmayı hedefleyen ve akran değerlendirmesinin
öğrencilerinin sosyal becerilerine olan etkisini inceleyen 7 haftalık bir durum
çalışmasının bulgularını sunmaktadır. Çalışma, bir vakıf üniversitesinin
İngilizce hazırlık bölümünde okuyan ve B1 seviyesinde olan 5’i kız 12’si erkek
olmak üzere toplam 17 öğrenci ile yapıldı. İlk olarak öğrencilere yazılı bir
metnin değerlendirilmesinde kullanılan puanlama rubrikleri tanıtıldı. Sonra
öğrenciler her hafta yazı yazdıkça, ilk üç hafta haftalık bir paragraf ve
sonraki dört hafta haftalık bir deneme, öğrencilerden bir anonim olarak
herhangi bir arkadaşının yazısını uygun puanlama rubriklerini kullanarak
değerlendirmeleri ve sonra akran değerlendirme formunu doldurmaları istendi.
Buna ek olarak, çalışmanın üçüncü haftasında öğrencilerin akran
değerlendirmesinin en çok ve en az sevdikleri yanlarını ve bu çalışma boyunca
akranlarını değerlendirmekten ve onlar tarafından değerlendirilmekten ne
öğrencilerini saptamak amacıyla öğrencilerle yüz yüze görüşme yapıldı.
Öğrencilerin fikirlerini değiştirip değiştirmediğini anlamak adına aynı görüşme
çalışmanın son günü yine yapıldı. Çalışmanın sonuçlarına göre akran
değerlendirme öğrencilere çeşitli faydalar sağladı. Öğrenciler zamanla puanlama
rubriklerini daha iyi anladığı için daha kaliteli yazılar yazdılar, sadece
kendi eğitimlerinden değil aynı zamanda arkadaşlarının da eğitiminden kendilerini
sorumlu hissettikleri için işbirlikçi bir ortamda birbirlerine kaliteli geri
bildirimler sağladılar ve en nihayetinde birlikte çalışma ve sorun çözme
becerilerini geliştirerek okul dışında da kullanabilecekleri sosyal beceriler
edindiler.

Anahtar Kelimeler

akran değerlendirmesi, yazı yazma değerlendirmesi, yabancı dil olarak ingilizce yazı yazma, akranlarla iş birliği

Kaynakça

• Black, P., and D. William. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102
• Boud, D. (1989). The role of self‐assessment in student grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 14(1), 20-30. doi:10.1080/0260293890140103
• Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. Philadelphia, PA: Kogan Page.
• Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167. doi:10.1080/713695728
• Brown, S., & Glasner, A. (2003). Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
• Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2005). Peer assessment of language proficiency. Language Testing, 22, 93-121. doi: 10.1191/0265532205lt298oa.
• Cheung, S. K., & Sun, S. Y. K. (1999). Assessment of optimistic self-beliefs: Further validation of the chinese version of the general self-efficacy scale. Psychological Reports, 85(3), 1221–1224. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1999.85.3f.1221
• Cho, K., Schunn, C., & Wilson, R.W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from the instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology 98, 891-901.
• Conway, R., Kember, D., Sivan, A. & Wu, M. (1993). Peer assessment of an individual's contribution to a group project. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18, 45-56.
• Dochy, F., & McDowell, L. (1997). Assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 279-298.
• Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. doi: 10.1080/03075079912331379935
• Ehly, S. W., & Topping, K. J. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A framework for consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113-132. doi: 10.1207/S1532768XJEPC1202_03
• Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(2), 175-187. doi:10.1080/1355800950320212
• Keaten, J. A., & Richardson, M. E. (1993, February 12-16). A field investigation of peer assessment as part of the student group grading process. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Western Speech Communication Association, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
• Lee, C. (2006). Language for learning mathematics: Assessment for learning in practice. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
• Loacker, G. & Jensen, P. (1988). The power of performance in developing problem solving and self-assessment abilities. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 13, 128-150.
• McDowell, L. (1995). The impact of innovative assessment on student learning. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(4), 302-313.
• Moerkerke, G. (1996). Assessment for flexible learning. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Lemma.
• Oldfield, K.A., & Macalpine, J.M.K. (1995). Peer and self-assessment at tertiary level: An experiential report. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 20, 125-132.
• Patri, M. (2002). The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing, 19(2): 109-131
• Raimes, A. (1983). Tradition and revolution in ESL teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 535-552.
• Sambell, K. & McDowell, L. (1998). The value of self and peer assessment to the developing lifelong learner. In C. Rust (Ed.) Improving student learning - improving students as learners (pp. 56-66). Oxford, UK: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
• Topping, K.J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and university. Review of Educational Research 68(3), 249–276. doi:10.3102/00346543068003249
• Villamil, O.S., & De Guerrero, M.C.M. (1996). Peer revisions in the L2 classroom: Social cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing 5(1): 51-75.
• Williams, E. (1992). Student attitudes towards approaches to learning and assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 17, 45-58.
• Yorke, M. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education, 45, 477–501.